From: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Subject: Re: sexist heterosexists (was Re: mandatory service)
Reply-To: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 06:01:57 GMT


In a previous article, nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) says:

>Warning - this post is nothing but a flame. I'm in a bad mood today
>anyway, and this person is really bugging me.
>
>In article <1992Aug13.191528.14774@news.ysu.edu> ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller) writes:
>>Gee, Melinda, you speak pig...is it your native language?
>
>no, but it seems to be yours.
>
Melinda made an assumption that I must be some mannor of sexist because
I argued from a male point of view.  My responce was my way of saying:
Don't make assinine assumptions.

>
>[Kelley writes a picture of heterosexual male bliss shattered by the
>evils of the draft]
>
Wrong.  Kelley writes a picture of how a typical heterosexual male (or person
who poses as a heterosexual male by circumstance) would
respond to the idea of their wives and daughters being drafted.

>[Nelson says "gee, I'm a faggot, I doubt I'll ever be a blissful
>heterosexual male]
>
And how did I respond to this?  I said, "Gee, I'm a faggot, too!"

>[Melinda says
>>>AAAAAAAGH!!!!  AAAAAGH!!!  AAAAAAAAAAAGH!!!
>which, if you have half a clue you will realize is Melinda's own way
>of indicating her frustration when someone forgets that women exist.]
>
Oh?  I don't recall making any sign of forgetting that women exist.  Can
you point it out?

>Kelley again:
>>Read the entire post, Melinda.  I'm illustrating that the draft is wrong, 
>>regardless of the gender or marital status.
>
>Kelley, honey, look. You've said your little piece about the draft
>again and again. We all know you think it's bad.
>
>This is a forum where queer men and women are discussing their lives
>and how things (like a draft) affect them. But you come in here, and
>you try to make some bizarre example case out of a heterosexual male.
>Do you not understand how stupid this is in an audience with a lot of
>people who are not male and/or are not heterosexual?
>
Indeed?  Are you saying here that these issues do not affect queer men
and women?  Are you saying that there aren't plenty of queer men and
women who do not have children that they wouldn't like to see forced
into involantary servitude?

Get a clue yourself.  There are a lot of queer men and women who must
concider these issues, that have daughters and grandchildren(and wives...)
.  In this
ideal world where queers must not hide or assimilate into mainstream
society by denying their true selves and marrying motos and having
families, how could it be otherwise?

(And as an aside, before you make another bad assumption and decide to
attack me fo being a closet case, know that it is no longer true, in my
case...but it still is in many...)

>And fix your fucking news software. You're completely mangling the
>References: line, making those of us who use threaded newsreaders
>very unhappy.

Your unhappiness is not my problem.  I don't maintain the news software,
or even have access to it.  You got a problem with it, inform my sysadmin.

-- 
*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist // "Peter...PETER!!  I can see    *
*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller // your house from here!"          *    
*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu // Jesus Christ, from the cross     *
****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.****************