From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Arne Adolphson, Moron At Large
Date: 9 Jan 1993 02:38:03 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu


In article <73218@cup.portal.com> 
Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison) writes:

>Arne screeches:

You know, George, it would help if your grasp of the English
language were a little bit more secure.  You give the impression
that you're not a native speaker.

> >OK, yes, I've posted a few nasty vitriolic articles.
> >To see that as my characteristic voice here -- without
> >noting to whom I address those postings -- is perverse.
>
> Try "accurate."

Yeah, whatever.

> >It's possible that not everything I post makes it to
> >portal.com.   It's also possible that George grows tired 
> >from sounding out all those syllables ("News-gr...-grou...
> >-groups...Newsgroups") from all the articles that get posted
> >to soc.motss.
>
> Arne, I was reading at age 4.  Ad hominems don't impress me.

Heavens.  Is it possible you *are* brain-damaged?

> >Can't you read, George?  I don't suffer fools gladly. 
>
> Then how do you stand yourself?

Imagine I managed a (teeny-tiny) smile there.  (I didn't,
but imagine it anyway.)

> >>> There *are* people who deserve a dash of salt in the eyes and a
> >> rapier 'twixt the ribs; but it seems that this sort of thing is
> >> Arne's *primary* mode of social interaction. 
> >
> >Yeah, so?  Haven't you ever hung around gay men?
>
> As I recall, this was a concept you couldn't grasp in a previous 
> discussion, but I'll try again: ALL GAY MEN ARE NOT ACID-TONGUED
> QUEENS WHO LIVE TO EXCORIATE OTHERS.

I'll try spelling this out: ALL GAY MEN ARE NOT HUMORLESS ASSHOLES
WHO THINK THAT SMOKING CIGARS AND DROPPING THEIR PANTS ON ANY
PRETEXT WHATEVER SUBSTITUTE FOR THAT THING KNOWN AS A "PERSONALITY".

> >Oh dear.  Comic strips.
>
> I read comic strips that are deeper than you are, Arne.

Snore.  (Forgive me, Jess.)

> >> >>Try re-reading this, moron -- maybe you'll catch a badly needed clue:
> >Are you calling Steve a moron, or is that comma misplaced?
>
> Steve was quoting my original message, which was addressed direct
> to you -- therefore, you're the moron.  Not that anyone's
> surprised.

Forgive me for having missed the subtleties embedded in your 
article.  (In plain English: forgive me for having skimmed your
article, because I knew that you didn't have a single fucking
interesting thing to say.)

> >Me about George:
> >> >>That tired old queen?  Why the hell would anyone bother
> >> >>talking to a drab who'd chose to live in *Glendale*?
> >
> >What's wrong with those two sentences?
>
> Nothing, as proof that you're a shithead to the core.

Yawn. 

> >You are a tired
>
> Nope; I had a good night's sleep and a quiet day at work.

Tee-hee!  (Yawn.)

> >old
> 
> I suppose in your insanely youth-centered world, 27 *is* old.

*My* world is youth-centered?  Have you ever read anything
I've written, George?

> >queen,
>
> Here we go again -- all gay men are *not* "queens." I'm not one.

Yeah, right.  And I'm Marie of whatchamacallit.

> >you are a drab,
>
> It is to laugh.

Oh dear, you really don't speak English as a native language.
Drab: "1) A dirty and untidy woman; a slut, slattern, 2) A harlot,
prostitute, strumpet".  We know that you like to be pissed on and
other things, that you like to smoke cigars, that you like to
drop your pants in public venues.  So why is it so out of line
to think that you might be "untidy" and a "slut"?

> >and you do live in Glendale.
>
> The only fact you've come up with so far.

No, you're also a humorless drab.

> >So what's the problem?
>
> Nothing. You've just gone a long way toward proving my points.

Yeah, right.  And I'm Marie whatshername.

> If it hasn't been clear before, I'll clarify it now: I have been
> discussing *only* Arne's noxious net.persona. I have not been
> (nor will I) making the kind of idiotic personal comments that
> Arne has above.  Since (as I said before) we've never met in 
> person, he has absolutely *no* basis on which to make these 
> comments, other than the exudate of his pustulent imagination.

Cracked open a dictionary, have we?

To call what I wrote "idiotic personal comments" is proof that
you have no sense of humor, that you're unfamiliar with normal,
everyday gay men's talk, that you might have brain damage.

> Steve? You out there? Get the point yet?

I doubt it.  I don't get the point.

> >No, I think George has a hormonal imbalance, on top of which
> >I think that he's not very comfortable around gay men.  And
>
> Ah yes. A subtle twist on the "what's wrong with you, PMS?"
> misogynist insult, 

What?  I'm not talking about a recurring, temporary imbalance.
I'm talking about a congenital defect.

> coupled with more of Arne's inability to
> grasp that all gay men aren't obnoxious screeching queens 
> *just* *like* *him*.

Ho-hum.

> >how could he be, since his interaction with men seems to take
> >place at glory holes?
>
> Another baseless, ridiculous assumption. 

Yawn.  You really are clueless, aren't you?

> I'd be willing to bet
> that the people on the net who have actually met me are aching
> from the hysterical laughter that your idiocy has produced.

Yeah, right.

Wake me, won't you, when this is over?

--Marie of Roumania