From: starkid@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Lance Sanders)
Subject: Re: AMC: TAN: More on homosexuality
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:19:51 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: EnviraForm


On 20 Jan 93 19:52:52 GMT, kerry@is-next.umd.edu (Kerry Ogata),
in Message-ID: <18049@umd5.umd.edu> writes:

>>NB>A very good friend and I had an ongoing joke where we would send each 
>>NB>other postcards with the name of someone who we'd just discovered was 
>>NB>gay. (The friend is gay). He knew some really good [famous] ones. 
>
>>   Nancy, are you trying to be thread-facilitatory, or is this really 
>>true?! I ask, because of your closing question: 
>
>>                NB>Aren't there any famous lesbians? 
>
>>   Coming from a woman with your educational background and wordskills, 
>>it could only be rhetorical. 
>
KO>Are you suggesting that Nancy's knowledge is lacking?

   No. Just the opposite.


KO>What does educational background and "wordskills" have to do with knowing 
KO>famous lesbians? 

   Specifically, nothing. Generally, everything:


On 20 Jan 1993 23:16:46 GMT, susanm@an.hp.com (Susan Margulies),
in Message-ID: <1jkmguINNlmh@hpscit.sc.hp.com> writes:

>Kerry, I think it matters how you interpret Nancy's question
>On the one hand, she could have meant 
>
>    Are there any famous women who are (closet) Lesbians?
>    or
>    Are there any famous women who are open about being Lesbians? 
>
>I believe Nancy meant the latter.  I also believe Lance interpreted 
>the former, in which case I agree the question is rhetorical - the
>answer is YES...
>
>Obviously, just because we don't know of any homosexual [insert 
>occupation/race/religion/whatever here], doesn't mean they don't exist.  
>That is what I took it to mean when Lance called the question rhetorical. 

   Yes. Susan is correct.


>>  [I should point out that (obvious to some) none of those practices
>>   (dog meat-eating, polygamy, sodomy, not paying taxes, etc.)
>>   are real OR logical barriers to sainthood.
>>   From God's point of view (as I would understand Him). Not the pope's.]
>
KO>Just a teaser:  how do you know God is male?

   Kerry, I knew this question would be asked when I was composing my 
response, and I rejected being non-specific because of my experiences. 
The use of Him (as opposed to him) transcends gender, and I used the term 
for a very good reason. 
   Believe me, I'm in no way trying to be funny or evasive or sexist, but 
one day you'll find out for yourself. 



>>   How would male, homosexual Catholic dog lovers, Korean triathlete 
>>bisexuals, and lesbian conservative/vegetarian roommates deal with "the 
>>new guy on the block"? 
>>Lance "I just got a good idea for a 'Donahue' show" Sanders
>
KO>What are you talking about?  Please, enlighten me.  I'm genuinely trying
KO>to understand why you feel you had to chastise Nancy. 

   Kerry, I realize your genuine intent, and I'm glad, because you 
indirectly seized upon MY genuine intent. :)

   I wasn't trying to chastise Baym. I was trying to expand the TAN to 
include discussion on the limits of tolerance.

   As a straight male, I felt a need to elucidate the fact that, contrary 
to the direction the thread was taking, and contrary to the inordinate 
number of "bad apples in our (global) barrel", heterosexual men don't 
have a "lock" on prejudice and intolerance.

   And you know the amazing thing? Donahue's show for Thurs., 1/21/93:

   "Bisexuals discriminated against by homosexuals and heterosexuals"

   Of course, I don't expect Phil's show to be as comprehensive in scope 
as our TAN would have been. :))) 

---------
Lance Sanders                [WARNING: GENDER-SPECIFIC QUOTE AHEAD]
starkid@ddsw1.MCS.COM       "I'm interested in the fact that the less  
GE Mail: L.Sanders6          secure a man is, the more likely he is to
Vox: (312) 667-5958          have extreme prejudice." ---Clint Eastwood


Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.soaps