🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep4.140153.14491@en.ecn.purdue.edu> davisonj@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John M Davison) writes:
>
>IN ARTICLE <Bu17BG.7sK@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> MATTHEW@MENTOR.CC.PURDUE.EDU (MATTHEW N. SHARP) WRITES:
>>In article <92090330080@zone4.ocunix.on.ca> david@zone4.ocunix.on.ca (David Stimson) writes:
>...
>>>  I really give a shit.  Being queer, I find it a personal insult.
>>>Pottery?  Sorry, I prefer programming.
>...
>
>>I have never told anyone my sexual preference without them asking for some
>>legitimate reason.
>>
>>It is, simply, no one's business.
>>
>>It should NOT be an issue.
>>
>>
>>You, Mr. Stimson, seem to make it one.
>
>        ADMITTEDLY, I HAVE CAUGHT ONLY THE TAIL END OF THIS DISCUSSION, BUT
>IT DOESN'T SEEM TO ME THAT MR. STIMSON WAS OVERREACTING.  VERBAL GAY-BASHING IS
>AS CONTEMPTIBLE AS, SAY, RACIAL/ETHNIC/NATIONAL SLURS, AND IN ADDITION TO
>OFFENDING GAY AND GAY-POSITIVE READERS, IT MAKES THOSE OF US WHO ARE COMPLACENT
>LOOK, WELL, COMPLACENT.  FOR THAT REASON, EXPRESSIONS OF INDIGNATION (AND,
>PERHAPS, PITY AND GAY-POSITIVE ENCOURAGEMENT) TOWARD THOSE WHO EXPRESS
>HOMOPHOBIC VIEWS SHOULD BE MADE.  PERHAPS MR. STIMSON'S CHOICE TO REVEAL HIS
>SEXUAL PREFERENCE WAS A MISTAKE -- I SAW NO NEED FOR IT -- BUT MORE
>IMPORTANTLY, HE POINTED OUT THAT THE HOMOPHOBIC REMARK IN QUESTION SHOULD NOT
>BE DEALT WITH SIMPLY BY IGNORING IT, AND THE ONLY REASON I CAN THINK OF TO
>DISPUTE THAT IS THAT IF ONE SPENT ONE'S TIME ATTEMPTING TO CORRECT ALL OF THE
>DING-DONGS ON THESE NEWSGROUPS WHO MAKE HOMOPHOBIC REMARKS, THERE WOULDN'T BE
>ENOUGH TIME LEFT IN THE DAY TO EAT, SLEEP, GO POTTY, &C.  MR. STIMSON DIDN'T
>SOUND LIKE A RAVING MILITANT HOMOSEXUAL IN HIS REMARKS; HE SOUNDED LIKE SOMEONE
>WHO WAS JUSTIFIABLY IRRITATED BY SOMEONE'S COARSE, INEXCUSABLE REMARK.
>

I simply don't see the use of _any_ word as being sufficient
provocation for a response, whether that word be 'nigger',
'fag', or 'Christianity.'  They are simply words.  And by response,
the thoughts behind them are agitated.

No one is ever changed via strong emotional response.
People must be convinced; persuaded.

You cannot expect someone to respond to an attack
by simply saying, "Gee... you ARE right!"

Alienation is the by-product of such an attack,
and the cause of eliminating prejudice is not
furthered by the creation of new enemies.

IMHO.

-Matthew Neill Sharp
matthew@mentor.cc.purdue.edu, bp271@cleveland.freenet.edu