Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    
    I have had friends in the past who insisted on going into far more
    detail about their relationships than I would wish to know, or indeed
    to tell them. It's just an attitude, y'know? I don't WANT to know how
    good "X" is in bed, just as I wouldn't share that part of my
    relationship other than with my partner. 
    
    On the other hand, I am quite happy to discuss generalities. It's
    just a matter of personal style, is all.

    As to why hets find gays intimidating on occasion, it's probably the
    same reason as why gays find hets intimidating upon occasion. Gays and
    hets are different and that can be unsettling upon occasion. Just as
    teenagers are different to parents and that can also be unsettling.
    This is, however, no reason for a friendship not to exist.  

    re .0,
    
    Well, a lot of traditionally raised American (just to keep it local
    to my knowledge) men are uncomfortable discussing sexuality and
    other emotionally charged subjects period.  I certainly require
    a certain run-up period to deal with such.  So your being gay may
    just add to a difficulty that's already there.
    
    As a purely crass speculation, back in the 60s and 70s, acting
    "sensitive" and discussing feelings and emotions was, among some
    of my more neanderthal friends, considered a fairly good strategy
    leading up to the seduction of an interesting female.  Not to be
    insulting to any of your friends, but maybe you are unintentionally
    triggering some reverse deja vu?
    
    /Dave

Just to keep the conversation in focus...

When I mean talking to a friend, I do not mean discussing sexual acts, 
or even discussing anything too terribly sensitive.  Sentences such as 
the following turn a conversation with many of my het male friends to 
ice:

    "Yeah, I know what you mean.  My boyfriend and I have trouble 
     communicating that way, too."

        or...

    "Bob and I saw that movie on a date last Thursday.  We really 
     liked it."

Just an inference seems to place a chill on a conversation.  Trust me
when I tell you that I'm very aware how far I can push things in a
conversation with hets, but the statements listed previously seem
pretty harmless to me.  I can't belive that I'm "pushing my sexuality
down their throats" with harmless statements like that. 

Any ideas?

					--Ger

        Gerry,
    
           It sounds like your het friends *tolerate* you, but don't
    want the fact that you're gay pushed on them. Most het males that
    claim they don't have any problem with gay men will get jittery
    if you were to introduce your s.o. to them. You're gay, so what
    it isn't discussed, bring X or talk about X into the picture and
    the fact about what you are becomes too real.
           I've also had het male friends like this and it was ok for
    them to do on in sordid detail (short of making me watch videos
    of their heterosexual sex prowess). Since they didn't even want
    to know if I were seeing anyone or what gay social life was like,
    I told them I really didn't want to hear about the adventures
    of X and Sheba Z.
           So my friendships with het male men usually consisted of
    working on cars, racing in rallies, boating, hiking, shooting
    pool, etc. I keep the conversation generic (non intimate sub-
    jects) and they do too. Needless to say, today my het male
    friends number at 1 and I don't see much of him since his wife
    feels uncomfortable, ya know AIDS and things, heaven knows they
    may catch it by me visiting. His wife believes that all gay men
    have AIDS, even if they test negative. I dunno Gerry, I suppose
    you have to take each man as a separate case. It's their problem
    not yours.
    
    Ray

Well, as a het male who has shared a flat (apartment) with a gay male for a 
couple of years, we found we could discuss relationships without any 
problems. Neither of us wanted to hear about each others intimate issues, 
but as a friendship it worked well and continues so to do.

Jerry

	There were plenty of gay men in the college theatre group I
	was in, and I generally got along fine with all of them. I
	recall one party which I mainly spent exchanging love-lost
	tales with the gay friend of one, and it didn't disturb me at
	all. It was pretty interesting, actually, that the only
	differences in what we told each other were in the genders of
	the pronouns - although I believed in the usual liberal
	ideology that "they're not any different", I don't think I
	fully believed it until that night - it was definitely a
	learning experience. I have to admit, if it had swung to
	intimate details I would have been uncomfortable (as I was
	when his friend gave him a good-bye kiss on the way out), I'm
	afraid my open-mindedness does have its limits - the details
	are, to put it kindly, unappealing to me.

	Why does it bother straights in our society? Mainly, I think,
	because straight men are afraid to be thought of as unmanly.
	And notice how many epithets for "unmanly" also mean "gay":
	pansy, fairy, faggot - they're all sometimes used to refer to
	gays, and also to refer to "wimps" without directly accusing
	them of being gay ("Hey, that fairy won't play football with
	us this weekend"). Our society still places much importance on
	men and women filling "male" and "female" roles. Also, on the
	practical side, being suspected of being gay can be damaging
	to someone (with a homophobic boss, for example), and avoiding
	any "taint" of homosexuality can be one excuse for avoiding
	contact with any known gays.
	
	A slight digression: I've always wondered about this, how did
	"gay" acquire it's meaning as a synonym for "homosexual"?
	
	Mike

       > Why does it bother straights in our society?
                                                     
       RE: .6 Well Mike!
    
           It does not bother hetero males as much to see a flaming,
    very effeminate male than a rather masculine acting gay one. At
    least the effeminate one lives up to the stereotypes they keep
    re-enforcing and they can mock him.
           Now let some quite macho acting, athletic, self confident
    gay male come along and there's agitation in the monkey house.
    The more dominant (also more insecure) males are threatened by
    someone who's looks and acts pretty much like them, my God!
    maybe they are not that far from being gay themselves. So the
    best way to deal is to even more rabidly put down gay men, even
    to the point of violence. This insures that they are *still*
    men and the gay guy is less than a man. Little do they know
    how lame this reasoning is. If they were in fact *real* men
    ands felt secure in themselves, there would be no issue, the
    het male and the gay one could co-exist together with no 
    fear on either part. Like yesterday, I'm walking to the caf
    with a co-worker and this group (looked like maintenance
    types, I wasn't paying much attention) shout out in my face
    "FAGGOT! GAY BOY!"......now I don't know who they were and
    they probably know me from some other phobic types who have
    seen my notes and do all in their power to enlighten the
    entire MLO complex that there's a queer among the masses.
    Now a part of me wanted to lunge and rip out their jugulars
    but, I let it pass, no need risking job, etc over some ig-
    norance...it is their problem! Now being the kind, giving
    types that they are, they offload all this hatred and ignor-
    ance on anyone who does not fit their narrowly defined
    idea of what's acceptable.
          I don't think that many hetero males understand how
    it feels to be on the recieving end of all this stuff, for
    no good reason. I *had* <past tense! two hetero male friends,
    one since the age of 5. I had a good friend die of AIDS and
    my friend freaked out, like banned from visiting him and his
    family. Another misconception that a lot of het males have
    about gay men is that a gay guy mentions a gay friend and
    right away the het thinks gay friend=sex partner. Gay men
    probably have more strictly platonic relationships with
    men than anyone else. one of the biggest lies that still
    gets carried is that gay men will sleep with anyone and 
    as many as possible, not true!
          In ending Mike, you mentioned that you might be a bit
    uneasy if a gay friend were to share intimate facts of his
    sex life. Well, for me anyway, intimate facts are something
    that should not be shared...period! It's a very private
    matter and not something to shout from the rooftops, either
    gay or heterosexual. In your experience, it sounds like you
    were not much threatened and knew that you were not going to
    be raped. Gay men are as much men as anyone else, you just
    have to observe, they can also be trusted as much as anyone
    else. There are jerks (in the minority) who give gay men a
    bad name just as there are jerks in the hetero world who 
    give society at large a bad rap.
    
