Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rochester!ritcv!jrc From: jrc@ritcv.UUCP (James R Carbin) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: (Retransmission) Proposed net.gays newsgroup Message-ID: <590@ritcv.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Sep-83 15:03:17 EDT Article-I.D.: ritcv.590 Posted: Thu Sep 22 15:03:17 1983 Date-Received: Fri, 23-Sep-83 23:31:36 EDT Lines: 30 ** The following article is being retransmitted at the request of two usenet ** readers as somehow is was garbled in transmission to their sites. >From jrc (James R Carbin) Mon Sep 19 19:37:36 1983 Subject: Proposed net.gays newsgroup Newsgroups: net.singles It seems to me that a double standard is appearing when net.jokes can contain gay jokes (even if they are ROT-13) that can be offensive and degrading to a group of individuals, but there is a noticeable objection to the possibility of a net group to discuss issues of concerns to gays. Where were such objections when net.rec.nude and net.women.only were being considered? <<>> As far as a user misusing this proposed net.group, isn't this a possibility with any net.group. And for the suggestion that this would be a "dating service" or a forum for inappropriate topics, isn't this just reenforcing stereotypes that unfortunately still exist in the minds of some. If the name (net.gays) is a problem, why not net.motss? What net administrator couldn't come up with some appropriate disguise (MicrO TapeS System? etc. (tee! hee!) ). My apologies (in advance) to anyone who objects to my posting this article in net.singles, but this is where it all started, and it seemed appropriate to post it here as well as in net.news.group. j.r.