From: ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack B. Nimble)
Subject: Re: Jack B. Activist (was Re: Social Democracy)
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:08:01 PST

In article <1992Nov6.141001.21594@macc.wisc.edu>, on 6 Nov 92 14:10:01 GMT,
anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:

>
>
>In article <19921106010731ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU>
>ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack B. Nimble) writes:
>References: <1992Oct29.202518.1072@macc.wisc.edu> <19921106010731ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU>
>
>>To me an Uncle Tom is somebody who grovels about begging for
>>mercy from somebody whom he considers to be his social
>>superiors.
>
>Rather oversimplified, wouldn't you say?  It's somewhat more
>inclusive than that.
>
I think that about covers it. I'd be happy to consider your definition
of the term.

>>One thing that you should consider is that the various
>>producers, directors, and writers in the media can damn well
>>portray us however they please.  Anyone who wishes to
>>achieve results rather than simply whine about how bad
>>things are eventually recognizes this and develops
>>strategies that are effective rather than counterproductive.
>
>I suppose you don't realize it's the choir you're preaching
>to.
>
Perhaps. But there most certainly is a segment out there not committed
to the principle of free speech, who would argue that the government
ought to prohibit and censor GLB-defamatory material.

>>I'm particularly pleasedthat there exist organizations such
>>as GLAAD which act in a manner compatible with my
>>libertarian principles of freedom and nonaggression.  Sadly,
>>there are too few such activist organizations to be found in
>>gaydom.
>
>Would you say GLAAD is *in general* libertarian, or just the
>chapter you're active in?  Would you accept as valid other
>principles of freedom and nonaggression?  What organizations
>currently advocating LGB issues would you find inimical to
>your principles?
>
Neither GLAAD nor GLAAD/LA is political or particularly libertarian.
There are, nevertheless, libertarians active in GLAAD besides me. Aside
from what I've noted above about compatibility with principles, GLAAD
stays focused upon its charter to combat defamation and GLB invisibilty.
As such, it is non-partisan.

>>Since I publish approximately five articles a month about
>>GLAAD activities all of which contain action items, I
>>heartily recommend that you read them, choose at least one,
>>and follow through on the suggested course of action to be
>>taken. 
>
>Send me your articles, let me have a look.  How many people
>see them, do you think?
>
All such articles are prefixed with the tag GLAAD:, so they are quite
easy to find (as well as to skip over). I expect the readership of
soc.motss is rather large, tens of thousands perhaps. That's the reason
I post the articles in the first place. Many people would not otherwise
get the information about what is going on in the media, and perhaps
there are hundreds of readers who might be inclined to write letters.
Written letters to producers, directors, editors, etc. do quite a bit of
good in resolving many of the problems we address to the media.

        =Jack=
---

Jack B. Newsbaum             You have rights antecedent to all earthly
Library Information Systems  governments; rights that cannot be
University Research Library  repealed or restrained by human law.
ecl4jn2@mvs.oac.ucla.edu               - John Adams