    
    Ray

RE:  Why "gay"?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but after modern gay liberation 
began, the movement made an attempt to adopt a positive name for our 
sexuality, and the word "gay" was chosen.  I believe that the black 
civil rights movement inspired this one.  It goes along with the idea 
that, "We don't want to be called 'negro' because that is a label 
society created.  We want the power to define our own terms.  We want 
to be called 'black.'"  Replace "negro" with "homosexual,"  "black" 
with "gay," and you get the picture. 

The modern gay liberation movement began in 1969 in New York city.  
The police raided a gay bar called "The Stonewall."  The Stonewall was 
a bar that catered to drag queens (men who dress in women's clothes).  
There was nothing unusual about police raiding gay bars, but this late 
June night was different.  The clientelle fought back, chased the 
police back into the bar, overturned and burned cars, and generally 
caused quite a riot that lasted for a weekend.  When the rioting had 
subsided, the mayor was, for the first time, forced to meet with a gay 
delegation.  One of the arrangements that came out of that first 
meeting was the agreement that the police would no longer raid gay 
bars.  

Most people trace the origins of today's movement (support 
groups, political lobbying groups, newspapers and magazines, social 
groups, professional groups, and so forth) to that one event.  This is 
also why Gay Pride parades are held in late June.  At many of those 
parades, you'll see t-shirts that read, "Gay Liberation Started with a 
Bunch of Revolting Queens."


RE:  Two Men Kissing.

It's hard for me to remember when I used to be upset at the sight of 
two men kissing since I partake in it all of the time.  However, 5 
years ago, I was 20 and very  naive.  At that time, I still thought 
that I was heterosexual. 

Also at the time, I was rooming with a good friend of mine from 
highschool who had just come out to me (told me that he was gay).  
Being the wonderful liberal that I am :{), I had no problem with this. 
I was amazed to discover that when I saw him with his boyfriend, I 
didn't get the least bit upset.  They would occassionally hold hands
at the dinner table, and I didn't even flinch.  

One night, I was watching television and my friend and his boyfriend 
sat on the living room couch.  My friend put his head in his 
boyfriend's lap, and his boyfriend bent down and kissed him.  Nothing 
obnoxious.  Just a peck on the lips.

I was horrified.  I clenched the arms of the chair and stared at the 
TV hoping that my friend would not notice how upset I was.  I knew 
that the reaction was stupid, but I couldn't help being overwhelmed at 
my own repulsion.

Years later, I realized that my friend and his boyfriend were rude.  
They should have had more consideration for other people in the room.  
I realized that someday, maybe there will be no difference between a 
gay or het couple pecking each other on the lips, but that day is not 
here yet.  Gay people have to realized this and to be considerate. 

Six years later, I have no problem watching two men kiss.  Our fear of
intimacy between males is pretty deeply engrained in us.  It takes a 
long time to do away with those strong emotions, but I definitely feel 
that it is worth your time and effort to get rid of the hangup.  
And, it IS a hangup.  Think about it.  It's just two people kissing. 

I also wish that straight men could show more physical affection
between themselves.  Sometimes a pat on the back or a quick bear hug
just doesn't satifsy you emotionally. (This sounds like a new NOTE 
brewing: Physical Affection between Men.)

					--Gerry

Gerry, please forgive me if I am intruding.. I'm a het white female
only offering a possible opinion....

It's been my experience that some folks (men and women) are uncomfortable
with homosexual people because it strikes a little too close to home.
If one of your friends is himself suffering internal doubts and conflicts
about his own sexuality, he is likely to be put off by your simple
conversations with him about your boyfriend or dates.

Perhaps the friend (or friends) are simply reacting not to you and your
conversations, but to their own thoughts...

If I was worried about a possible pregnancy I certainly wouldn't want to
be listening to someone expound on the joys of babies!  I would probably
be uncomfortable with simple conversations that mentioned "babysitters".

If this is the case, then there is nothing that you can do about it
because the conflict is not with you.  You certainly need the ability
to communicate with these guys and not have to watch what you say!!

If I'm too far off the beam, I'm sorry....

Karen

    More than AIDS, I'm upset at homosexuals for stealing good
    English words (ie. gay, fag, faggot, fagged).  Almost as bad as the
    damn feminists creating ugly, awkward new ones: chairperson, salesperson,
    mailperson, garbageperson, womanchild etc..
    
    3/4 :-)

    The French word gai has meant homosexual for quite a long time.
    English speakers picked it up from the French. I don't know
    the origin of the French use of the word.

    I think that .9 comes pretty close to home for a lot of homophobes,
    but certainly not all.  Quite often, I suspect there is a questioning
    of a person's sexuality, especially in teenage years.  And the greater
    number of "queer-bashers" are teenagers out for kicks, or whatever,
    who probably ARE questioning their own sexuality.
    
    There's also the issue of men just being uncomfortable with agressive
    sexuality.  Society trains women how to react to (or even fend off)
    advances from men.  So the advances and attentions of a man to a woman
    are accepted as part of normal every-day living.  Men, however, are not
    so trained, and I think don't know how to deal with the attentions of
    another man.  Yes, as mentioned earlier, a simple "no thanks, I'm not
    interested" or some such statement is enough.  Women are taught how to
    say this in a thousand different ways, and then deal with the
    situations that arise when the attentions continue.  But men, alas, are
    not. 
    
