From: orc@usite-next.uchicago.edu (David Parsons)
Subject: Re: Assorted ramblings (long)
Organization: Ministry of Skritching
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 07:10:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.202335.1@oread.cc.ukans.edu> matthew@oread.cc.ukans.edu writes:
|we've gotten very serious here at soc.bi.  Although I do enjoy the
|articles posted on this and the thoughtful discussion, none of it
|seems playful as it once was.

   There are, unfortunately, serious issues that sometimes come up.
I know that I, for one, wouldn't mind if the main topic of discussion
wasm, oh, trainspotting (The Friday, Aug 21 issue of the Wall Street
Journal has a front-page article about British trainspotters. It is
a positive hoot; trying to convince people that trainspotting is dull
(fat chance of that!) while doing some the writing in a frankly
sexual style), but, you know, we are rather a minority (an oppressed
one at that) and have a nice lovely set of unpleasant interactions
with the rest of the world.

   (However, the signal to noise ratio hasn't gone up that much.
soc.bi is better than <shudder!> alt.callahans, but, well it still
contains a good fraction of the gourmet quality fluff on the net.)

|	Are we being playful?  Am I just not tapping into the articles
|that have a "serious" heading and are masking the fun "inside," as it
|were?  Yes, and no.  Some of the posts deal with people I've never
|met, magazines I have no access to...or topics that I've never had to
|deal with...or have put aside in my quest for fun.

    Perhaps.  I don't think you need to worry about soc.bi being
an overly serious group until they've tied me up and locked me up
in a place where I can't do trainspotting recruitment, or, for that
matter, there are a few posters who have gone on at great length
about the erotic possibilities of computer hardware, and they'd have
to be tied up and locked away (preferably in the same cell as me,
though ;-)

    But I'm kinda glad that things can turn serious once in a while.
A diet of pure cotton candy may seem appealing, but it soon turns
sour.  And, already there have been complaints about the soc.bi
cabal (because of some of the in-comments about, um, certain parties,
and some of the intense flirting/courting going on here?) which is,
I suppose, to be expected, but so soon after the group was created
(it's been, what, 9 months now, or has it been more and I'm getting
feeble in my old age?) is disconcerting.

|	To tell you all the truth, I have no idea.  Perhaps the
|"thrill" is gone for me.  Perhaps what I thought of as a great group
|just isn't for me anymore.  And before I get flamed rudely for that
|comment, I want you all to know I say it with *no* sarcasm or malice.
|It's just that I don't seem to fit in anymore.  I am still bisexual,
|and I am still hiding that part of myself from the general populace.

   That might be a part of your dislocation?

|But that is necessity at the moment--'tis a house of cards that I live
|in, and one whisper on the wind of what I might be in the "general"
|world will make it fall.  And although I came into this group with a
|vow that I would start changing that and making myself be known, I
|simply cannot.

   Give it time....

|	So I watch and wait.  Perhaps I will slide silently into the
|shadows, always watching and marveling at you all, as you debate and
|laugh and question.  And maybe occasionally I'll interject with a
|comment, a quip or two.  But at this point, I really don't know.  My
|life is becoming more and more complicated, and holding onto the ideas
|I once had seems to be more of a burden than a blessing....

   I think that's part of the rules of life.  Look in the appendixes
covering "mental breakdowns, ulcers, and other psychological mishaps"
under "wear and tear."
                 ____
   david parsons \bi/
		  \/  orc@pell.chi.il.us