From: vanyel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alan Williams)
Subject: Re: Gay Homophobia (was Re: Too straight looking to be gay???) (was re: UNGAY GAY)
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:20:10 GMT

In <1992Aug20.005350.4551@microsoft.com> bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:


>(dyer)
>/ Listen, you seem to be rather oblivious to the fear and loathing
>/ in your articles.  Probably you should try to work this out with the
>/ help of a good, sympathetic therapist.  
>Yeah, the old "therapist" line again.  You folks really lean on this
>one when you're out of ideas, don't you?  

No; I think that comes up when one of us sees that's what's really needed.


>(dyer)
>/ OK, Mary, what do you have to say that's new?  Nothing.
>Simple test (even for you).

I will not sling mud, I will not sling mud. . . .

>1.  T/F  Members of an oppressed minority group who willingly act 
>         out negative stereotypes advance the cause of their group's 
>         acceptance in society.

Counter-question (I'll try to use one-syllable words so you understand it):

T/F The "negative stereotype" is the product of the people of that
repressed minority.

>2.  T/F  Bizarre behavior is a effective recruiting tactic to get
>         invisible members of a oppressed minority group to become 
>         more visible.

T/F "Invisible" members of this "oppressed minority" would feel comfortable
becoming "visible" only if they have, within their own ranks, a smaller
oppressed minority, creating by an intolerance toward those who act
different.

>3.  T/F  Sometimes members of a minority group will act in personally
>         selfish ways which hurt the overall group goals.

T/F This goes both ways--with those who act "bizarre" and those who act
"normal."

>4.  T/F  When a group shows a chronic unwillingness to submit its beliefs
>         to examination, testing, or debate, said group is most likely
>         a religion and not a political movement.

I would suggest looking in a mirror on this one. . . .

>Do you want them to join you, or not?

Not if they bring the kind of hate you advocate.

>Is the ability to do drag more important that political and social
>progress?

Is the ability to put those people down more important than working with
them to get equal rights for ALL?

>What positive gay role models (or public figures) do we know about?

>There are a lot more now (due to AIDS, mostly), but really, considering
>how large a community we are, we have a blight of positive models.
>How many bad models / public figures do we have?  A hell of a lot more.

What defines a "bad model"?

>(me)
>    >If all the prominent left-handed people I knew dyed their hair green and 
>    >set their clothes on fire, I would probably stay a closet left-hander, too.

That's your problem, not ours.

>(dyer)
>/Talk about stating the obvious.

>If you understand the concept, what malfunction prevents you from extending
>the principle to gays?  How come it works with one, and not with the
>other?  For something so "obvious", you are having a hell of a time
>seeing how it might apply to *you* or Arne.  Is there a little hypocrisy
>here?

Yes, and I smeel it floating in from your direction.

So tell me: What's to be gained by hating some of the members of our
minority?  You think that's a really positive image--to say, on the one
hand, "We want to be accepted for who and what we are," and on the other
hand, "But we don't want to accept those people who aren't *just like us*"?

That's called intolerance and prejudice, since you obviously can't see that
yourself.


>(dyer)
>/I didn't know that leather parades were designed to foster "gay
>/acceptance" (something you're sorely lacking in, I might add.)

>You're right.  I don't accept that leather parades are indicative
>of the gay community.

It seems that your definition of "indicative" is as narrow as the
definition you ascribe to us.

>(dyer)
>/And I am sure that the last thing on a drag queen's mind is
>/furthering the cause of "gay acceptance."
>Perhaps it should be on their mind.  I thought it was an important
>cause; obviously you think otherwise.

If "thinking it otherwise" means we all have to actively crusade for
someone's rights--*if* that person isn't a drag queen or some other type
you personally don't like--then think again.  I've been told quite often by
friends of mine that I've made them see gays in a different light than they
saw them before, and I'm certainly not trying to do that.  Where does that
kind of unintentional "furthering" fit into your book, hmm?