    I think that's one of the most valuable lessons that a young man just
    coming out can learn:  how to say "NO".  (that, and the STD clinic's
    location :-) )  I suspect this is why some gay men go through a "slut
    phase" when coming out---they just don't know how to say no, and for a
    new face in town that spells disaster! :-) 

"Gay" has been around since the Middle Ages.  "Homosexual" is a much more
 recent term (and a much more objectionable one, seeing as how its a bastard-
  ization of Greek and Latin roots).

While we're on the subject, I should say that "het" is not an acceptable term.
 Its primary use is as a pejorative, much like "Jap."
  <_Jym_>

    .14  is correct in that "gay" has been around a long time however it 
    has not always exclusively referred to homosexuals. At various times, 
    notably  during  the  19th  century, in British colloquial speech it 
    referred, very definitely, to prostitutes.
    
    /. Ian .\

    RE .15
    
    Now *thats* showing your age, Colonel!

>   .14  is correct in that "gay" has been around a long time however it 
>   has not always exclusively referred to homosexuals. At various times, 
>   notably  during  the  19th  century, in British colloquial speech it 
>   referred, very definitely, to prostitutes.
   
Gay does not exclusively refer to homosexuals....even now....even in the States


Richard....who is sometimes happy and gay but never, ever homosexual!

    I don't intend to pass judgement on gays here.  I just wish to open
    the window to my mind and share my feelings.
    
    First of all, I feel like I'm walking on eggs and will offend someone,
    but I've got to try.  Second, in response to .0s question:
    
>    Why is it so difficult for gay and heterosexual men to be close 
>    friends?  

    I feel uncomfortable knowing that a man is gay and wants to be
    friends.  I get a chill down my neck and I really don't know why.
    In the French Quarter in New Orleans, I was approached several times
    by gays.  I simply told them I wasn't interested.  The words sometimes
    got jumbled up coming out, I was flabbergasted.  I was only 21 at
    the time.  I think I have grown up a bit since then and it is more
    accepted now.  Some of the gays down there are really nice looking,
    as in, they look like gorgeous women.  I was with my wife, so I
    dismissed them without bearing on their sex.  I sometimes think
    that they approach men just to see the shock.  I was in the Air
    Force and had short hair.  I had a friend who met a nice looking
    woman in a bar.  She sat on his lap and they started to get cozy
    when he slid his hand under her skirt and grabbed a handful of more
    than he wanted.  He almost soiled his britches.  We went to a strip 
    show and watched as a beautiful 'woman' stripped and tossed articles
    of clothing to the men.  When 'she' got down to the G-string,
    everyone realized that 'she' was a 'he' and the whole place, about
    30 people, got up in unison and walked out.  But, why?  I don't
    know, especially in the French Quarter.  I quess we felt shocked,
    cheated, appalled.  But, across the street, we went into a place
    that advertised the fact that they were men (female impersonators).
    We went in out of curiosity.  The guys in there really looked like
    women.  They had everything a man could want (and more ;-) ) One
    of them even aroused me.  That was embarrassing, but I realized
    that I was aroused by the illusion, not the fact.  At the end of
    his performance, he sat on the stage and took questions from the
    audience about the whole thing of transvestites, transexuals, gays,
    and anything related.  He answered the questions and nobody got
    beligerent.  I was impressed.  I learned a lot from that half hour
    of just rapping.  There were maybe 15 in the audience and it turned
    out as a rap session.  He explained about how he felt as if he was
    a woman in a man's body and he was working there to get the money
    to have 'the operation'.  He had been taking hormones to develop
    his breasts (and they were good'uns).  I think it was the spark
    that got me to accept them more.  But, I sometimes wonder how I
    would feel to find out that my best friend was gay.  I would wonder
    how many times we had showered together in school, went to the bathroom
    together, if he was sexually attracted to me.  I don't think that
    I would be completely appalled by it, but it would be hard to accept.
    He would be different.  My training as a child still tugs at me
    and tells me that its a bad thing.  But, I'm changing my attitudes.
    You are what you are and I'm starting to realize that its not
    necessarily your choice.  I don't understand why it happens, but
    it does.  Just because your skin is a different color doesn't make
    you a bad person, and just because you are gay doesn't either. 
    I think that with exposure, it will be more and more accepted. 
    By the time I'm 80, it might be old hat and no one will care, but
    for now, its too different.  If I sat down and talked to a guy for
    a while and then found out he was gay, I would be taken back and
    recoil in ?fear?, but then reality would set in and I would be curious.
    I would want to talk and ask questions.  But, to me, the thought
    of having sex with another man is just too bizarre and I wouldn't
    even want to hear about it.  It may be normal for you but its not
    normal for me and I don't think I could accept it.  I have never
    sat down and talked one on one to a gay man, that I know of.  I
    think that I could accept it and talk, knowing that it wouldn't
    lead to anything sexual, just a learning experience to discuss our
    thoughts.  I do have prejudices because of past exposure, but I
    was never really exposed to gays, so I don't have a lot of prejudice
    towards (or against) them.  (I am prejudiced TOWARDS my wife, and
    prejudiced AGAINST barking dogs).  As a matter of fact, I would
    welcome the opportunity to rap with one or more gays.  However,
    in reading the replies, I noticed myself unconsiously looking up
    the see which name went with which man said that he was gay and
    thinking "Aha, he's gay, remember that."  I actually embarrassed
    myself when I realized that I am being a bigot by doing it.  
    
    Well, I've probably got fires going all over the world by now, so
    I better quit, besides, its bed time.  This all sounds pretty liberal
    for an old-fashioned conservative, eh? ;-)  And I'm the guy who
    said that I don't like change.  Another personal theory shot to
    hell.  Lately, I've realized many changes in my feelings.  Thanks
    to all for the enlightenments.  I'm still knocking the military
    dust out of my brain.  
    
    Again, please don't take this as a put-down, its not intended that 
    way, more as education and maybe to enlighten the original author 
    of this topic.  I would have been scared off long ago if not for
    2 letters from people who are interested.
    
    Spence                                   

Spence,

Thanks for your reply!  It was really well said.  

I have a few general questions and ideas for anyone interested: 

>    I don't think that
>    I would be completely appalled by it, but it would be hard to accept.

What does someone mean when saying this?  Seriously.  Can anyone elaborate? 

