From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Stereotyping
Date: 26 Aug 92 12:05:31 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab

I knew it was too good to be true.  I hadn't read a CC gaybashing posting
for over a week now and I had hoped that he'd moved his crusade to a more
appropriate forum.  No such luck.

In article <11830@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
[Jeff Dauber says:]
> # Nope.  I cannot figure out why they are offended.  Then, after watching
> # the one sided news coverage, it becomes more clear.
> 
> You can't understand.  That tells me a lot about how warped you and
> the rest of the homosexual community are -- that you don't understand,
> for example, how offensive the drag queens are.  The drag queens are
> an insulting parody of femininity.  It's not even just an exaggeration
> of it, but an insulting parody of it.  It is equivalent to Amos and
> Andy, being done by white guys in blackface.

Well gee, Clayton, the heterosexual community must be just as warped, because
*I* don't understand how offensive the drag queens are.  When I think about
them at all, I think they're rather humorous.  I'm certainly not offended;
why should I be?  (An "insulting parody of feminity", indeed....)

The people who should be insulted are homosexuals, not heterosexuals.  Your
Amos & Andy comparison is totally misplaced.  The drag queens tend to per-
petuate a stereotype of homosexuals, just as Amos & Andy did with blacks.

Incidentally, were you aware that homosexuality is no more prevalent among
cross-dressers than it is among the general population at large?

[Re:  Booting NAMBLA out of the SF parade]
> Fine.  The parade committe can do so.  Why don't they?

Judging from what I've heard, on most parade committees, they do.  Are you
aware that the SF Gay Pride is one of literally hundreds of parades held
nationwide?  In the overwhelming majority of these, NAMBLA doesn't march.
As to why the SF parade committee allows this, I have no idea.  Why don't you
ask them?

> Then don't tell me, or any other straight person, how to live my
> life.  That's exactly what AB 101 tried to do -- to force us to
> hire, rent to, and otherwise associate with homosexuals against
> our will.  You want freedom to behave like spoiled children?  Fine.
> Let us have the freedom to express our disapproval by keeping our
> distance.  YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH!

There's a few problems with your wording of AB101 here.  First of all, AB101
did not "force" you to "hire, rent to, and otherwise associate" with homo-
sexuals.  It simply prevented you from discriminating against homosexuals in
hiring, renting, or selling.  There is a difference.  Incidentally, what
other ways did AB101 cause you to "otherwise associate" with homosexuals?
It certainly did not have any effect on your private life.

Interestingly, I believe that one of the reasons Governor Wilson vetoed it
is that he believes that such protection already exists under current state
laws.  Therefore, you have already lost your battle.

I also loved the wording of your other complaint:  "freedom to behave like
spoiled children".  Jeff had been talking about dressing in leather clothing--
this is behaving like a spoiled child?  The one who has been behaving like
a spoiled child around here is you, Clayton.

As for freedom to express your disapproval--you have been doing nothing else
for the past year!  It's getting very old, particularly since you haven't
said anything new for at least the past nine months.

[Re:  Le JoJo's postings in soc.motss regarding (I assume) S&M behavior]
> They are "wonderful"?  I guess I should post some of them -- that will
> certainly demonstrate that homosexuality, at least by your definition,
> is sick, depraved, and warped.

Oh, please do post them, Clayton.  They'd be so appropriate to the
political newsgroups being essentially political in nature.  And Heaven
knows, you haven't cross-posted enough from soc.motss to these newsgroups.
Why don't you just cross-post the entire soc.motss newsgroup if you're so
intent on having us read it?

While you're at it, why don't you cross-post the heterosexual S&M postings
from the alt.sex newsgroups and post a couple of advertisements from
heterosexual S&M magazines.  That way we can see, "by your definition", that
heterosexuality is "sick, depraved, and warped".

Gad, what a feeble attempt at an argument.

> Ditto, for AB 101.  Stop trying to force straights to associate with
> you, and the crusade against homosexuality can stop.  Live and let
> live.  Unfortunately, homosexuals don't really believe in that.

The only way to never have to associate with a homosexual Clayton, is
to live like a monk and never associate with anyone.  If you're really
serious about this freedom of association argument, then expand it to
include all the other minorities protected by law--including women,
blacks, hispanics, etc.  You are "forced to associate" with all of these
by law.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of
                          |    many things..."                  Lewis Carroll
pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov   |   Disclaimer:  Opinions?  What opinions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: ca.politics