Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    Sorry to see you go.  Good luck, whatever you decide to do.
    
    						- Vick

    I feel bad, Gerry.  I wish this file could be more
    welcoming for you.  I'll miss you.
    
    Wil

Wow, Ger. I'll be really sorry to see you leave, but I can understand the
reluctance to be a token, and certainly the reluctance to put up with what's
been happening lately.

I'll miss you, and your contributions.

    I want to know if you want a Viking funeral Gerry. I cannot seem to
    keep my mouth shut on this one pal. But I see a game here, and I don't
    like it. What are we doing? Gaining sympathy? Cornerened and now your
    going to cry out of it? Come on Gerry! We all have to eat humble pie
    and I have eaten my share as much as the next guy. Reguardless if you
    are gay or not. I hear another tree dropping! More nails in a cross for
    you all to hang out on? Cut it out! If you listen you can hear the
    shovel cutting through the dirt for that cross. 
    
    You even pointed out that your primary cause was to convert us heithen
    types to rally to your cause of accepting you as a nationality. Of
    course your going to get push back when you push out or push on. 
    Changing the tides, changing peoples ideas, like any thing else takes
    time. And H.G. Wells points out that sicence advances only as fast as
    society allows it to.  But lad, I don't think that what the game is
    really all about. I am not shure what it is either. We grow with
    conflict. And this file has all the makings of the family of Digital.
    We squable like siblings would, play like siblings do, and kick each
    other in the ass when its due as brothers would.

Hey, Gerry, I understand being up-to-here and bone tired with mennotes,
and with noting in general.  It meets some needs for some of us for some
periods of time; then you just have to go away from it and let all the
fuss and fury and confusion go on without you.  You gotta do what you
gotta do.

But if you change your mind, you can come back.  Oh, the neanderthals
(hi there, .4!) will undoubtedly still be around, but sometimes they
deserve a little 'education', and sometimes delivering it can be a real
charge.

Hope your new paths work out well.

DougO

Gerry,

Very nicely worded.  Good luck.

Re: .4


I'm trying to think how I could respond to this in an intelligent manner, but
I don't think anything I or anyone else could say that would be heard.

>>>Ken

    
    
    I missed .4.  If anybody happened to extract it before it was deleted
    I'd love to see it.  
    
    	GJD

RE .5

You obviously didn't get it.  You might want to read .0 again.  Or you
can take this as a summary: I learned years ago that it isn't my job
to try to convert or to educate you, it's my job to be the best,
healthiest, and most honest me that I can be.  Simple.  

It's just that some of you keep judging me for who I was years ago
instead of giving me credit for changing and growing.  And it has
simply gotten too taxing for me to be myself in this file.  I'm not
the least bit angry or bitter about this; it's just "the way it is"
for me. 

Don't pity me.  I won't be pitying you.  Y'all will do _just_ _fine_
without me, just as the gay file has been flourishing without me.  I
have no illusions to the contrary.  I'll be just dandy myself.

I'm okay.  You're okay.  Okay?  Great.

Or is it against the law to leave a notes file?  Or am I required to 
leave when you want me to, once again, so that I can bend over 
backward to make you "comfortable"?  

Let go of the control, will you!

							--Gerry

    .10
    
    Dear Gerry,
    
    	....and you have obviously missed my points. And that was stated
    with the last couple of lines in .5   But as you, I am not here to make
    you do anything either. I am not here to pass judgement on you as you
    would on me when we speak from the heart and soul of your lives. You
    can never find fault with someone who speaks in this manner. You can
    miss out on things that do makes us all grow, reguardless of who you
    are or pretend to be. 
    
    Safe Journey
    
    George

>some people will be offended by it.

And everyone is responsible for how they behave when they feel 
offended.  Oppression is not a reasonable response to feeling 
offended, in my opinion.


						--Gerry

    .13 Where is the ship! I thought we have go to see the Gods of 
    Vahala! Wasn't the fat lady warming up to sing here??:) Gee, this is
    starting to remind me of a B movie where it takes over an hour to die
    and the movie is 90 mins in length.:)

>    	....and you have obviously missed my points. And that was stated
>    with the last couple of lines in .5   

Okay, lemme take another look.

>    We grow with
>    conflict. And this file has all the makings of the family of Digital.
>    We squable like siblings would, play like siblings do, and kick each
>    other in the ass when its due as brothers would.

Without conflict, we cannot grow.  With constant and unreasonable 
conflict, we wither and die (or at least get "sick").

I am not in your family.  We have never met, George.  

You have not contributed enough love and nurturing in my life for me 
to sit back and allow you to continue to kick me in the butt.  I need 
to receive one for the other one to get through to me in a loving way. 
Otherwise, it's simply another form of dysfunction and abuse.

I wonder how many non-heterosexual, white males feel that this notes 
file is a "family."


							--Gerry

    
    	Good luck on your next adventure Gerry!  I'm generally a read-only
    so it feels a bit odd to be noting here.  Personally, between you
    and me <grin>, I wouldn't have the stomach to put up with this file as
    a noting member.  They don't make Pepto in an industrial strength yet.
    
    ttfn,
    
    sean
    
    p.s.  How 'bout that dance?
    

    Gerry,
    
    	Now! Now! I guess I have sadly mistaken you agian. You see,
    sometime ago, I went to this High Preformance Work Group that tought us
    about this commonly flanted phrase 'Valuing Differences'. Where we
    learned that we are all working for the common cause. And dysfunctional
    or not, we do contribute to that cause, weither its common or not.
    Weither lad, you think that I am off base with with my hetero views or
    your off on a tangent we are that family. We do sit down to bread in
    the evening from the same source of income to purchace it. We do play
    outside with other Digital folks, perhaps date them, marry them, what
    ever you wish/not to believe. And if you wish, I will introduce myself
    to you at this moment. It may not be face to face, but in lew of its 
    absents. This keyboard serves quite well. 
    
    	Hello Gerry. My name is George Rauh. I see your mentaly in good
    form. Have a good day.
    
    
    Was that O.K.?
    
    George

>    p.s.  How 'bout that dance?

...you may pet my monkey.

;-)

			--Gerry    

 Too bad you feel you have to leave (or should I say too bad you don't feel
like staying.) I'm going to miss your notes. Please revitalize yourself and
come back.

 The Doctah

    
>    	Now! Now! I guess I have sadly mistaken you agian. You see,
>    sometime ago, I went to this High Preformance Work Group that tought us
>    about this commonly flanted phrase 'Valuing Differences'. 

I can recite Valuing Differences philosophy in my sleep.  Can you?  
Thought not.

