Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site bbncca.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!bbncca!sdyer
From: sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.flame
Subject: Re: Flame: Sargent's theory of homosexuality
Message-ID: <1163@bbncca.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 26-Nov-84 10:47:01 EST
Article-I.D.: bbncca.1163
Posted: Mon Nov 26 10:47:01 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 27-Nov-84 04:13:40 EST
References: <283@haddock.UUCP> <1464@pucc-h>, <1132@bbncca.ARPA> <1504@pucc-h>
Organization: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Ma.
Lines: 41

>=Sargent
>Perhaps in one way I am being a bit presumptive, since I've never actually
>fallen into homosexuality full-fledgedly.  But I have had more struggles with
>homosexual feelings than most people I've talked to; so I'm not 100% ignorant.
>
>I do wonder why my statements provoke a flame.  It has been my experience that
>heated denials often are a cover for a truth that the denier does not want
>to accept or admit.  Might I suggest that you examine yourself and see if
>perhaps, at bottom, you really do have some -- shall we say, reservations --
>about homosexuality.

It's clear in Sargent's entire response to my article that he has missed
the point.  He still is writing out of befuddlement, amazed that anyone
could possibly take offense at his bizarre generalizations.  Regardless of
their origin (more on that later) his comments are akin to so-called
christians proseletyzing among Jews, so filled with self-righteousness that
they do not see their capacity for insult.  I make no comment on his last
paragraph here, except to repeat it, so it can stand off by itself, as
another example of the kind of ad-hominem double-talk and evasiveness we
see repeatedly coming from the fundamentalist corner.

I received a response by mail to my first comment on Jeff's article:

>     I get the impression that Jeff Sargent's problem is
>     that he uses introspection to understand humanity, and
>     (badly) generalizes from his own experiences and neuroses to
>     the rest of the world.  It's an easy trap to fall into,
>     especially when one is young and lonely -- which he is.

This just about sums it up.  I have no problem hearing Jeff's explanations
of his own mental processes, but he needs to understand that only Jeff works
like Jeff, and to assume otherwise is to invite misunderstanding.  To then
publically propose this as the mechanism by which 10% of the population
operates, is to provoke anger and flames.  I speak up here against Jeff
Sargent's view of gay people, not because, as he so glibly states, that
I have "reservations about homosexuality", but because *someone* needs
to state the contrary--a statement like his should not go unchallenged.
-- 
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbncca.ARPA