In article <csundh30.735398449@ursa>, csundh30@ursa.calvin.edu (Charles Sundheim) writes: > lynn@pacesetter.com (Lynn E. Hall) writes: >  > >>lynn@pacesetter.com (Lynn E. Hall) writes: > >> > >> [description of a pretty rowdy-sounding party] > >> > >>And still we wonder why they stereotype us... > >> > >>-Erc. >  > > Whacha mean 'we'...ifin they (whom ever 'they' are) want to stereotype me > >as one that likes to drink beer and watch lovely ladies display their > >beautiful bodies - I like that stereotype. > >  If you were refering 'stereotype' to infer a negative - you noticed we > >didn't rape, pillage, or burn down the town. We also left mucho bucks as in > >MONEY with the town. Me thinks the town LIKES us. Least they said so. > >                         Lynn Hall - NOS Bros >  >  > They bein' themfolk who tend to compose fair piece of the population; > bein the ones that regard bikers as a loud, irresponsible, irreverent, > reprobate rabble.    Doesn't sound like they attended, though, does it?  In fact, if we riders need friends, it sounds a lot like we might have a whole townfull from  Lynn's description, especially if the same crowd gets invited back to party some more year after year.  > Sure you didn't rape and pillage-- It's a relief to know that you were > such gentlemen-- but because you were not completely out-of-hand you  > justify your lesser indescretions?  Some pretty distorted thinking, I > should say.    You seem to be one of very few bent out of shape over these "lesser indiscretions".  If the towns-people aren't ruffled by the "indiscretions" and the partyers aren't either, maybe the "indiscretions" don't amount to anything more threatening or damaging than harmless  good-natured rowdiness among consenting adults.  The only thing that  really bothered me about the description was the knee-deep empty beer cans  in the street, but maybe the town had a plan to deal with that since they  helped set up the party in the first place.  If I lived there and the bikers' previous visits had established a record of mutual cooperation and good intentions, I'd certainly rather they stick around and party than go riding off into the night impaired and maybe get hurt or killed.  > Oh-- I'm sorry, I just noticed that you left mucho bucks (as in MONEY)... > Nevermind my criticism, I was out of line.  I forgot that when one leaves > mucho bucks (as in MONEY) their behavior is permissable, perhaps even  > justified.  If it doesn't hurt anyone, and all the parties to the party benefit and consider the entire activity to be benign and harmless, then who  needs to "permit" or "justify" it?  You?  Why do *you* need to do that?  > Keep in mind that "themfolks" are the ones that could give a %$#@! when  > a biker gets killed, when *their* elected officials institute further > draconian legislation (helmet laws, gun controls, etc.), the ones that don't  > respect our rights on the roads because we do not respect theirs all "the > rest of the time..."  Ironically, these particular townsfolk probably are in the minority that don't happen to fit the stereotype you describe.  They've developed a friendly long-term mutually-beneficial relationship with a group of  motorcyclists, and aren't as burdened with MC-ignorance as is the general population because of it.  > Need I continue?  If such a need exists, it surely must come from within.  > So continue to wear your stigma as a badge, but the next time you are > whining about "them" and the effect of their values on yours, remember > that it was probably the behavior of self-righteous wusses like myself > that kept "them" at bay for this long.  Well, you got the "self-righteous wusses" part right, anyway.  Chuck Rogers car377@torreys.att.com