A few years ago, we had some trouble in the gay notes file.  It 
involved harassment of some type, but I don't recall the specifics.  
The moderators of the file and members of DECpac met with a coporate 
VoD manager (Pat something or another).  

In the course of the conversation, it was mentioned that we needed the 
gay notes file to do Valuing Differences work.  Pat responded by 
saying that Notes files are not designed to do Valuing Differences 
work.  They are designed to convey information _about_ Valuing 
Differences work, and some work might get done in the process of using 
them, but this is not the proper forum for Valuing Differences work.

Valuing Differences work is designed to be done face to face, in core 
groups, in support groups, at UDD, and at other such events.  The 
types of bonds that are formed that one can call "family" can only be 
formed in person, with flesh and blood, with all of the visual, 
emotional, physical, and mental cues available for processing.

Notes is excellent for networking and for rapid transference of
information (articles or stories), but it is very, very limited.  When
it comes to "family" and "Valuing Differences," it's about as
effective as smoke and mirrors. 

>Is that okay?

Okay for what?  Does it put bread on my table?


							--Gerry

    .22
    
    Gee Gerry, I though your ship was off in a blaze across the lake like
    you see in those viking funeral flicks. Wagner's music is playing and
    everything. I thought I heard the fat lady cherping in the back ground.
    Wow! What an exit! Metro B will be personally handing out Oscars with
    you name on it.:) Who do you want them to star in your place when the
    book becomes a movie? :) Wow! I can see it now! Your name in lights in
    Hollywood. And perhaps your hand prints in front of the oriental
    restrant.
    
    Smile

 Jeez, Geroge. Can't you give it a rest? nobody wants to leave with someone
talking after them.

> Jeez, Geroge. Can't you give it a rest? nobody wants to leave with someone
>talking after them.

He's not the only one.  I think it's time for Gerry to take a Doggie 
Downer!!!   

;-)

							--Gerry

I think _that's_ what makes me queer.  I watch too much Saturday Night 
Live!

    Gerry,
    
    	Go home tonight. Have a brew. Relax and we'll talk agian
    tomorrow.:)
    
    Peace!

    re: last
    
    	Can you maybe be a little more patronizing?  
    
        I think I'll be ill.
    
    	   Greg

    	Bad spelling, bad grammar and an inability to stick to the topic
    are things I find a lot more grating than any (appropriate) mention of
    someone's sexual orientation.
    
    	If you have any time for recreational noting then VISA::JOYOFLEX
    would welcome you, Gerry (since I am moderator), and I am sure
    TOKNOW::STORYMAKER would too, and might be more in line with the
    interests you expressed in .0.
    
    	Dave
    

    VAX Notes are quite similar to electronic cocktail parties. Everyone is
    invited and everyone is welcome, but, no one is forcing me to come
    and/or to like the party ... it's my choice.  If I don't like the
    party, I leave - it's as simple as that.  I've certainly left more than
    one of these electronic parties becase I don't like either the people,
    the music, the talk (gossip), or the "standards" of dress.
    
    Different people like different parties for different reasons.  I like
    this party ... others may not ... it takes all kinds of people and all
    kinds of parties to make a world ... your mileage may vary.
    
    Bubba

>    Another long flowery Jack Paar farewell, he'll be back i know
>    his type. Amerikka's great white hope, flies off in hys super-
>    person cape.

Oh, duplicity.  Thy name is Ex-Roommate.    

The original E-Net Lazarus speaks!

    Re: .16 - You're right Gerry, this type of noting is not "like family".
    Bubba is closer in .30 when he calls it a cocktail party. I think it's
    really talk radio: relatively shallow and opinionated, usually very
    polarized and exaggerated, almost always addictive.
    
    I don't worry about you, Gerry.  You seem remarkably strong and
    thoughtful. Few noters chew away at a subject as fully, acknowledging
    what others are saying, modifying or re-stating your argument based on
    what others say. Even admitting error, heaven forbid.
    
    You mention the problems some people have with your discussion of your
    sexuality. I particularly admire your bravery in jumping into
    discussions of love and sex and unselfconsciously adding your
    perspective to what clearly started as heterosexual discussions. That
    takes confidence and discipline.
    
    Good luck.
    
    Kit

.35> Bubba is closer in .30 when he calls it a cocktail party.

Sho' 'nuf.  Good grief, I don't like every party that I go to,  for  one
reason or another ...  so I take my Stetson and leave ...  go to another
party.  I've been to some parties (conferences) where I didn't like  the
atmosphere,  or  the  people,  or the <whatever> ...  no big deal ...  I
leave -  I  feel  better  without  them  ...   I  go  to  another  party
(conference) ...

As to the "family" ...  well ...  I'll disagree with you on that, purely
from my personal perspective:

I've settled down to (basically)  two  non-work  related  conferences  -
SOAPBOX and MENNOTES.  I've made some FANTASTIC friends, both personally
and electronically, and that is what I'm looking for - I feel very  VERY
much  part  of a "family" of wonderful people.  Sure, sometimes we argue
and bitch and moan but if I remember correctly  that  happened  with  my
father/mother/brother/uncle/aunt/etc  ...   you  know,  it  happens  ...
perhaps a simple by-product of the common malady that we we all share  -
we're human.

To my SOAPBOXfriends and my MENNOTESfriends, both present and future,  I
owe  a  debt  of gratitude which could not by material means be repaid -
the English language is totally inadequate to convey  my  true  feelings
and  very  sincere  "thank  you".   Other people will find what they are
looking for in other places and to them I  extend  my  best  wishes  for
their search for the holy grail - for me - I've found it.

Shalom.

Bubba

    I too am mostly read-only here and in Soapbox.  When I've
    noted I've talked about being gay when I thought it was appropriate,
    fully understanding that any mention of it would offend a certain
    number of people (usually the same ones; their negativity is
    mostly counteracted by the positive notes of LIONEL, KOHLBRENNER,
    BENNISON and OLSEN, and others, thanks gentlemen.)  I've appreciated
    Gerry's outness here and in other non-gay conferences; he's been
    the vanguard for the rest of us.  I can see how that mantle
    would become heavy after a while.  Good luck, Gerry, I hope you
    find the peace and contentment you seek.  I think you've
    done a  lot of good (consciousness raising, to take a term from the
    70's), and it hasn't been for nothing, remember that.  I think
    the people who object to your perspective on life are going
    to miss it when it's gone, whether they believe that or not.
    
    The advice I give to people when they end a relationship applies
    here: remember the good, and forget the rest.
    
