From: rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu (Gadson Sandor)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Samegender Families))
Date: 5 Jan 1993 19:08 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu

In article <1410@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) writes...

|Exactly where did you suppose that it was my son that made these comments?
|It wasn't him and since I'm not in the habit of correcting other people's
|children (I'll leave that to the liberal school teachers 8^) I was very 
|content to simply observe this very interesting conversation...

	And, obviously, you didn't think to much of the possibility
that such attitudes could lead to furthering their juvenile bigotry.
Had they been saying things which you really had thought to be either
wrong or dangerous, would you have interjected?  I mean, what if they 
had been going on about how rotten "niggers" are?  Would you have been
content to simply observer the conversation for its interesting qualities?

	I'm not telling you what to do with your kids, just asking
what you'd do.


|Frankly because I wouldn't waste my time watching the kinda of garbage
|that MTV generates.  And I think you missed the point.  Whether there
|was one homosexual on the show or a dozen is meaningless.

	I'm not missing the point.  I'm trying to make mine.  Whether
their information was accurate is important since it seems they were
paarticularly upset that the show was devoted to letting lots of fags
tell about their dating experiences.  Maybe they would have been just
as upset if they thought there had been only one.  But I can see the
scenario where the artificial multiplication of numbers makes the
impression worse.  And, so it's important.

	Now, I didn't miss your point at all.  


|The tone
|and the level of hostility in the conversation was though, since it was
|pretty clear that no matter how many are there the fact that they are 
|driven from the tv by the presence of just one is a pretty clear indicator
|to me that even at the ripe old age 10 or 12, these kids are pretty 
|fed up with the whole matter.  

	It's not pretty clear to me that the number would have made no
difference.  They seem to be fed up by a perceived attempt to flood them 
with homosexual propaganda, when in reality, the Real World show only
featured on segment with one bisexual among the rest of the heterosexual
dating experiences.


|>	Why didn't you take the opportunity to tell them that perhaps it's 
|>inappropriate for people to be taking about their heterosexual dating
|>and sex experiences? 
| 
|Again, why do read anything you want into my postings?  Did I say anything
|about inappropriateness of the subject?  I think it's very appropriate for
|kids that age to be talking about such things.

	No, you missed what I was saying.  I meant, you could have called
attention (had you seen the show) to the fact that there were six other 
dating experiences detailed, and that they were Heterosexual, and that
perhaps it's simply inappropriate for MTV to be discussing dating (and/or 
sexual) practises on the show at all.  Of course, that would be only if you 
felt that way.


|expierience, which indicates to me that the whole notion on which teaching
|about alternative lifestyles in school is based (that being, if we expose
|children to the issues early enough they'll grow up thinking it's normal)
|is a bunch of hooey!  

	I didn't think Black people were normal.  I'd only see them once or
twice when my parents would take me to visit the South.  Once inside the
walls of my grandparents' house, I would hear the locals talkl bad about
the "niggers".

	It wasn't until I saw Blacks as normal people on Sesame Street
that I began to /think/ of them as normal, nice people.  And while I
grew up around privately racist people, my schooling told me that Blacks
were good people.  And (to please your threorising) I do recall other kids 
who ignored the teaching nonetheless, and are bigots today.  But that
social engineering worked on me.  



|If anything's normal in this situation it's that young boys hearing or seeing 
|two men engaging in a physical relationship and be repulsed by it is 
|normal.

	That reaction may or may not be /common/, but it's not normal in 
the sense that there is some innate tendency to despise affexion between
two men.  I remember long before I knew much about the hatred of Gays.
There was some 10:00 news piece on "Gay Rights".  I asked my dad what
"gay" meant.  He hesitated and said, "It's when mem like other men, and
kiss them the way men and women kiss".  I understood what he meant, and
I didn't think it was gross.  It was just a fact my dad told me.

	None of the guys I grew up around had any intense hatred for fags, 
even long after we all knew about Gays.


|Sorry if those real life situations don't click with what you
|want to be the result of the latest psycobabble based ideas, but that's
|what your getting.  

	No need to be sorry.  I just have enough real life situations
of my own that I know that yours are not absolute or generalisable.


|But you still don't see the difference between my wage and theirs do you?
|The difference is that they're gambling with my children's futures and I
|will do what ever it takes to see to it there's counter to the radical
|views my kids are exposed to in school, anything!  And I don't really care
|anymore if that means some group that has no respect for my rights as
|a parent gets tiffed.  

	Yes, Paul, I see the difference.  Earlier, you were making it sound 
as if they were gambling with their own futures as well, predicting that
there would be a backlash against the Gays for their efforts.  They are 
gambling with their futures indeed since the world they are forced to live
in pretty much sucks when their love is made criminal, their relationships 
are ignored (legally and socially), and their lives are put at risk by
bigots who have this so called "natural" hatred for them.  They don't want
to see any more of that.  

	Frankly, I'm not sure what the big gamble with
your kids' futures is all about.  What are the terrible possible 
consequences for your kids?  Are you worried that they'll be incited to
do violence to fags, and be thrown into jail?  Right now (though it's
late) that's about the only terrible thing I can foresee.

|The classroom is a battleground for control of my kids' mind?  Fine!  
|But I plan to win the war for their sakes, no matter what the cost.

	Mandatory education has always been the forced instillment of
ideas.  Not saying it's right or wrong.  I've never been a fan of teaching
values in school at all.  It's been going on for years, of course.
But, I am for teaching kids facts.  I would oppose social engineering in 
schools to the point that it tells kids what is right and wrong.  I will
encourage it as long as it presents factual information about society.
When those facts are capable of fostering moral opinions in students, then
my only request is that all such related facts be presented for the sake of
fairness.  I accept this level of forced instillment of knowledge into the
minds of kids.  

on Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson G
Gasdon Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gads
on Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson Gadson G
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh