Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!mit-eddie!mit-amt!gerber
From: gerber@mit-amt.MIT.EDU (Andrew S. Gerber)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: Weird Concepts!
Message-ID: <90@mit-amt.MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 21-Feb-86 12:56:41 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-amt.90
Posted: Fri Feb 21 12:56:41 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Feb-86 07:42:34 EST
References: <1193@decwrl.DEC.COM> <147@daisy.UUCP>
Reply-To: gerber@mit-amt.UUCP (Andrew S. Gerber)
Organization: MIT Media Lab
Lines: 28
Keywords: apology

In article <147@daisy.UUCP> david@daisy.UUCP (David Schachter) writes:
> 
>This writer will now make a value judgement: Mr. Boroff should apologize to
> Mr. Gerber.  Mr. Boroff does not attack Mr. Gerber's argument; instead he
> attacks Mr. Gerber!  This is unacceptable in civilized discussion.

For anyone who cares, we've already "buried the hatched", as it were.

I think this whole discussion brings up a few major points, one which
I'd love to hear other's opinions on..

1.)  Do you have to be "gay" to be a homosexual?
2.)  If you're a homosexual, do you have to act a certain way to be
     accepted by other homosexuals?  By the straight society?
3.)  If you are a homosexual, and wish to act in one particular way, does
     this isolate you from the straights?  From the gays?

_or_

4.)  Is this whole thing worthless? (-:  :-)

					-andy
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Andrew S. Gerber    		MIT '87             Visible Language Workshop |
|  gerber@mit-amt.MIT.EDU, gerber@mit-mc.lcs.mit.edu, gerber@athena.mit.edu   |
|  UUCP: decvax!mit-eddie!mit-amt!gerber   decvax!mit-eddie!mit-athena!gerber |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+