    Peace,
    
    Richard
    
    P.S. Doctah, have you posted that personal name in Wommanotes or
    BGLAD?  It's brazen, to be sure!

    I've at times said "here we go again" when Gerry interjected his gay
    experiences, but I've usually took it as a consciousness-raising for
    me.  I had that reaction in the 'compliments' note - and then thought,
    hmm, I _did_ just think about it from the het perspective, and my
    consciousness _was_ raised to realize that of course gay lovers can
    have the same feelings for each other that het lover do...
    
    I can also understand the need to get away for a while, and the need to
    change, and move on...  Good luck, Ger, catch you in notes...
    
    Dave

    RE .0
    
>I can't do anything to prevent the 
>maliciousness of the Catholic Church hierarchy or the fundamentalist 
>campaigns to restrict our rights.  
    
    I suppose that from your point of view, this is correct. From a
    religious persons point of view, well... they probably don't consider
    it restricting your rights.
    
    There is what I call 'the church of what's happening now.' This is
    contemporary values subject to the whim of society or a vocal minority.
    Then there is catholic church or other fundamentalist churches. They 
    use a book as a compass. Something that does not change with the whim
    of society or a squeaky wheel.
    
    See everybody has to draw a line someplace. They have to have limits 
    of behavior personal or societal. We (society) have codified limits of
    behavior or freedoms (gun control is a good example) in this country
    and others. People need limits. Where you draw your limits and I draw
    mine are different.
    
    Calling the Catholic Church hierarchy 'malicious' to a religious person
    only puts you at greater odds with them. It only reinforces their view
    of your attacks on an institution of their basic beliefs. 
    	I thought that this should be said to you, whether you liked it or
    not. I am sure some people did/would find it offensive.
    
    Well, with all this now said: Gerry, let me say that I too have learned
    somethings from you. You are a good writer (that is what you use to
    do?). I don't agree with much of what you said, but you have a right
    here too.
    
    Steve

RE .40

I'll leave you folks to discuss this.  I'm sure y'all will do just 
fiiiine.


							--Gerry

    re: .40
    
    Steve, if Catholics and other Christian sects didn't act the way they
    do toward people who are homosexual, then somehow, I don't think Gerry 
    would be in any mood to call them "malicious".  As it is, those
    church's do reject people like Gerry, and teach their members to be
    intolerant of homosexuals.  Why would someone who is on the receiving
    end of such abuse want to say nice things about an organization that
    holds them in ridicule, and worse, believes they are evil?  Why?
    
    Mike

    Yup, put me on the church-attacking side, here...
    
    In fact, I'll go further - I think that the absolutely ridiculously out
    of touch brainwashing of the Catholic masses have caused a GREAT many
    of the problems that we end up discussing in this, and other,
    notesfiles...
                                                                       
    And I refuse to get into a point-by-point refutation/assertation of
    this statement - if you know what I mean, no explanation is necessary,
    and if you don't - no explanation is possible.
                                                                       
    Sorry, but the church is the one that needs to change its attitudes,
    not Gerry (on this point, anyway ;-)
                                                                       
    Dave

    1st:
    
    I am not catholic
    I am not a fundamentalist protestant
    
    With that said:
    
    The Gay community wants to receive the sacrament in the catholic church. The
    church won't. They (act up as I recall) invade a NYC church and
    desacrate the church. This IS a great way to show/prove you are
    better/superior/more righteous than they are. They (Gays) have the
    option of starting their own church(s). They want to tear down the
    one(s) that disagree with their lifestyle.
    
    Their (catholics et. al.) beliefs are just that. Seems to me that that 
    is Valuing Differences... It works both ways.
    
    Steve

    
    
    
    
    Not to be insulting, but you haven't a clue.
    
    >>They (Gays) have the option of starting their own church(s). 
    
    	And, indeed "we" have.  There's MCC -- the Metropolitan Community
    Church.  They are too fundamentalist for me taste, but they are a
    relatively large body.  There a group called "Lutheran's Concerned".
    The Catholics have a group called Dignity.  There's an Epicopalian
    group (don't know the name).  There's a Jewish Group (don't know the
    name).
    
    They want to tear down the one(s) that disagree with their lifestyle.
    
    	Nope, not at all.  We'd just like the them to see their hypocrisy.
    Most churches preach "love one another".  But, of course, that doesn't
    seem to apply to gay/lesbian/bi people.  I've many personal stories,
    but this is not the venue for them.
    
        For me, personally, I've quit going to "church", per se.  I can't
    abide the hypocrisy.  Does that mean I'm not religious?  In my mother's
    eyes, yes.  But then, she already believes that I'm going to hell
    because I'm gay so why should I worry 'bout what she thinks!!  And,
    you're right, I don't worry 'bout what she thinks.
    
        And, by the way, the behavior of ACT-UP is atrocious and NOT
    representative of the g/l/b community at large -- they just happen to
    get all the frickin' press.
    
    	Greg
    

> The Gay community wants to receive the sacrament in the catholic church. 

Wrong. Some gay Catholics do though.

> The church won't. They (act up as I recall) invade a NYC church and
> desacrate the church. 

You recall completely incorrectly. The disrupted a service, and the disruption
had absolutely nothing to do with gays wanting to be accepted by the Catholic
Church. The protest was against the Church's opposition to AIDS education and
the distribution of condoms.

> This IS a great way to show/prove you are better/superior/more righteous than
> they are. They (Gays) have the option of starting their own church(s).

You obviously are underinformed about gays and what we are doing.

> They want to tear down the one(s) that disagree with their lifestyle.

First, it's not a "lifestyle", second no, we don't want to "tear down the
Church" just get them to stop opposing measures designed to save lives.
    
> Their (catholics et. al.) beliefs are just that. Seems to me that that 
> is Valuing Differences... It works both ways.

Unfortunately it doesn't. The Church does not value our difference.

> And, by the way, the behavior of ACT-UP is atrocious and NOT
> representative of the g/l/b community at large -- they just happen to
> get all the frickin' press.

I support most of what ACT-UP does.

	-- Charles

    
    
>>> > And, by the way, the behavior of ACT-UP is atrocious and NOT
>>> > representative of the g/l/b community at large -- they just happen to
>>> > get all the frickin' press.

>>>I support most of what ACT-UP does.
    
    
    	I support their goals, I just think their technique stinks much of
    the time.  But then, Charles, I'm one of those "conservative" gays. 
    8-)
    
    		Greg

Um, is this really the right place to be debating the relationship of
the Catholic church and gays?

