Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxe.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!ihuxe!rainbow
From: rainbow@ihuxe.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: RE3:bigotry
Message-ID: <715@ihuxe.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Jul-84 16:31:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxe.715
Posted: Wed Jul  4 16:31:47 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Jul-84 00:37:15 EDT
Sender: rainbow@ihuxe.UUCP
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 77

<the comments I have drawn upon are found in an article by charm!slag>

>	To say that "most men are egotistical chauvenist, insensitive,
> macho assholes" in any context I've ever seen is a very fine
> example of racial hatred and bigotry.  The implication is, 
> except for the occasional exception, that this is a rule.
 
Since this partial sentence was torn out of a paragraph which had
a totally different intent, I refuse to go so far as to accuse
Trish of racial hatred and bigotry. I think its wrong to be so cruel. 
I will not be a hypocrite and join the lynch mod. I think further
evidence/inquiry is needed before such accusations are valid. 
I have no qualms against anyone presenting opinions on
their interpretations. But personal attacks were just a little to much
for me to handle without speaking up. Especially since I feel there
is a serious shortage of information available.

>	I'm not saying that trish was wrong to say that, because
> I understood the context and emotions behind what she was saying,
> and there's no such thing as a right or wrong emotion.  Obviously
> most men are egotistical, chauvenist, insensitive, macho assholes
> to trish or she wouldn't have  said they were.

I am continually amazed at how all words are taken so literally.
I feel the benefit of doubt should go to Trish until she clarifies
otherwise. The thrust of her statement was not to tear down men.
Rather something about being happy as a homosexual. In that light
any other deductions from her article must in all fairness be
first looked into and discussed. Not any of this <censored>
going on now. I feel any of these other deductions(ie bigotry, etc)
are invalid unless Trish writes an article on her feelings about men.
In any case, there should have been no personal attacks against Trish
because she quite easily could be innocent. Hence she should treated
as such. What would have been wrong with a calm rational discussion?
They are probably afraid no one would hear them unless they stir up
controversy. 

> This last round of namecalling has made me very angry. 

I agree that the artistic element of our discussions has digressed 
considerably. But this is what had got me incensed in the first place.
And since I'm not one to back down, I'll fight fire with fire if necessary.

> I feel that I've been attacked, yet if I protest, my protest
> will be used as evidence that I am egotistical, chauvenist, insensitive,
> macho and assholy, because I can't tolerate being attacked
> by calling me an egotistical chauvenist, insensitive, macho
> asshole because I'm a man.  

Not so at all. It depends how you protest. If you attack Trish personally
as what has been going on, then I'd say yes. Otherwise no. Anyone can
calmly and rationally discuss a subject without being accused of said
offense. Otherwise the implications are immense.

> 	I would rather have trish speak vehemently and then
> clarify what she meant, then have to listen to a thousand
> other people interpret and reinterpret her words, explaining
> in detail just what she meant, why she said it, how she said it,
> who she said it to, and how the act of disagreeing or agreeing
> with her just goes to prove her point.  Have any of you
> noticed how many megabytes of garbage have spewed forth
> from a few lines from one person, who hasn't posted anything since.
  
Now these are words of wisdom. Profound in every way. They carry great
weight and should be listened to. For they are true without a doubt.
The most intelligent thing I've read in some time pertaining to Trish.

>	I know I'm gonna be sorry for posting this one, because
> it makes me feel egotistical, chauvenist, insensitive, and
> macho, not to mention an asshole.

Well, finally we have a bit of humor for a change. Cute. And I'm
not going to touch it with a ten foot pole.
 
Robert