As a gay man, I have to hear lines like this all of the time "I love
you but I cannot accept you;" "I know it's not your fault, but I can't
accept your lifestyle;" and in a recently received letter from a
highschool friend, "I guess I let your choice of lifestyle get in the
way of our friendship."  

Does "hard to accept" mean that you wouldn't be friends with him
anymore?  Does "hard to accept" mean that you could never be sure that
he would never "make a pass" at you?  (If this is true, how does this
concern compare with the "threat" of a female friend making a pass at
you?)  If his sexuality and your sexuality are not compatible, meaning 
that if you two would not share a mutual attraction to each other, what 
is there about your friend's homosexuality for you to accept or to 
reject, since it doesn't affect you directly?

People's acceptance or rejection will not change my sexuality. So, 
unless they are my friends, I really don't care about their acceptance 
or rejection. 

As an openly gay man, I don't care as much about acceptance as I do
about TOLERANCE.  In other words, are you in favor of denying gay
people jobs?  Are you in favor of denying gay people housing?  Are you
in favor of legislating laws against gay sex?  Are you in favor of
denying gay people credit?  In summary, will you tolerate me enough to
allow me to live in peace?  Or, will you fight to oppress me? 

>    He would be different.  

Would he?  In what ways?  How different?  Would he wear women's 
clothes?  Would he talk with a lisp?  In all seriousness, can anyone 
elaborate on why and how they think that gay men are fundamentally 
"different" from heterosexual men?  I mean, there are differences that 
are caused by our unique experiences by being societal outcasts, but 
how fundamental are those differences?

It's strange.  If you looked at the fact that my boyfriend likes 
poetry, goes to plays, and is soft spoken and sensitive, then you 
might say, "I TOLD you those gays are DIFFERENT!"  But if you looked 
at the fact that he has a muscle builder's body, is an ex-football 
player, used to work in a construction crew, and currently teaches 
furniture making, then you might say, "Well, he's an EXCEPTION!"  How 
do you judge "different"?  And, once you judge qualities that you 
determine to be "different" take a look at heterosexual men: do they 
have some of those same qualities?

I wish that I had my reply to my highschool friend online.  I replied 
to his "I let your choice of lifestyle get in the way of our 
friendship" line with the following:

1)  I'm really glad that you returned my letters (it had been 2.5
years).  Our friendship was important enough for me to wait. 

2)  I'm not a lifestyle.  I'm a person.  I think that gay men have to 
"come out" twice.  They have to first realize that they are gay, and 
then secondly, they have to realize that they are so much more than 
gay.  Granted, I sleep with men.  But, I also like writing; I like reading; 
I HATE Broadway musicals; I love the Celtics; I love to play 
basketball; I like politics; I love rock and roll; I tolerate 
classical music; and so forth.  Although I am 8 years 
wiser, I am still, essentially, the same person who used to play 
tennis with you in the summer of '78.

I guess that there is a lesson here for gay men.  Be patient.  It 
takes people time to put away their strong feelings about 
homosexuality and to remember their strong feelings of friendship.  
Someone once said that you should give your family and friends twice 
as much time to get used to the idea of your sexuality as it took for 
you to come to grips with it (and MAN, is it a STRUGGLE!).


						--Gerry

    Gerry and others,
    I will attempt to elaborate on my feelings, much easier by tube
    than face to face.  
    
    First, I'm glad you thought that my reply was well said.  I was
    really worried about making someone mad.
    
    The phrase "I sleep with men" makes the hair on my neck stand up.
    Why?  I guess its all in the way I was raised.  My parents taught
    me that this is a no-no.  I will try to explain my feelings about
    "hard to accept" by use of a ?metaphore?  My parents, school mates,
    environment, etc. built a brick wall between us.  The bricks that
    compose the wall are phrases like "Can you believe 2 men sleeping
    together" and "you walk like a faggot" and "don't do that, you look
    queer".  A lot of peer pressure.  Maybe I'm a little more sensitive
    to it because I had trouble in school with being a passifist (sp?)
    or, yes, a coward.  This always equated with being gay.  I once
    even wore (gasp) white socks, the eternal sin, the sign that said
    that you were queer.  We all know that gays wear white socks, right?
    I didn't wear white socks for many years and even now, I only wear
    them for sports.  This was one brick that was hard to break.
    Well, anyway, this wall got built over the years.  The wall was
    solid and hard to climb.  If I dared to approach the wall, I was
    ridiculed and labeled as queer and the labels hurt because they
    gave the impression that I wasn't as good as the other boys.  Now,
    I am older and hopefully wiser and the wall is starting to crumble.
    I know that gays live on the other side, but we are still separated
    by the wall.  Some of the bricks have fallen out, so I can see through
    it and these guys on the other side don't look so bad.  And the
    wall is weakening, but it still stands.  It is still hard to climb.
    
    It was so ingrained into my mind that I can't just shake my head
    and its all gone.  Then there was the military, the ultimate anti-gay
    movement, next to the Ku Klux Klan.  Society in general preaches
    that it is wrong to be gay and it sticks in my mind, whether I want
    it to or not.  If I had gay feelings, then it wouldn't stick because
    I would reject it.  If I had more knowledge about gays, I could
    reject it.  But, having never been exposed to gays, I don't have
    the artillery to shoot it down.  All I've ever been exposed to is
    the society that doesn't approve of it.  I think that the feeling
    is better explained as a fear of being labeled as gay and gay is
    not supposed to be good.
    
    I've been thinking about my line that went something like "I would
    welcome the opportunity to talk to gays".  Since I wrote that, I
    have thought that I would be afraid in this situation.  But I can't
    for the life of me figure out what is to be afraid of.  These people
    would be human beings just like me.  They wouldn't drag me into
    an alley and rape me.  They wouldn't bite.  Gay doesn't rub off.
    I think that the fear is that I wouldn't know how to handle it and
    say something totally stupid which would upset someone.  I never
    like to upset anyone unless they deserve it.  I worry constantly
    about other people's feelings.  I get really uncomfortable when
    I'm with someone who talks about "Boy is she fat and ugly" or "Man
    that guy looks gay".
    
    I guess that 'different' is explained above, too.  Society has taught
    me that ANYTHING other than heterosexual encounters is wrong.
    
>   Does "hard to accept" mean that you wouldn't be friends with him
>   anymore?  
    
