From: utzoo!decvax!microsof!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!floyd!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!thekid Newsgroups: net.singles Title: Thanks for the cards and letters, but... Article-I.D.: rlgvax.368 Posted: Mon May 2 02:19:28 1983 Received: Thu May 5 05:39:17 1983 Well, to anyone that's interested: I have received 5 notes in the past week, 15 in the last couple of weeks, all noting that I was not mentioning my gender. Two of them said that my articles had `male written all over them' (I quote 1 of them), and three said that they liked `women who understood a male's point of view' (again a quote). Am I behaving like a male? How studly... Anyway, I AM male. `Delightfully' so, for you Heinlein fans. I got the login `thekid' when I was a bit younger. I decided at that time to flaunt it, and our password file reflects where THAT got me. Of course, it hasn't been an accident that I have kept from explicitly signing my arti- cles. I prefer the asexuality that a pseudonym permits. And I prefer not to have anyone look at the article and say: male, why bother reading it. And everyone knows that happens because we've seen the articles saying `typical male point of view, why read', etc. etc. I would like you all to read without wasting time on gender speculation. The main reason for this article. I received no less than 5 versions of this one: "I don't like it when people conceal their identities for no apparent reason, I look at it as being distant and therefore disrespectful." I would be interested in why you all feel this way. No apparent reason? What's not apparent about not wanting people to know who I am? I've had several conversations over the last several months, some just four or five exchanges, some of a few hundred (so far). Invariably one or both of us has remarked on the freedom that we had to really express how we felt about something rather than seeking the respondent's approval. You know, you say something, and the person you're talking to gets a quizzical expression on their face, so you're immediately on the defensive and either apologetic or argumentative. I've written some devastating flames, most of which got trashed because while typing them out I ended up really thinking about what the person said and ending up seeing their point of view, partially anyway, certainly enough to douse any flames. Of course it's more difficult to be personal with a pseudonym, not in the sense of Lady A. personal, but willing to discuss personal feelings. And, by golly, I think that's because we have this need to pigeon-hole the person we're talking to, to MAKE SURE that they are some- one who will give us the strokes we want. No one goes to their worst enemy when they're down. Everyone knows exactly what they want when they have problems. Your `friends' are people who offer the correct response when you stimulate them in certain ways. To go on the net, or to mail to a person you don't know is incredibly gutsy. I mean that person might not give you the correct response, right? It requires you to trust an unk- nown quantity, right? Wrong. That's not the problem, kids, that's the symptom. The problem is that what that person thinks of you is the key fac- tor in what you think of yourself. Something that has recently been a real `growth' factor for me is to decide exactly what I want from the peo- ple around me. If I have a problem and I go to talk to someone I try to decide exactly what I want the person to give me. If it's support, or if it's advice, or if I just want them to listen for ten minutes, whatever. Then, once I've really defined the issue, 50% of the time I decide I don't really want that from them. Another 20% I say, `Hey, listen, I want to talk to you, and what I want you to give me is '. So far, it's been as instructive as anything. Response has varied from, `great, okay, here's what I've got', to `you arrogant *&##@&'. Oh, well, I started by questioning the need to be close/respectful. I still question that. I want you all to listen to me, give me a chance to air some of my pet little prejudices/thoughts, and give me some of your own in return. Frankly, on the basis of some of my recent mail, I'm not sure what you all want from me. All answers of `eternal silence' to: Keith Bostic (thekid) ...![ brl-bmd, seismo, mcnc, we13, lime ]!rlgvax!thekid (703) 471-6860 p.s. Also, I'm not (I don't think, anyway) contradicting myself. Some- one wrote me and said, `you jumped on whoever for saying you can avoid judging people', pardon a rough paraphrase, anyway, I don't retract that statement, knowing that a person is a fe/male, what their religion, *whatever*, gives me something that will help me predict their reactions and in general help me to insure the achievement of whatever I happen to want at the moment. However, I see no reason for the fact that other people judge me to affect in any way how I judge myself. And I see no excuse for flaming on me for not providing the expected pigeon-holing information. Maybe we could have a required biography with every news submission. Have a nice one, campers.