From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Subject: Re: On chronic victims
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 18:26:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.045742.12255@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, cc697@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Eric Oppen) writes:
> 
> If there's one thing that wearies me above all others, it is people who
> seem to feel that they, due to their skin color, sexual orientation, or
> whatever, have some sort of monopoly on suffering and virtue, and who think
> that since members of their groups have suffered in the past, this gives
> them some sort of Divine Right to call up the Mephistophiles of Big
> Government to make their enemies play nice.  This reminds me of some
> children I've seen with deficient social skills, who scream for Mommy when
> the usual playground give-and-take goes against them.

  Like for example lifting the ban on homosexuality in the military,
and granting legal status to domestic partners (aka marriage) and
repealing sodomy laws? Boy that's an awful lot to ask for. Wherever
will we get the money for it?
  Look dude, the government as it stands right now is part of the
enemy since it has been employed by our enemies to make illegal
our lives. When the government stop taking sides on the issue _For_
and _Against_ you might have something to whine about.

> Granted, there are still people who have bad attitudes about members of
> some groups.  COPE WITH IT!  I'm sure that it's scary to be in a group of
> members of your own particular group, and have a (much smaller) group of
> people go by and mutter nasty things about you---but do you realize just
> how cowardly that complaint makes you sound?  If having nasty things said
> to my face, loudly, qualified me for chronic victim status, I'd have it
> long since.

  About as cowardly as this post is my guess.
 
> If you're gay, why go doing things in public that call attention to the
> fact, considering that in this culture, that is not acceptable behavior?
> Custom, as I've pointed out, is much stronger than any law.  There could be
> no law forbidding me, for instance, to wear kilts---but I never do, because
> it is not the custom in the place where I must live.  If you are unable to
> express affection for your MOTSS partner in public, why not grow some
> perspective and realize that there are lots of places in this world where
> us evil straights/hets/breeders couldn't do anything of the sort with our
> MOTOS partners.  Just ask any Gulf War vet, or anybody familiar with
> Mediterranean/Latin culture.  

  Gad. I guess that all of the black folks ought to line up to have their
hair straightened and their faces whitened so that they don't "call 
attention" to themselves. I guess that the Jews ought to feign Christianity
so they too shouldn't "call attention" to themselves. I mean really they 
could be living in the Dark Ages when times were a lot worse and they might 
be slain on the spot. They should be thankful for what they have now, and
not complain. We'll get around to tolerating you, trust us. Barf.
  Our culture love it or leave it? Thanks but no thanks. If we have to be
beholden to the least common denominator of what is "acceptable behavior"
we will indeed be reduced to the drek of whatever any moron whines about.
 Is it really to much to ask to be able to walk hand in hand with your
partner without fear of being beaten up? There is no such right as the
right to not be offended. Get used to it. If everyone had your attitude,
illogical social mores would never change.
  I truly resent the juxtaposition of "chronic victim" with "PDA's for
gay people". This entire post has the definite odor of "I'm trying to
be open-minded, but please don't flaut it in front of me". Why don't
you say what you really mean instead of bringing up these canards.
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)