From: jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com (Jake Coughlin)
Subject: Re: The MOW Platform (was Re: NOTICE - Details...)
Originator: jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 01:48:04 GMT
Reply-To: jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research

[is the newsfeed back?]

mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas) writes:
>In article, jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com (Jake Coughlin) writes:
>  Oh bother. Why do even try.

hmmm, consistent with your attitude regarding the MOW.

>> bingo.  the platform doesn't make much difference in
>> my decision to march.
>
>  Look dearie, some of us with a conscience want to know *why*
>we are doing something -- especially if it is in a political
>context.

bizarre response, mike, telling me that i'm not acting out
of good conscience.  tell me, are you treating headaches
with DMSO and rubbing alcohol?

>If you haven't noticed, those sheer numbers are going
>to be defined as supporting said platform.

who will define everyone marching as supporting The Platform?

the media?  i can't accept that a person shouldn't march
because the media is going to define everyone as supporting
The Platform (gasp) -- you know, the same media which distorts
Gay Pride by focusing solely on drag queens and leathermen.
also, are you really so naive as to believe that all gay
activists are going to be silent with respect to their
positions on the platform?

will the intelligent politicians define us all as supporting
The Platform?  the intelligent politicians, supporting and
opposing their own political platforms, understand the
separation between a platform and the constituent's actual
views.  intelligent politicians understand the media because
they use it all the time.

The Enemy?  then your invisibility by not marching only
contributes to The Problem.

>If you support it
>(or enough that it's worth the compromise) that's fine. If you
>don't you're either a bloody hypocrite or a moron.

and which, precisely, are you?  the supporter, the bloody
hypocrite, or the moron?  we're close to writing a Peter
Greenway film here.

>>so why should your decision to march focus on the media
>> when it cares more about drag queens and child molesters than
>> whether or not gay people are struggling for equality.  (why go to
>> Gay Pride?)
>
>  Are you on drugs? Try again.

ohhh please, sir, may i have another?

>   The only thing these things have in common is the large number
>of queers in one place. That may be enough for your skewed perspective
>but the rest of America is going to want to know what all those faggots
>are whining about. Guess what they are going to be told.

by *whom*, mike?  told *by*whom*?

>Adding superflous or only vaguely related issues detracts from the
>real point of the march: gay rights.

adding superfluous issues like ..... oh, Cambodia, a call for
more cancer research, that pesky hole in the ozone layer,
garbage disposal, and all those other too-liberal-for-your-eyes
issues ... would detract seriously from the point of the march:
gay rights.  i haven't seen much in the platform that isn't
linked in some way with gay rights, but again, the platform be
damned.  it's not The Reason why i'm marching.  i'm marching
more for a show of force than support for the platform.

>In doing so the march's platform
>becomes an agenda of the organizers who get to claim there is some
>sort of unity for their platform, when in fact probably half of the
>people are there for your reasons. 

duh.  when has it ever NOT been so and when are the so-called
"conservative" voices going to open their mouths and
contribute?  the organizers worked on The Platform, and
they're entitled to their media coverage, but i don't recall
the clause in the Media Constition(tm) that the organizers
have the monopoly on media coverage.  can you point me to the
appropriate section, please?  it really would help me
understand your position.

>  Those of us who have half a conscience about not become utter
>hypocrites are thus excluded because of a whole laundry list of
>superficial and irrelevant issues are tacked on like an Omnibus
>Funding Bill.

(*scream*) OH MY GOD, MOMMA THOMAS, MIKEY MARCHED FOR ABORTION
RIGHTS!!  WHY, JUST LAST WEEK, HE TOLD US HE WAS PRO-LIFE!!  I
GUESS HE LIED!

>  Not that I would expect you to care; you've got your's after
>all.

pretty ironic coming from a libertarian.

>		Mike, not holding his breath.

then you can't blame oxygen depravation...
-- 
Queer Without A Cause!
Jason Coughlin ( jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com )
"I find myself suddenly in the world, and I recognize that I have one
right alone: that of demanding human behavior of the other." -- Fanon
Newsgroups: soc.motss