			Steve

    Greg
    
    the Episcopal group is also named Dignity
    
    Bonnie

    RE .46
    
>> The Gay community wants to receive the sacrament in the catholic church. 

>Wrong. Some gay Catholics do though.

    You could/can assume that was what was meant.
    
>> The church won't. They (act up as I recall) invade a NYC church and
>> desacrate the church. 

>You recall completely incorrectly. The disrupted a service, and the disruption
>had absolutely nothing to do with gays wanting to be accepted by the Catholic
>Church. The protest was against the Church's opposition to AIDS education and
>the distribution of condoms.

    They are not entitled to their opinions? Last time I looked this was
    America (with a c). Freedom of speech. Freedom of religion. No?
    
    BTW didn't they throw condons around the church?
    
>> This IS a great way to show/prove you are better/superior/more righteous than
>> they are. They (Gays) have the option of starting their own church(s).

>You obviously are underinformed about gays and what we are doing.

    The point is two wrongs do not make a correct, political or otherwise.
    If they have churches (g/l/b), then why not leave them (catholic
    et.al.) alone? Would they (g/l/b) churches like to have their service(s) 
    disrupted by a bunch of bible thumpers?
    
>> They want to tear down the one(s) that disagree with their lifestyle.

>First, it's not a "lifestyle", second no, we don't want to "tear down the
>Church" just get them to stop opposing measures designed to save lives.
    
    They don't have a _right_ to a belief or a choice in this matter? You
    know all? I thought that was _their_ line you objected to. Monomogy saves
    lives too. They preach that. They (some churches, Catholic included)
    oppose abortion. That saves a soon to be human life. They preach that.
    
>> Their (catholics et. al.) beliefs are just that. Seems to me that that 
>> is Valuing Differences... It works both ways.

>Unfortunately it doesn't. The Church does not value our difference.

    So you fall into their (and the media's) trap with some of these actions.
    
>> And, by the way, the behavior of ACT-UP is atrocious and NOT
>> representative of the g/l/b community at large -- they just happen to
>> get all the frickin' press.

>I support most of what ACT-UP does.

    That is your choice, just as it is their choice to support a church of
    their choice.
    

    Steve

    RE: .50
    
    Let's just do away with (outlaw) organized religions ... bingo ...
    problem solved.

| The Gay community wants to receive the sacrament in the catholic church. The
| church won't. 

	One only has to talk to one of the many gay priests to see that this
DOES happen.

| They (act up as I recall) invade a NYC church and
| desacrate the church. This IS a great way to show/prove you are
| better/superior/more righteous than they are. 

	I didn't know anyone was out to prove that they were any better than
anyone else, just that everyone is the same as everyone else, human beings.

| They (Gays) have the
| option of starting their own church(s). They want to tear down the
| one(s) that disagree with their lifestyle.

	All one has to do is to look at the churches history with any type of
people and it would make one wonder just what was "really" going on. Slavery,
the Spanish Inquisition, burning of witches, treating women as though they were
second class citizens, all of these were supported by the church. They thought
that the Scripture said this was ok. What they were doing is wrongfully
interpretating the Scripture. With just these FEW examples of the churches
history, why wouldn't anyone question them? They are like anyone else, they're
human and they make mistakes.

Glen

    
>    the Episcopal group is also named Dignity
    
I heard that it was called Integrity.

    Right, my mistake, thanks.

>    RE: .50
    
>    Let's just do away with (outlaw) organized religions ... bingo ...
>    problem solved.

Gee I like bingo, I didn't think there was a problem with BINGO!

    I don't read MENNOTES that often. It's not in my notebook and
    I tend to just poke around abit. The conference became tedious
    for me a long time ago but, I suspect, for different reasons then
    are expressed in .0.

    When I looked in earlier today and did a directory I found this
    topic. I wondered what it was about while deciding to read it or
    not. My first thought was that it would be a "lite" topic. The
    word "dance" did that to me. So I almost skipped it as dancing
    holds little interest for me. But seeing who wrote it I figured
    that there was a 50/50 chance that it was not a lite topic but
    a gripe one. So I took a look. I was right.

    Once upon a time a friend of mine and I were talking about a conference
    that existed called "MEN". We didn't much like the way it was being
    run and decided that we could do better. So one of us created a
    conference with the two of us as moderators. We invited others in
    to plant some seed topics. That was this conference of course. The
    other conference has been gone for years now but this one has grown
    and changed.

    I'm not sure what we expected MENNOTES to become. I know that I hoped
    it wouldn't become a male version of WOMANNOTES. But it has. I'm not
    sure how that happened. Undoubtedly this conference meets the needs
    off some people, as WOMANNOTES does, but it doesn't meet too many
    of mine. That's the tedious part for me. There is a lot to wade through
    to get to what I want/need. So I don't do it often anymore. I can
    of course understand those who don't do it at all. There are a lot
    more conferences on the net now then there were almost 5 years ago
    when this one started. Many of us get our needs met in some of them.

    As long as this conference meets the needs of some people I hope it
    stays around but those who would expect or even hope for it to meet the
    needs of all people or even all men are destined to be disappointed.
    It can not happen as there is far too much diversity in this world.

    		Alfred

| I'm not sure what we expected MENNOTES to become. I know that I hoped
| it wouldn't become a male version of WOMANNOTES. But it has. I'm not
| sure how that happened. Undoubtedly this conference meets the needs
| of some people, as WOMANNOTES does, but it doesn't meet too many
| of mine. 

	But how does this conference not meeting your needs have to do with why
it's become another WOMANNOTES conference. Why do you think it has become that?
I'm curious. Is that good..... or bad?




Glen

>	But how does this conference not meeting your needs have to do with why
>it's become another WOMANNOTES conference. Why do you think it has become that?
>I'm curious. Is that good..... or bad?

    I'm not sure how to parse this but I'll try. That this conference has
    become so much like WOMANNOTES is not a case of cause and effect. That
    is to say that the reason it does not meet my needs is not because it
    is like WOMANNOTES. It is not meeting my needs because of the issues
    not discussed and because of opinions that I don't believe can be safely
    expressed here. I'll not elaborate for reasons which should be obvious.

    An obvious question is why don't I add Notes in area of interest to me?
    Answer: Because my needs are already [mostly] being met elsewhere. Also
    my need to bang my head against a wall was satiated completely some time 
    ago.

    Is your question "why has MENNOTES become like WOMANNOTES" or "how is
    MENNOTES like WOMANNOTES?" The answer to the first question is, I'm not
    sure. I suspect it has to do with the political climate in Notes today.
    The answer to the second question is more complicated and I'd rather
    not answer it in Notes. Why? Because I do not think that MENNOTES being
    like WOMANNOTES is good at all and criticizing WOMANNOTES is not one
    of those things that is valued in Notes.

    		Alfred

    Alfred,
    
    I really don't think that Mennotes is like Womannotes, but maybe
    I'm too close to the trees to see the forest.
    
    Bonnie

Yeah, me too, Bonnie.  I don't find mennotes anything at all like
womannotes.  But as I remarked before, each community is what its
contributors make of it.  If Mennotes doesn't suit someone's needs,
its up to them to try to influence the direction the file takes or
not.

DougO

    RE: .59 You probably don't see the similarity between WOMANNOTES
    and SOAPBOX either. A different similarity then between MENNOTES
    and WOMANNOTES BTW. Yes, I think you may be too close to the trees
    to see the forest.

    			Alfred

    RE: .60

>If Mennotes doesn't suit someone's needs,
>its up to them to try to influence the direction the file takes or
>not.

    Not necessarily true. Can you see men trying to mold WOMANNOTES to
    meet mens needs? How long do you think that would go on? Or Moslems
    trying to mold BAGELS to meet their needs? No, I think it's better
    for people to drop a conference and/or start their own then to try 
    and influence a conference that is very far off from their needs.

    Each conference is a community and people have the right to find
    their own community where they are comfortable. The minority should
    not try to make major changes in direction that would make the current
    group whose needs are being met suffer.

    		Alfred

    Boy, Alfred, you've used an amazingly large number of notes to say
    extremely little. The semantic content of your replies is "MENNOTES is
    like WOMANNOTES and I don't like that." We have no clue as to HOW the
    two conferences are similar, or how you'd like to see MENNOTES instead.
    And you seem to be frightened of saying anything specific! Were you
    somehow burned by noting?

I don't think Alfred has any obligation to explain himself.  I see some
similarities myself, as well as significant differences.  If Alfred or
anyone else feels that MENNOTES is "not for me", then it isn't, and there's
no point trying to prove "who is right".

My goal for this conference is to serve as wide a spectrum of the Digital
community as possible without reducing its effectiveness.  If the focus
is too wide, then it stops being useful to anyone, if too narrow, not enough
people benefit.  It follows then that there will be some people "left out".
I'm saddened by this, but don't see what can be done about it.

I don't have any particular agenda to push here.  All I do is make sure
that people behave politely, and that corporate policy is adhered to.  
Otherwise, just about anything relevant to the subject of "men" is valid
here.  Unfortunately, here as elsewhere, there will be individuals who
push their own agenda, and make it difficult for some to express themselves
without being attacked.  I do what I can to prevent this, but I can't serve
as a filter for everything that happens here.

All I can suggest to anyone who feels left out is that they try and start
a discussion about their values and feelings.  Everyone matters.
Everyone should be able to have their say.  As long as the rules of polite
discussion are followed, there should be no problem.

As always, feel free to write us if you have specific suggestions as to
how things can be improved.

				Steve

Congratulations Gerry.

You have once again created a topic, (under what I feel was false pretenses),
to push your agenda, still further.

Likewise, as has been noted, you wrote a base note with a dramatic touch
about leaving the conference.  I see that 53 replies later, you're still
here.

The basenote was cleverly written.  As I read it, I started to feel how "tired"
you were/are of battling the world, myself.  Then I realized that this is an
old tactic, often deployed in notes conferences by those seeking attention,
sympathy, etc.  It's like dying and getting to see who weeps over your grave
or who pees on it.  Sort of fun to watch, eh?

As I skimmed your basenote, I never had a doubt that you would still be here.
You've got a right to be here.  I've never questioned that.  Never will.  I
only tire of your agenda... but I can hit "next unseen" to avoid it.  :^)

I'm sure if I went into the "Gay" conference, or whatever "PC" term it may be
called, and if I kept pushing an agenda promoting the heterosexual lifestyle,
I'd probably be looked at as someone starting a rathole too.

    .67
    
       Thank you, if that came from me, it would not be received well
    at all, my sentiments exactly. I know it's just me, but i'm getting
    a little......no....lot tired with thie whole homosexual agenda stuff
    going on in society today.....considering it's not even a valid
    minority......and another thing, the term gay community is one huge
    oxymoron; more like a bunch of lookist feudal cliques

| I'm sure if I went into the "Gay" conference, or whatever "PC" term it may be
| called, and if I kept pushing an agenda promoting the heterosexual lifestyle,
| I'd probably be looked at as someone starting a rathole too.

	You'd never know unless you tried. 



Glen

| Thank you, if that came from me, it would not be received well
| at all, my sentiments exactly. 

	Why do you think that? I'm curious.

| I know it's just me, but i'm getting
| a little......no....lot tired with thie whole homosexual agenda stuff
| going on in society today.....considering it's not even a valid
| minority......

	What qualifications does one need to become valid in your eyes?

| and another thing, the term gay community is one huge
| oxymoron; more like a bunch of lookist feudal cliques

	Wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?


Glen

| I don't think Alfred has any obligation to explain himself.  

	If someone is telling the conference that it is similar to another
conference, no one really sees this, wouldn't it only make sense that he
explain himself so others could see his point? 

| I see some similarities myself, 

	Steve, what similarities do you see? 


Glen

Re: .71


> 	If someone is telling the conference that it is similar to another
> conference, no one really sees this, wouldn't it only make sense that he
> explain himself so others could see his point? 

No, not unless his intent was to try to convince others that his view was
valid, which I don't think Alfred was.


> 	Steve, what similarities do you see? 

Both conferences are focus points for discussion of gender-specific issues,
both are open to participation by and discussions about those with
non-traditional lifestyles and views, and both have moderators who support
Digital's "Valuing Diversity" program.  And, both have readers who are
uncomfortable about some of the discussions and the people who partake in
them.

			Steve

Re: .74

On the contrary, I think Alfred behaved perfectly by ignoring your taunts.
I certainly would have.


Those of us who read MENNOTES today owe a lot to Alfred and Mike, who started
this conference when the macho swaggering of the "MEN" notesfile got
too annoying.

				Steve

>    I think his intent was to be rude, to tweak the noses of several
>    conferences simultaneously.

    I think you have a vivid imagination. If I wanted to tweak the noses
    of several conferences a note in either SOAPBOX or WOMANNOTES would
    have been much more effective.

>    I think that his non-response to our 'put up or shut up' speaks for
>    itself.

    I assume you mean that my none response shows that I don't regularly
    read this conference. Also Steve has explained my notes very well and
    there isn't much to add.

    			Alfred

>    And you seem to be frightened of saying anything specific! Were you
>    somehow burned by noting?

    Quite right. And often. And a number of replies here have shown me the
    wisdom of not going into detail. All I ever wanted to say was that
    MENNOTES does not meet my needs. Perhaps I should have left out the
    bit about WOMANNOTES. Not because it's not true but because people
    has used it as a base to attack me rather then just my opinions.

    			Alfred

    I agree with the fact that WN and MN has some similarities.  I
    believe most of these tend to be PC in nature.  Or rather the lack
    there of.
    
    In both conferences it is extremely uncouth to spout anything other
    than the proper PC tripe that I seem to see so much of in these
    conferences.  That and the "poor me, I have such a rough life"
    attitude.  I get the idea most of these people are not happy with
    their lives.
    
    While I may believe in a lot of these PC items, I also believe folks
    shouldn't gang up on someone who doesn't hold those same beliefs.
    
    
    
    
                                    L.J.
    
    
    p.s.  Incoming!  ;^)

Re: .79

Have you tried it here?  If you manage to express your "non-PC" opinion
in a manner which is not insulting, there should be no problem.  The
moderators will do their best to limit offensive behavior in this conference,
no matter what the source or target.  In this manner, we differentiate
ourselves from some other conferences.

The reaction you get will all depend on your apparent intention.  If it is
"this is my viewpoint on the subject and here's why I feel that way", there
should be no problem.  If instead it's "all people who are X are bad",
you may well expect some flack.  It's all in the approach.

					Steve

    re: .80
    
    I concur with Steve that it's the method of delivery that matters in
    many cases.
    
    Also, a notesfile is what YOU MAKE IT.  Your degree of investment will
    directly affect the tone of the notesfile, where it goes, what it
    becomes.
    
    -Jody
    

| Gee Glen, don't you think that you and your PC club have beaten this
| horse to death yet? 

	Gee, I've never been called PC before. Hmmmm......

| As in you and Gerry have everyone pissing and
| moaining about what ever you wish to direct your cause for/to?

	Oh, you mean by asking others what they meant in their notes? If that's
what you meant, yeah, I would have to agree.

| Its like an over play song on a local radio that you like but so over
| played that you wish it would go away. You hope that that rock group
| will write agian. But.... If you don't stop this horse feather pissing
| and moaning act, there is going to be allot of very angry folks.

	Care to clarify that? Who, why, things like that.

| I realize that your PC club wants to convert us heatens heterosexuals
| to be aware of PC Gays or make us well aware of your cause.
| Which we are all well aware
| of, and our hearts go out to you with deep respect. But, if you don't
| stop this, your going to set your beloved cause so far back you might
| be known as 'the missing links of humanity'. Gee.... we would not want
| to hear of that, would we.

	How would we set things back by asking people to clarify what they 
have said? What is this missing links of humanity stuff about? Could you
clarify these things?

| Your constant provoking of this topic will get poor Steve to perhaps
| put a write lock on this note or some other stupid thing. Any of us
| heathens can see that in Steves writings. Your peeing on the Good Humor
| Mans shoes pal. He is going to get real piss'ed. Does this start to
| make basic sence to you? Sorry Steve, I hope that I have not put words
| in your mouth. Just casual observations.

	Why would someone write lock a topic when people are asking others to
clarify what they have said? Alfred made a comment about the similarities
between this notesfile and WN. I asked for the differences. I also asked Steve
and he kindly gave me an answer. So, I ask you, what's the problem?


Glen

Re: .75

George, I am perfectly capable of speaking for myself.  Please speak for
yourself, only.

				Steve

>> If Mennotes doesn't suit someone's needs,
>> its up to them to try to influence the direction the file takes or
>> not.
>
>    Not necessarily true. Can you see men trying to mold WOMANNOTES to
>    meet mens needs? How long do you think that would go on?

Not true in the sense you took it, certainly.  Molding womannotes to meet
(unspecific) "men's needs" is precisely orthogonal to the charter of that
place and the effort doomed to failure.  Yet I as a man have specific needs
that I would like to see addressed within the general air of a community
which is discussing topics of interest to women.  And I have in the past
and continue in the present, to enter my opinions about the content and 
the form ("processing") of those discussions as they occur.  I do the same
here, I do the same in soapbox, and in most notesfiles I follow.  And it
will "go on" from my perspective as long as I have interest and energy to
continue participating.  It requires some degree of style adjustment to
each place, I claim; especially with the vastly different enforcement of
styles of interaction permitted by the differing teams of moderators.  It
can be as subtle as refusing to interact with individuals who persistently
and deliberately seek to stir up trouble; or it can be as overt as a long
essay explicitly stating my views on the way a community might handle a
certain situation; or anywhere in between.  But I take responsibility for
participating in a community, and have little patience for folks who seem
to think they're powerless to do the same.

DougO

    Actually, folks, it's quite easy to start your own conference if you
    don't like any of the existing ones ...
    
    Bubba

| I'm sure if I went into the "Gay" conference, or whatever "PC" term it may be
| called...
    
    NOT recommended for the faint of heart ... 
    ---
| .. and if I kept pushing an agenda promoting the heterosexual lifestyle,
| I'd probably be looked at as someone starting a rathole too.
 
    WWIII is more like it ...
           
    Bubba

    Just wanted to put in a couple of cents here....I've been on vacation.
    
    Alfred.....I agree with you about MN and WN similarities on a few
    counts:
    
    1. The gay folks have taken over both
    2. Everyone tries to constantly push agendas rather than discuss issues
    3. Hetro male bashing is "in"
    4. Straight males who like being straight males are "out"
    5. Anything outside the "agenda" is considered not valuing differences
    
    In past two years, I've felt that neither conference has any "value
    added". 
    
    Ken
    

    re.88
    
       Oooh, I like that...an honest opinion...what a novel concept! ;^)
    
    
    
                                       L.J.

