From: bob@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (robert s. richardson)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: A Few Questions
Date: 23 Dec 1992 13:47:42 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: atlantis.cs.orst.edu


In article <21DEC199210521002@venus.tamu.edu> crr4574@venus.tamu.edu writes:
>I am trying to gain some insight into the subject of homosexuality because I
>do not understand you.  I am not trying to be offensive, I just do not know the
>answers to my questions.

It is good that you are seeking information, and trying not to be offensive.
Be careful not to exclude folks from discussion however:  "I do not
understand you" infers that other heterosexuals don't have anything positive
to help you understand homosexuality.  In any case, I'm always happy to
talk about gay issues with someone willing to listen.  For reference
purposes, I am a gay male, near as I can tell exclusively (no bisexual
tendencies...)

>1.  Would you be heterosexual if you had a choice?

If it were truly a choice, then I'd be bisexual.  I am simply not sexually
attracted to women.  I'm not repulsed by them--I can appreciate the subtleties
of people's bodies--the aesthetics if you will, but I'm not aroused.  But
being gay (I make a distinction here: being homosexual is being attracted
to members of the same sex, being gay is owning up to and accepting that
attraction in a healthy way.) But being gay is more than sexual attraction,
its affectional.  Just as you may be sexually attracted to a woman, you
may also find women (perhaps the same person) who you feel you could spend
the rest of your life with: LOVE.  Being gay is falling in LOVE and/or
being aroused, lusting after people of the same gender.  Just as heterosexuals
are not attracted to everyone they see, neither are homosexuals.  I find
some people revolting, am neutral towards most others, find some folks
stimulating, and occasionally see a body that would cause me to fall off
my bike as my head spins around, etc.

Getting back to your question, I have given a lot of thought to this in
the past.  The only reason I would become straight, if I could, would be
to escape society's persecution of gays, but I wouldnt be able to live
with myself if I did that for "selling out" to the cause--It'd be like
a black person being offered the chance of changing their skin color to
white.  Also, let's say there was a magic pill that I could take and
become het--I would love to try it for curiosity's sake, but only if there
was a pill to change me back.  Think of the possibilities!  If I had 
trouble finding a guy to go dancing with on a Saturday, I could take
a pill and go out with my female friends.  (Though we often go out
dancing anyway--I know a lot of females who enjoy a night out at gay-male
attended night clubs because they feel safe from sexual-pressure there.)

By the way, I never understood the fuss over kissing/dancing until I finally
started seeing other men.

>2.  What terms do you find offensive?  I thought I knew until I heard of Queer
>    Nation.

Well, Queer is offensive if used in the wrong way.  Queer Nation is an
attempt to "reclaim" the word--the idea (I think) is that if we use the
negative words ourselves, then the folks who use them against us will
become powerless because we have adopted their bad words, or something
like that.  It's hard to explain.

Generally, for men, "Gay" is used, while women prefer "Lesbian."  I wish
there was one word, other than "Homosexual" for both, though Gay is often
used for both.  Also, many people dont like phrases such as "Gays in
the military"  Something more sensitive (recognizing the whole person,
rather than defining a person by their sexuality) would be "Gay people
in the military".  I've always wanted to start a group called "Faggots
for Christ" but I think it wouldn't go over well.  (Thats a joke)  

>3.  I never understood what the problem was with Perot's comments in the
>    election.  He said that he did not want gays in his cabinet because he 
>    wanted to avoid controversy.  After this he was insulted and shouted down
>    several times.  I felt this did not look good for the homosexual community,
>    that someone should have asked him to clarify his position instead of 
>    insulting him.  Can someone comment on this?

I didn't realize he was insulted and shouted down.  By whom?  The main
issue at stake here was that up until that statement perot had always
said things like "As long as a person is doing their job, what else
matters?" or "People should be judged by their actions" etc.  Then,
suddenly, a person is unsuitable because they are gay--he did use the
word "unrealistic" and "unsuitable" in other statements at the time.

Anyhow, the very next week he appointed a liason to the Gay/Lesbian
community and a meeting we held between him and many gay leaders, and
progress was made.  The general consensus amongst my friends was that
although Perot would do nothing to further gay rights on his own, he
wouldn't be driving us backwards like Bush and the national republican
platform.  In the end, I think something like 80% of the gay vote went
to Clinton.

I don't understand this fuss about Clinton and the military ban.  After
all, early on in the campaign, on national television, and then reaffirmed
several times later, he *promised* to repeal the ban.  It was a "read
my lips" sort of thing.  One reporter asked "Governor Clinton: How long
will it take you to repeal the ban ..."  His answer, as he held up his
index finger, "One Day."  Seems pretty clear to me.  I would think that
people, no matter who they voted for, would respect a president who,
no matter the flak, keeps his solemn promises.  We'll still have to
wait and see.  I don't think "one day" is realistic, but he is trying!

>4.  Finally, are you able to have heterosexual sex and enjoy it?

I think I covered this above, sort of.  Please don't be offended, but
a good tool in this sort of discussion is to reverse the question: 
"Are you able to have homosexual sex and enjoy it?"  How does that sound
to you.  If your answer is yes, then perhaps you are bisexual.  If
your answer is no, then have you tried, or are you not attracted to
members of the same sex.  There are a lot of issues surrounding such
a seemingly simple question.  I had sex (well, not intercourse, but
lets call it a sensual experience) with a lesbian once, and it was
kinda fun, but there was another guy there too, so its hard to say.

I might use another question as an example here.  A lot of people ask
"When did you decide to be homosexual."  I just turn it around and ask
"When did you decide to be heterosexual."  Try substituting and pondering
words like "realize you were", "choose to be", "become", etc for "decide
to be", and dont forget to try subbing "bisexual" and "asexual" and
the ever popular "pansexual" at the end.

>Once again, I am not trying to be offensive and I am not doing any type of
>study.  I ask these questions merely because I do not understand.

>Charley

No offense taken.  It is refreshing to see a poster on this group who
appears to have a genuine interest rather than just wanting to start
a flame war.  Please, if you have any other questions, feel free to
email me.  I'd be happy to answer them.  There are so many aspects to
all of this that it's quite amazing, and no one ever seems to get beyond
the basic "its wrong" "not its not" "yes it is" sort of discussion that
we have around here.

Bob Richardson
bob@atlantis.cs.orst.edu


Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush