From: dbshapco@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Brad Shapcott)
Subject: Re: The War Between Us (Long)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 00:49:19 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.192958.13565@rat.csc.calpoly.edu> pclary@mushroom.csc.calpoly.edu (Ellen Clary) writes:
>I've had a bit more time to read Brad's post.
>
>Yee Gawds, I do believe I have been mistaken for a monosexual.
>
>Here's what I said:
>
>Ellen writes:
>>I obviously can't speak for anyone else but me, but is it possible
>>that some members of the lesgay community 

I left in the parts that confused me, but the above seemed to be saying that
you were speaking as a member of the community, but not for the community.
It was that sentence that made me think that you had just come over here to
ask us all a loaded question.

I might have said "What the hell?" and gotten a clarification if I was more
on the ball, but at the specific time wasn't in a good mood and wasn't
comfortable with the subject.

>That's what I get for not using pronouns.  Damn.  All right maybe I should
>have said something like "Is it possible that the GL community would
>perceive us a little differently [the context was hetero priviledge]
>if we chose not to marry until marriage was equally available?"

I'm sure they would.  That was one of the points of my article -- that there
are many sources of tension between the two communities that could be
resolved if we were so accomodating, but shouldn't be.  The differences
should stay in place, and we should work from there.

>The above is something that I honestly think is _possibly_ true,
>but entirely unproveable.  HOWEVER, having said this, I think a
>valid question is 'Do we care what the GL community thinks?'
>(Some of us will; some of us won't.)  Or should we continue on with
>the attitude of: 'We're bi, we're queer, we come in every different size, 
>shape, color, flavor, and orientation - get used to it.'
>
>[Brad also writes]
>>but I'm not queer.
>>Not if queer means I'd give up marriage, 
>Once again, note the lack of any mention that already married couples
>should break up.

But no mention that perhaps if that is what is important to the individual
that it should be accepted without condition or reservation.  Why should
a bisexual deny a strong urge to marry and have children or whatever, if that
is what is honestly in their soul?  This 'privilege' is a fluke of our
sexuality, and doesn't even apply uniformly.  It is only available to bi's
who have a MOTOS partner.

>Ellen

The difference stands, and needs to be dealt with.  Avoiding marriage because
of the inequity is still a valid political act if that is really what is in
that person's soul; avoiding marriage because the lesgay community will be
more accepting of bisexuals is the type of accomodation and hiding that I
am against.  I defer (egomaniacally) to the last two paragraphs of my
original article.

>But to bring this down and bring it to a close, I think recognizing the
>inherent differences between the homosexual and bisexual community is
>important in maintaining the alliance that should be there against the
>prejudice we both face.  If I am invited into your house, I shall
>enter; if I am asked to your table, I will sit with you.  But I make no
>pretense of being the same thing that you are; I ask for no part of
>your glory, nor can I at times understand your suffering.  But I shall
>not cut off what displeases you, nor shall I hide it away.
>
>I would have that we were at peace, but I would not have that it were a
>false one.  If the rest of this has seemed puerile or silly, then
>perhaps that one sentiment can be understood.  I have said all this
>not to incite anger or drive a wedge between our communities, but so
>that if there is any bond it is a true one.



Brad
Newsgroups: soc.bi