    Not necessarily.  It means that it would be difficult.  I would
    have to think about it real hard and try to come to grips with 'the
    wall'.  In the case of a friend, I would have more incentive to
    try to climb the wall and meet halfway.  But, I'm afraid that we
    would always be straddling the wall.  I would hope that I'm wrong,
    its too hard to guess.  A friend would be easier to talk to and
    try to understand.
    
>   Does "hard to accept" mean that you could never be sure that
>   he would never "make a pass" at you?  
    
    I've mulled this one over for about 15 minutes and can't come up
    with an answer.  I would expect that once we understood each other,
    He would know not to make a pass at me.
    
>   (If this is true, how does this
>   concern compare with the "threat" of a female friend making a pass at
>   you?)  
    
    It is considered normal for a female to make a pass at me.  
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Now that I've said it, I'll let it stand.  This statement used to
    be wrong.  When I grew up, it wasn't at all normal for a girl to
    make a pass at a boy, the boy had to make the first move.  If a
    girl made a pass at a boy, she was considered loose.  Now, its OK.
    Interesting that I accepted this so quickly, of course, I was too
    shy to approach a girl, so this turn took the responsibility off
    of me.
    
>   If his sexuality and your sexuality are not compatible, meaning 
>   that if you two would not share a mutual attraction to each other, what 
>   is there about your friend's homosexuality for you to accept or to 
>   reject, since it doesn't affect you directly?

    Again, it makes the hair on my neck stand up.  
    
    I do like the word 'tolerance' rather than 'acceptance'.  I think
    that I couldn't accept it as much as I could tolerate it.  I'm not
    sure what I mean by that, either.  I don't believe in denying gays
    jobs, housing, etc.  Live and let live, as long as you do it in
    private and it doesn't affect anyone else.  I.E. your dog can bark
    as long and loud as it wants to, as long as I don't have to listen
    to it.  You can take drugs until you die, but don't take me with
    you.  And a man can have sex with a man if he wants to, but I don't
    want to see it or hear about it.  If I want to see it, I'll rent
    a movie.
    
    Boy, this is hard trying to explain my feelings.  I know how I feel
    but I don't know how to explain it.  But it does feel good to talk
    about it.  You have a right to try to understand why we (hets) feel
    the way we do.  I think that we have an obligation to at least
    understand you, too.  I like to try and form my own opinions about
    things rather than take society's word for it.  Unfortunately,
    sometimes that's all I have to go on.  
            
    Damn, its way past my bedtime again.
    
    Spence  

    
    .22 makes the basic point here.  All my gay/lesbian friends were
    my friends before I found out their sexual preference, at which
    point it did not matter one iota.
    
    I'm not claiming to be particularly enlightened here.  I have tried
    describing this experience to my parents and they can't fathom it.
    Oh well.
    
    DFW

    I tend to think that people in Colorado would be much more inhibited
    about admitting to being gay.  Maybe that's why I don't know anyone
    who is gay.  They won't admit it, and knowing the people who I know,
    I don't blame them for not admitting it.  I could probably say the
    same for any state bordering Colorado.  I'm sure they exist in the
    cities, but they don't go where I go, of course, I don't go anywhere
    much.
    
    In my environment, men don't hug men.  Only in square dancing and
    then its only in fun, and only the most fun loving of us do it.
    I've danced with men who would sooner stuff buffalo chips up their
    nose than hug me.  I've hugged guys before they could get away.
    Its comical sometimes, other times, its pathetic.  In square dancing,
    we also do 'position dancing', where 2 of the men will dance the
    woman's part, so we have 2 men dancing with each other, while the
    women stand back and laugh at our antics.  Some men will almost
    refuse to hold my hand, which is very necessary in square dancing.
    That makes me so mad.  Then we all switch and its the women's turn
    to dance together and we get our turn to laugh at them.  Women don't
    have the hangups about it that men do.  Consequently, the women
    wind up having a better time.
    
    Spence

    	Where I was raised, inner city during the 40's and 50's, males
    did not touch males in a gentle manner.  I never thought about this
    one way or the other.  It wasn't right or wrong, it just was.  My
    life's experiences up through 1964 continued to enforce the belief
    that males are not suppose to touch males in a gentle manner then
    I found myself in a India as a member of Peace Corps.  What I know
    about India amount to very little in the true scheme of things but
    I do know men in the Poona area (south of Bombay) hold hands if
    they are friends, or they did when I was living near there.  In
    time, a number of my fellow (all of us in the area were males) Peace
    Corps volunteers accepted the practice of holding hands with our
    India male friends when walking in public.  We also held hands with
    our Indian male friends in the movies.  Again, not all Peacce Corps
    folk in our area did this but a number of us did.  We never held
    hands with other Peace Corps males!  Why?  Obviouly because we were
    taught this was wrong.  Why was it OK with Indian males?  I guess
    it was an effort to fit in, at least at first.  It wasn't a subject
    many of us would discuss openly.  The point of all of this rambling
    is, I very much enjoyed being this friendly with males.  Male bonding
    is important and difficult, at least among my peers.  The freedom
    to show affection for other males was very rewarding.  The all too
    often nonsense of competing with males about almost everything was
    put to one side and the feeling of intimacy which should be a part
    of friendship became the core of experiences.  There was nothing
    homosexual about any of the relationships, except those which blossomed
    between homosexuals.  
    
    	When I returned to the U.S. I missed this intimacy between males
    very very much.  I still miss it.  For a time, I was a 'touchy feely'
    type of person but the negative looks from too many people put this
    aspect in the closet.  I am once again somewhat the 'touchy feely'
    type, but in a more limited way.  The intimacy of physical contact
    warms my heart and makes me feel a little closer to my friends and
    close associates (both male and female).  I am not 'on the make.'
    I am recognizing the importance of intimacy - even when it is quite
    limited - for me.
    
    Douglas

    	Interesting note...  I've got a little story to tell and also
    an observation.  First the story.
    	I was in the 10th SFGA in Mar '74 when we were sent to the
    Aderondacks to look for an Air Force pilot forced to bail out of
    his jet.  The temps were falling to 15 degrees below zero Farenheight.
    All we had for shelter were our ponchos (standard issue in the 10th
    was 2).  I froze my butt off that first night and do you think that
    guy I was "bunked" with would snuggle up?  Heck no!  He had a nice
    civilian sleeping bag rated to 200 below. and all I had was a military
    issue bag.  Everytime I tried to get close he'd pull away one time
    even challenging me.  I still can't get over the idea that he'd
    let another person freeze simply because of the "implications".
    On another trip with my regular team some years later one of the
    guys didn't bring his bag and was frezzing.  We put him between
    2 of us and threw his blankets on top.  That kept him warm.
    	The whole point about the above is that for some people it is
    very ingrained in thier skulls that certain actions are a no-no.
    