>    >Why?  Because he was nonthreatening, calm, reasonable, and firmly
>    >believed in his rights as an individual.  People across America
>    >looked at Thorne and said, "My god, he looks just like my son / my
>    >neighbor / my friend."  It made America sit up and take notice.
>    >Same for Col. Kammemyer; another bright, hardworking individual who
>    >stated her case with conviction and calm assurance that she was
>    >in the right.
>(dyer)
>/Frankly, I'll take both of those two over the likes of you.
>I doubt that either one would find much in common with *you*.

I think they'd find a lot *more* in common with us than with you.  We don't
ostracize people because they don't fit into our little model of the
universe, and then turn around and justify that ostracizing with the basic
idea of "they didn't act the `right way.'"

>I also note that you skipped over the point I made:  their normality
>made them great role models and spokespeople.  And made them
>*real* to the average American.  

I think *you* missed a point: That what made them great role models is that
they made it clear you *can* be happy despite the chains heterosexual
society puts on you.  Your kind of claptrap furthers the image of
conformity that riddles this nation; you can't accept drag queens for what
they are, because you want to be "like everyone else."  Well, "everyone
else" in my definition includes people who have been raped; people who've
stuggled with their sexuality for years and are only now finding peace;
people who seem to have it all but deep down are hurting so much it hurts
*me* because I care about them.  Do you care about people who are hurting?
Do you care that maybe some of these "queeny" types might be hurt by the
kind of hate you advocate?  Or are you so busy championing your own cause
at the cost of others that you can't *possibly* see beyond the blind hatred
that guides you?

>(dyer)
>/Honey-bun, it's the closeted gayboys who are not taking responsibility
>/for their own actions, pretending to blame someone else for their wretched
>/lives.  
>Hardly.  If the goal is gay acceptance and political rights, then 
>what the fringe is doing is sabotaging that.

No, *you're* sabotaging it, you insensitive sonofabitch, by riding in on
your high horse and telling *us* how *we* "should" act because *we"* are
"sabotaging" your efforts to tell the world "Homosexuals like me are good.
Everyone else is bad."

>On the other hand, if the goal is strutting like a bunch of chorus girls
>and fighting for an audience, I guess they're pretty effective . . .

You've got a lot of nerve to say that.  If you weren't so busy preening
your own feathers as a "model of normalcy" and fighting for what's *really*
important--the acceptance of *everyone* on their individual merits--maybe
you wouldn't feel so threatened by the possibility that you might get
grouped with a bunch of so-called "undesirables."

>(dyer)
>/Arne and the rest of us are doing just fine.  Now shoo, shoo
>/until you learn some manners and some logic.
>I could *teach* you logic.  As for manners, you & Arne receive more than
>either or you merit.  

You're *hardly* a teacher of any kind; your lessons include discrimination,
hatred, and elitism reminiscent of the Nazis.  I've been trying very hard
to simply accept you for what you are, but I find that so loathing that, on
a personal level, I can't.  I would do everything in my power to defend
your right to be who and what you are, but I don't have to like it myself.

Dammit, I spent *twelve hours* with some people last night--*straight*
people--helping them heal their lives because they *had* to know that
someone gave a damn about them--I'd already spent over twelve hours helping
one of them deal with his hurt--and according to him, I was the only thing
between him and suicide.  That friend told me he *respected* me, and that's
not something I usually hear from people.  To have people like *you*
goose-stepping around with your elitist bullshit, showing a pathetic dearth
of compassion for anyone who isn't like you, has to be the biggest insult I
have *ever* experienced.  Why don't you go back to your little hidey-hole
until those people you hate so much have managed to make the world
accepting of even *your* hate-mongering kind?  Who knows; you may even grow
up a little while you're waiting.
--
 ________________ Alan Williams  vanyel@camelot.bradley.edu ___________________
 \/ A hypothetical paradox: What would happen in a battle between an         \/
    _Enterprise_ security team, who always get killed soon after appearing,
    and a squad of Imperial Stormtroopers, who can't hit the broad side of
    a planet?                 	--Tom Galloway
Newsgroups: soc.motss