    
    .88
    
    Amen to that!  Every thing you said is true!  I usually read for the
    entertainment, between duties...
    

| 1. The gay folks have taken over both

	We're still out numbered, remember, there are only 10% of us! ;-)

| 2. Everyone tries to constantly push agendas rather than discuss issues

	Not really. If we mention the word gay, then it's said we are pushing
our agenda. If we talk about a boy/girlfriend, we are pushing our agenda. Are
you telling me when you talk about your girlfriends/wife that you are not
pushing your agenda? If one is, then both are doing it. I myself don't think
either is pushing any agenda.

| 3. Hetro male bashing is "in"

	The only time anything takes place is when someone makes some sort of
stupid comment. Something demeaning, derogatory, whatever. There are some in
here when they hear the word gay anything, they get pissed. What's that say
about the people who feel this way? Not very much.

| 4. Straight males who like being straight males are "out"

	There is nothing wrong with anyone being straight. It's your life, if
your straight, so what? 

| 5. Anything outside the "agenda" is considered not valuing differences

	Can you explain this one a little more? There are many things outside
what you perceive to be our "agenda" that have to deal with valuing
differences. But some are just too hung up on the so called "agenda" issue to
ever see anyone for what they are, people.



Glen

re:  618.92

This wasn't to me, but I'll share some "possibilities."

>We're still out numbered, remember, there are only 10% of us! ;-)

That 10% ain't my figure.  And I don't buy it.  Besides, it's got more to do
with "PC" attitudes, IMO.

>	Not really. If we mention the word gay, then it's said we are pushing
>our agenda. 

There is a conference available that is more suitable.  Gays know darn well
that going into other conferences and blowing smoke is going to get them some
special attention.

>If we talk about a boy/girlfriend, we are pushing our agenda. Are
>you telling me when you talk about your girlfriends/wife that you are not
>pushing your agenda? If one is, then both are doing it. I myself don't think
>either is pushing any agenda.

I don't believe it.  That's how I perceive it.  And I don't think you do
either.  MO.

>	The only time anything takes place is when someone makes some sort of
>stupid comment. Something demeaning, derogatory, whatever. There are some in
>here when they hear the word gay anything, they get pissed. What's that say
>about the people who feel this way? Not very much.

First off, define stupid.  Secondly, it's the same as going into the black
conference and pushing 'white' attitudes on the black folks that want to
discuss things common to blacks.  There is a 'gay' conference to share those
attitudes... and some men feel like they had a conference here... where they
could share the traditional feelings of being a man... be it macho or whatever.
Those same men feel it slipping away.

>	There is nothing wrong with anyone being straight. It's your life, if
>your straight, so what? 

That's not his point, I don't think, and you know it.  I think I covered it
above, at least as I understand it.  But the author will probably speak for
himself.

>	Can you explain this one a little more? There are many things outside
>what you perceive to be our "agenda" that have to deal with valuing
>differences. But some are just too hung up on the so called "agenda" issue to
>ever see anyone for what they are, people.

It should be noted, that traditional men should have their differences valued
too.  It seems that the term "valuing differences" has become a smoke screen
for many gays.

    
    
    I'm really confused by the last several notes.
    
    I realize that there are a couple of gay conferences.  I DO participate
    in them.  But, they aren't enough, from my perspective.  Sure, I'm gay.
    But, I'm also a part of the "larger world".  Therefore I find it
    necessary to relate to that larger world by participating in this
    conference, in WOMANNOTES, in SOAPBOX, etc.  It seems, though, that
    people are only comfortable with people like myself doing that if we
    don't bother to mention that we're b/l/g.  It doesn't work that way.
    Being "gay" is a large part of my life -- just like being straight is a
    large part of "your" life.  It colors the way I think, the way I
    perceive the world, etc.  To not mention, usually casually, that I'm
    gay means that people assume I'm straight.  I'm not pushing any agenda
    (usually, and when I am it's real obvious!!).  I simply want to try to
    relate to the larger world and find my place in it. 
    
    Some of "you" have trouble with that -- I guess that's too bad!
    
    	Greg

>	Not really. If we mention the word gay, then it's said we are pushing
>our agenda. 

| There is a conference available that is more suitable.  

	You're absolutely right. But when you mention your girlfriends/wives
you are in essence letting us know of your heterosexuality. When anyone
mentions their boyfriends, they are letting you know about their homosexuality.
Same basic concept, it's just that one doesn't get blasted if mentioned, but
the other one does, and it gets a label. 

| Gays know darn well that going into other conferences and blowing smoke is 
| going to get them some special attention.

	If the topic is about gays, then do you really expect them to stay out
of it? If it's a topic about relationships, all one does is mention the person
they are seeing. Then it's taken as pushing their agenda. It's too bad it has
to be that way. No one is blowing smoke unless something demeaning is said
about them.

>	The only time anything takes place is when someone makes some sort of
>stupid comment. Something demeaning, derogatory, whatever. There are some in
>here when they hear the word gay anything, they get pissed. What's that say
>about the people who feel this way? Not very much.

| First off, define stupid.  

	Demeaning, derogatory.

| Secondly, it's the same as going into the black conference and pushing 
| 'white' attitudes on the black folks that want to discuss things common to 
| blacks.  

	I guess maybe you would have to rename this notesfile to,
STRAIGHTMENNOTES or TRADITIONALMALEMENNOTES to specify what you 
are looking for. Otherwise, when it's called MENNOTES, that applies
to ALL men, regardless of age, race, gender preference, etc.

	Also, please define traditional. 

| and some men feel like they had a conference here... where they
| could share the traditional feelings of being a man... be it macho or 
| whatever. Those same men feel it slipping away.

	I found that to be very amusing. Whether or not you want to be macho,
whatever isn't the real issue here, it's that you don't view the gay male as
ever being in that catagory. Something you should know is you probably have met
many gay men in your life, and never knew it. For whatever reasons why they
didn't tell you, wether it was just an aquaintance, he wasn't secure enough
with himself to come out to you, or maybe he thought you would react
negatively, whatever, you have met them. Before I came out people who I never
thought were gay, I found out they were. They come in all forms. Sports
figures, news casters, parents, to name a few. All traditional roles, people
you may even look up to, but they're gay. Not being macho or whatever has
nothing to do with being gay, all it is is another way to put a label on
someone.

It should be noted, that traditional men should have their differences valued
too.  It seems that the term "valuing differences" has become a smoke screen
for many gays.

	Like anything, it can get abused. I think the term valuing differences
is intended for everyone, not just certain groups. 


Glen

I find this discussion puzzling, but I know its not an isolated case.  
Recently the Boston Globe ran a piece in its Living section by the man who
said he was (US Congressman) Barney Frank's lover.  I found the story rather
boring and wondered what the big deal was, but apparently a number of the
Globe's readers reacted furiously and many wrote letters to the Globe accusing
the paper of "pushing the homosexual agenda".   The Globe's Ombudsman
column mentioned that this same piece ran in two other cities (Washington
and Philadephia, I think), with almost no reaction.