    	Now for the observation...
    	This problem (acceptance of homosexuals by the general public)
    is in my opinion a generational problem.  In other words, the concept
    of predefined ideas about gay people is so ingrained in the American
    public that it will take several generations of sustained effort
    to get rid of.  It is the same with race relations between whites
    and blacks,  relations between the sexes and in a somewhat smaller
    way relations between various religious groups.  Case in point,
    race relations.  The constitutional right of blacks in our society
    to equal treatment was established over 100 years ago.  In many
    ways the struggles of the 50's through the 70's have won many LEGAL
    protections.  But one thing has remained true, you can't legislate
    love.  There are still many places in this country where you'd have
    to be out of your mind to be caught (especially after sunset) if
    you're a black.  The reverse is also true.  It is going to take
    many generations for the American people to reverse the deeply-rooted
    feelings of the past.  It's going to take many many decades of constant
    "pressure" to eliminate racially based feelings (even as new ones
    grow!)  The exact same is true for the "general" populace feelings
    about gays.  As a group, you've made alot of progress towards
    "equality" under the law.  It's going to take alot longer to acheive
    equality in the hearts.  As long as you (as a group) realize this
    and continue to press forward, there is a good chance that one day
    in the future it really won't make a difference whether you're gay
    or not.  BUT it is going to take a long long time, maybe centuries,
    before all of the remarks are gone (and THAT is only in this country,
    how many gays do you see coming out of the closet in Iran?).  It's
    the same with race relations, womens' lib or any of the other
    "generational problems".  Anyway that's my 2 cents worth.  I think 
    you've made alot of progress in the last 30 years and I wish you the 
    best of luck and success in the next 30.
            
    Rich

RE:< Note 19.26>
               
>    	Interesting note...  I've got a little story to tell and also
>    an observation.  First the story.
>    	I was in the 10th SFGA in Mar '74 when we were sent to the
>    Aderondacks to look for an Air Force pilot forced to bail out of

    I spent a little time in the 5th and 7th SFGA, and normative
    behavior in those environments tended to be the reverse. A pretense
    of homosexuality was a barrier used to isolate the group from a
    civilian public that tended to be critical/hostile or, at least,
    to not acknowledge the group elitist self-perception.  This was
    particularly true with teams involved in operations that couldn't
    be discussed (or perhaps understood) by folks that were not involved
    in them.  Another function of the pretense was as a badge of
    membership.  A new team member would experience a number of advances
    in public places (bars, on the street, etc) and responding anyway
    except in kind would make future teamwork tenuous.  To the best
    of my knowledge, none of these folks were actually gay, though they
    may have suffered from some other mental disorders.  Given this
    experience, I am never sure how to interpret apparent gay behavior.

    RE .27
    
    Speaking of gays you say "Though they may have suffered from some
    other mental disorder"
    
    BEING GAY IS NOT A MENTAL DISORDER!
    

    RE: .28
    
    J'ai feuillete samedi dernier un livre sur les femmes, et le
    lesbianisme entre autres. Il disait (l'auteur du livre) noir sur
    blanc "que l'homosexualite etait une deviation, une nevrose, un
    reel danger qu'il fallait combattre tres tot".
    
    Il y a vraiment des imbeciles sur terre...
    
    
    Zoziau-qui-ne-veut-pas-se-priver-de-la-moitie-de-l'humanite

                      -< I've read : >-
    
    RE: .28
    
    Last saturday I skimmed a book about women, and lesbianism, among
    other things.  He said (the author of the book) black and white
    "that homosexuality was a deviation, a mental illness, a real danger
    which must be fought very early."
    
    There really are imbeciles on this earth.
    
    Zoziau-who-doesn't-want-to-deprive-herself-of-half-of-humanity

RE:< Note 19.28>-<  RE .27 - in need of education >-
    
>    BEING GAY IS NOT A MENTAL DISORDER!

    The psychological business is able to make money defining it
    as one.  I'm not sure how else one can identify a mental disorder.

    What makes one gay?
                                                             
    To elaborate, is it physical, mental, learned, hereditary?
    
    Furthermore, why am I interested in women and not men?  I remember
    seeing a person who looked like a man (very short hair) and <he>
    didn't interest me.  Once I found out that she was a woman, I was
    intensely interested.  Why?
    
    Spence

    Why is it that the question of Jim Bakker's sexual orientation is
    viewed as potentially more damaging than revelations that he's been
    milking the PTL for millions of dollars?
    
    

    
    re: .33
                                                     
    The thought that Mr. Bakker might be a thief does not disturb me as
    much as the thought that he might be an hypocritical, unscrupulous
    S.O.B. with influence over millions of people.  I personally would
    not care who he went to bed with, if he wasn't trying to impose
    a system of beliefs on anyone and everyone.
    
    Of course, it does not matter whether or not he had homosexual
    encounters, on a purely pragmatic level.
    
    DFW
    
     

>>    BEING GAY IS NOT A MENTAL DISORDER! 
 
>    The psychological business is able to make money defining it
>    as one.  I'm not sure how else one can identify a mental disorder.
    
    The American Psychological Association does not consider homosexulaity
    a mental illnesses.  They only consider it an issue to the extent that
    it causes other problems.  This is much the same way they might see a
    Black person having problems related to being Black (say stress related
    to trying to pass in white society or something similar).
    
    Yes that are a number of shrinks out there that make money trying to
    "convert" people to heterosexuality (usually in vain, despite claims to
    the contrary).  That doesn't make them right.
    
    Steveg

    re: .35
    
    Good analogy Steve, but I would say that the type of problems that
    the APA is concerned with are like those of blacks trying to be
    *accepted* in white/straight society.  It is true, however, that
    some gays are so worried about discrimination that might occur that
    they do try to "pass" as straight.  The lying that must be done
    (when trying to hide) to even one's "friends" can be very 
    self-destructive.
                                Carol

    In answer to an earlier question - it is my understanding that
    a person is born with the potential for a particular orientation
    on the scale between 100% homosexual and 100% heterosexual (where
    most of humanity falls inbetween the two extremes) but that their
    life experiences may influence how they express their sexuallity.
    (Much as a person may be born with the potential for artistic or
    muscial expression or even a certain maximum height - but that 
    the environment they grow up in will influence how this trait is
    expressed). Is this still current theory?
    
    Bonnie J

    Yes, Bonnie, that is the current theory, except that, of course,
    if you are not toward the middle of the scale and you are pressed
    to go toward the other side then it is far more stressful then not
    being allowed to draw if you are artistic.  Human drives are powerful
    stuff.  Many people, though, perhaps most, are in the middle somewhere,
    so have some ability to choose.  If their upbringing only gives
    them one socially acceptable choice, then guess which way they will
    express their sexuality?  However, if they are strongly gay, then
    it is just as difficult for them to love a person of the opposite
    sex as it is for a strongly heterosexual person to love a person
    of the same sex.  In those cases, it is not a choice.
    
               Carol

    Thankyou Carol....I have often argued that a person no more
    "chooses to be homosexual" than they choose to be a particular
    height or eye color....but I am aware that the jury is still out
    on the biological mechanisms.

    re .40 (re .38(re.37))
    
    Late last year I did a bit of research as a result of a challange
    in another notes file (Religion). I went through a good number of
    text books, and magazine articles (from Newsweek, and Science News
    for two examples.)
    
    The consensus of all the research that I did was that a person is
    born with their sexuality, that it is no more chosen than you choose
    to have artistic talent, blue eyes etc. but that the precise biological
    mechanism is not yet known.
    
    If you are really interested I will try and find the material I
    entered in the other conference. However, anyone who takes the time
    to do similar research in Biology/Psychology texts, or in magazines
    such as the ones I mentioned or in the Pyschology journals will,
    come across the same information.
    
    Bonnie J 

    Ditto.  This information was coming out when I was taking the classes
    that got me by B.A. in Psychology (San Diego State, 1982).  Since
    then far more research has come out to support it and can be found
    in any number of Pysch texts, magazines, etc.
    
    Try your local library and look for recent articles.
    
                Carol

    Mais pourtant, je suis certaine que l'orientation sexuelle dependra
    beaucoup de l'education recue lors des premieres annees de l'enfance,
    et des premieres experiences sexuelles vecues.
    
    Un garcon trop couve par sa mere aura tendance a associer toutes
    les femmes a cette derniere, soit par amour exacerbe, soit par degout,
    et ne pourra plus avoir de relations qu'avec des hommes, parce que
    ceux-ci ne l'effraieront pas, etant faits "comme lui".
    
    
    Puis, comment se fait-il alors que l'homosexualite apparaisse comme
    une mode, une vague ? Dans l'Antiquite, les hommes ne se mariaient
    que par necessite, pour assurer la descendance. Ils vivaient leur
    sexualite entre eux. La virilite etait glorifiee, deifiee, alors
    que les seules deesses existantes etaient soit des meres jalouses,
    abusives et possessives (Hera-Junon), soit des vierges severes et
    cruelles (Artemis-Diane, Athena-Minerve), soit de foutues salopes,
    garces, frivoles, jalouses et mechantes (Aphrodite-Venus). Pas de
    quoi hurler de joie.
    
    Puis sous Louis XIV environ (je ne suis pas douee en Histoire de
    France), l'homosexualite, quoique severement reprimee, fut florissante.
    
    Alors ? Mode ? Fait de societe ? Invention humaine ? Decadence ?
    
    
    Ou simplement oser avoir des desirs moins habituels que ceux qu'on
    nous enseigne ?

    
    
    Zoziau-qui-nage-un-peu

     With some reluctance, a loose and potentially bogus translation of
     19.43 follows:
     
                          -< I am willing, but... >-
     
       Still, I'm sure that one's sexual orientation depends a lot on
       the learning experiences during the first years of infancy, as
       well as the first actual sexual experiences. 
    
       A boy who gets smothered by his mother will tend to have similar
       associations with all women -- be it "exacerbated love" [trans.
       note: I'm stumped on that one] or be it disgust.  In this case,
       the boy will be able to relate only to men, because men, being
       made "like himself", won't frighten him. 
                             
       So, how is it that homosexuality seems to be a fashion, a trend?
       In ancient times, men married only when it was necessary, to have
       children; men experienced their sexuality among themselves.
       Virility was glorified, deified; on the other hand, the only
       goddesses that existed were seen as jealous mothers who were
       abusive and possessive (Hera/Juno), as cold and cruel virgins
       (Artemis/Diana, Athena/Minerva), or as mindless, frivolous,
       jealous, naughty nincompoops (Aphrodite/Venus).  Not exactly
       anything to jump for joy about. 
    
       Later, somewhere around Louis 14th (the history of France is not
       one of the things with which I am well-endowed), homosexuality
       flourished, even though there was severe repression. 

       So what's the answer?  Is it a fashion that fades in and out?  A
       social fact?  An invention of humans?  Decadence? 
    
       Or is it simply to dare to have some desires that are different
       from those that people tell us about? 

       Zoziau-who-is-swimming-a-bit 

    RE: -1
           
    
    The "smothering mother" theory went out YEARS ago with the notion
    that homosexuality was a sickness. 
    
    The fact of the matter is that the upbringing of straights and gays
    is more often similar than not.  
    
    John M.

    It appears that disapproval of homosexual behavior is almost
    always derided as homophobia (or fear). Yet no one accuses someone
    who disapproves of heterosexual sex outside of marriage of being
    afraid of it. Is this a defensive maneuver on the part of those
    who do approve of homosexual sex or do people really believe that
    fear of becoming homosexual is the only  reason people disapprove
    of it?
    
    			Alfred

re 19.46 - homophobia
    
    It's just a poor initial word choice that stuck. 
    
    There are folks that are actually afraid of homosexuals (real live
    incapacitating fear).  They are a very small minority.
    
    The word homophobia is used in much the same way as the word racism.
    Someone that disapproves of gays is labeled homophobic just as someone
    that disapproves of Blacks should be labeled racist. 
    
    Steveg

    Heterosexuals have the option of getting married and having sex
    within marriage.  The people who have strong moral beliefs about
    sex within marriage are then content and supportive of the couple.
    
    The gay couple have no such option.  They can't legally get married
    and establish themselves as a "real" couple.  Denying their gayness
    and marrying a person of the opposite sex isn't really an option
    either.  The other person doesn't have a mate that is truly interested
    in them, and will in all likelihood lead to either a divorce or an
    unhappy marriage.
    
    Elizabeth

    re: .48
    
    Hmm By married, I assume you mean
    the relatively new concept: That marriage which is approved by the
    state, and forms more of a legal contract than a "true" marriage
    contract ?
    
    I forget which note, or where, but i read a note where two gays
    did, in fact, get married. And, as such, live as a married couple.
    The "difference, of course, is that most states refuse to recognize
    that religions have the right to approve of marriages; whether the
    states (read: political entities)  like it or not.
    
    I'm surprised (a little bit) that "someone" hasn't taken the 'political
    entities' to court yet, on the basis that the states  have taken
    a "religious rite", and converted it to a "legal contract" for 
    their own purposes; rather than for its intended purpose of being
    a "enjoinement of two persons for <whatever reason>".
    
    Bob+3
    

    Re .49:  (Bob)
    
    Yes, I did mean the "legal contract called marriage" as seen by
    the state.
    
    I too know that gays do sometimes have a religious rite performed
    and live together as a married couple.  Unfortunately, if these
    people attempt to exercise many of the benefits offered to married
    couples (filing income tax as married (a benefit or detriment,
    depending on circumstances), putting their spouse on their
    insurance as a dependent, even taking the spouse as a dependent
    on the income tax - where 'sodomy' laws exist), these people are
    opening themselves to a charge of fraud.  Don't get me wrong - I
    agree that it is a religious rite that has been bent by the politicos
    for their own use.  I think any 2 people who feel they should have
    this rite performed on them by whatever religion they subscribe
    to should have it done, and the state have nothing to say in the
    matter, as long as both people are adults.
    
    Elizabeth

re .49

	While not exactly the same, the Mormon Church in the 1880s and
	1990s did get the Supreme Court to issue a ruling regarding the
	legality of the Edmunds-Tucker Act, forbidding polygamy, which
	the Mormon Church proclaimed as part of their religious dogma.

	The Supreme Court ruled that governments do have the right to
	regulate mariages within their jurisdictions, regardless of whether
	it prohibits certain parties from practicing their marriage
	customs.  The same principle has been upheld by the lower level
	courts under similar circumstances.

    I have grown up with this friend of mine who I spent my childhood
    with him as best of friends. He was the Best Man at my wedding and
    as far as I knew was a Het just like myself. Well after college
    we went our seperate ways, he got divorced from his wife and moved
    to San Deigo 8 years ago. I also got divorced a few years ago and
    found myself a  single guy once again after 12 years of marriage.
    
    After my seperation I had called my friend Rick up and talked with
    him a few times over the years. I had lost touch with him since
    he had moved out West. I would ask him if he had been going out
    with any women and he would say that even after being divorced for
    seven years, he wasn't going out with any. I thought this
    pretty strange since Rick, as I knew him years ago, was any
    girls dream years ago.
    
    To make a long story shorter, I visited him last Fall out in 
    San Diego, and found out right away that he was now Gay. I
    must admit it was pretty shocking to me to find out that my best
    friend who I had spent my childhood and teenage years with 
    and who I was always envious with when women would surround themselves
    around him, was now Gay.
    
    But, it in the end it made no difference, I love Rick as a longtime
    friend and his sexual preference at this time is how he is and I
    respect that no matter what. I still have some Hangups with seeing
    Warm and Fuzzy Teddy Bears on his bed pillows, but it is a matter
    of just not being exposed to that kind of male affection in
    that form. 
    
    Mutual Respect and Love for each other bridges the gap I feel between
    whatever sexual preference we choose to have.
    
    This experience has really helped me to understand and respect gay's
    for who they are, men with just a different sexual preference then
    my own.
    
    -Arthur
                                                                    

    Hello DECies,
    I'm sitting at home browsing thru the note files.  My fiancee (who
    works at Ditigal) waiting patiently for me to come to bed.  I am so
    engross with the questions, responses and answers in this topic.  
    
    I am new to all of this, so please forgive my ignorance.  First of all
    Spence I congratulate you for explaining your views on this subject,
    you respond very intelligently.  When you don't understand ask.  That's
    my motto.  Secondly, I envany human being that has the attitude "I
    don't care what people think".  We should try to learn something from
    the gay society.  
    
    An old college friend and I were roomates before I met my fiancee in
    Atlanta,GA.  I thought I knew her from head to toe.  However, I only
    reached the ankles.  One evening I fell asleep next to the fireplace,
    awakening to heavy breathing across my cheek.  She kneeling over me
    trying to kiss me.  I felt scared, hurt, humiliated, and baffled.  The
    very next day I left and stayed with an other girlfriend for about a
    month.  This incident resulted in me moving out, I felt she should not
    have approach me the way she did. 
    
    Nevertheless, we are still very good friends and I love her for being
    the person she was in college and still is.  Being a homosexual has
    nothing to do with being a normal human.  We shouldn't  waste our
    energy on an individual sexual preference, it should be exerted toward
    more important issues, such as educations, homeless people, and
    equality for all mankind.
    
    KEEP BEING THE WONDERFUL PEOPLE YOU ARE. We all need to pick up a
    couple of your traits.
    
    Shirl

    General reaction: who cares?  I've got more important things to
    worry about than somebody else's love life (my own, f'instance....)
    
    Last summer I happened to find a copy of the Kinsey report on
    sexuality; I don't remember the exact numbers, but some large
    (at least 75% ?) of the population has had at least one 
    homosexual experience at some time in their life.  It's by no means 
    an all-or-nothing proposition.  It's a question of degree.  I
    don't know why people get so upset by it.  I'd get upset if a
    guy made "advances" to me...but I'd also get upset if a woman
    made a nuisance of herself in the same way.  People are people.
    All this labeling is silly.

    This seems as good a place as any. I'd like to hear
    what you have to say re: your comment below.
    
    Richard
    
            <<< QUARK::NOTES_DISK:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MENNOTES.NOTE;2 >>>
                         -< Topics Pertaining to Men >-
================================================================================
Note 591.29    Alternatives for would-be Dad with infertile wife?       29 of 41
COMET::DYBEN                                          8 lines  13-MAY-1991 13:11
                      -< Lets disagree somewhere else.. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    > very skilled at thumbing our noses at societie's conventions
    
      I don't see how this relates to the topic..Why don't you open
    a seperate topic? I have alot I would like to say about the problems
    /prejudice allegedly heaped upon the " Gay community"...
    
    David