My question to those who are complaining here is: "What scares you about gays?"
Nothing else but fear would account for the virulent reaction one sees
here and elsewhere.  I just don't understand how someone writing here and
saying "I'm gay" can be construed as a threat to a straight man's
heterosexuality (or whatever the perceived threat is).  And if it's not
fear, then what is it that is so upsetting?

Some of the "traditional men" are complaining that they can't talk about
their lifestyle here.  Why?  Who's stopping them?  Indeed, the overwhelming
majority of notes and discussions here are heavily oriented towards
heterosexuals, so it seems to be the complaints are groundless.  What am I
missing?

				Steve

>Some of the "traditional men" are complaining that they can't talk about
>their lifestyle here.  Why?  Who's stopping them?  

 Of course they can talk about their lifestyle if they don't mind being
pounced upon for any non-pc utterance or taken to task for using non-inclusive
language. Many heterosexual men aren't willing to overcome all of that
inertia to write a note. It's exactly analogous to the gays who don't 
write here because of the "neanderthal" backlash. They don't want to 
expend the extra energy overcoming the nit-picking criticism based on
bigotry. And many traditional males feel precisely the same way.

 It seems hard to deny that there are factions which lurk in the bushes,
waiting for an opprtunity to pounce upon the unsuspecting of either flavor.
Some of the more reticent who are trying to muster the courage to share
here see these ambushes and opt not to write. Who can blame them? Not everyone
is impervious to flamage, or even criticism, particularly when it is done
out of a sense of moral righteousness rather than a willingness to be
constructive.

 I think what you're missing is that you are looking for men with uzi's
physically preventing these men from writing. In their absence you seem to
believe that nothing is stopping these men. Well the only thing that is
stopping them is themselves, whether they lack the energy to overcome
the inertia or can't be bothered to explain things 5 times to people who
are jumping to hostile conclusions. Nonetheless, the perception that
their opinions are not wanted or respected is very real.

 The Doctah

    WELL SAID, MARK.
    
    ed

Hmm - so how many of you have been propositioned in this notesfile by gays?
And how did the earlier propositioning cause you to want to deny the
existence of all gays?  Were you ever attacked by a member of some other
"group"?  Why don't you reject their participation as well?  It all sounds
very inconsistent to me.

Ken, you seem to want a pretty restrictive club ("Native-American/English/
French", and presumably heterosexual male as well).  What about Hispanics?
Would their participation be "promoting an agenda"?  What about blacks?
Or Chinese?  Or Norwegians?

This conference is MENNOTES - it's for discussions about men.  If you want
to start a conference whose focus is more restrictive, go ahead and do so.
But I don't think it's fair to tell a certain segment of the male population
that they're not eligible to discuss male-related issues here.  That there
exist other conferences with different focuses  (foci?) is irrelevant.
But, as far as I know, none of those other conferences are "exlusively" for
one group or another. 

I don't doubt that many have the perception that those who talk about
their "traditional" lifestyle get "pounced upon".  But I don't believe
there is sufficient evidence to substantiate it.  I've seen some occasional
misdirected comments from all sides, but I don't think it adds up to
"gays have taken over."

It's ironic; I've tried so hard to make this conference be egalitarian,
and those very efforts are construed as erecting barriers by some.  What
could be done differently?

					Steve

| When I was 12 a gay man pushed me against a wall and tried to perform
| fellatio on me. I got away.

	How many cases have you heard of when a straight "perceived to be
traditional" male has done the same to a young girl? 

| When I was 14 a gay man approached me and tied to touch me. I ran away.

	How many cases have you heard of when a straight "perceived to be
traditional" male has done the same to a young girl? 

| When I was 17 a gay man picked me up while thumbing to my girlfriend's.
| He put his hand on my thigh .... I assume he had surgery to remove the
| #2 pencil I broke off in his hand.

	How many cases have you heard of when a straight "perceived to be
traditional" male has done the same to a young girl? 

	Also, around how old was the person doing this?

| Any further explanations of the above are not worth the space. You can
| defend or whatever that these are isolated. I would argue that this is
| commonplace. Many of my hetero friends have also been accosted by gays.

	So, I guess in essance you're saying that it is also common for the
"traditional male" to do the same thing, right? In both cases you have people
who shouldn't be doing what they're doing. In BOTHcases it doesn't even come
close to being the norm. Can you really say otherwise?

| All I want is my own Native American-English/French space.

	How about a new notesfile? Call it:


		NATIVE/AMERICAN-ENGLISH/FRENCH-MENNOTES


Glen

| Many of us don't have a place to talk about hetro male
| issues. The gays have an exclusive note and as pointed out Steve, 

	The file is open to anyone. A lot of hets write in it. It's not
exclusive at all. It's about gay issues. This file is open for topics about
men. All men, not just the traditional style. Like I said, if you want one for
the traditional male, then start one.




Glen

    
    >>Any further explanations of the above are not worth the space. You can
    >>defend or whatever that these are isolated. I would argue that this is
    >>commonplace. Many of my hetero friends have also been accosted by gays.
    
    	You're probably right about the discussion not being worth the
    space, but what the hell!  You are wrong!!!!!!!  The vast, vast, vast
    majority of gay men DO NOT molest children.  The vast, vast, vast
    majority of gay men DO NOT attempt to pick up men in spaces other than
    where they know the pickee will also likely be gay.  And, the vast,
    vast majority of gay men don't even do "that" regularly.  Your
    opinions are formed from your experiences and your experiences have
    been unfortunately negative.  
    
    	And, I would assume many of your friends have been propositioned by
    members of the opposite sex.  If they (or you) are not interested,
    isn't a simple "I'm not interested" usually sufficient to get rid of
    the person.  I bet it usually works with a gay person who's got his
    sites set on a non-gay person.  It's that simple!
    
    	Greg

    	Many of the most vehement notes recently have been on the subject
    of child support and  custody. While some of the experiences recounted 
    might make you very wary of women it didn't strike me that they were 
    actively promoting a homosexual agenda - they were just from men who
    had suffered bad experiences with women.

    RE Steve Lionel:
    
    The way some people feel about g/l/b people is like the way people feel
    about abortion. There is no middle ground. So people saying they feel
    that an agenda is being pushed that is offensive to them, just like
    abortion. On the other side, the g/l/b community believes that their
    (what does DEC call it?) orientation (don't wanna get flammed again for
    'lifestyle') is a natural and US constutitionally gauranteed right,
    just like pro-abortion people.
    
    RE: do you know of someone who has been attacked--- 
    
    YES my wife by a lesbian
    
    
    RE: Crusades/witch burning, etc (this was a ways back)
    
    Well if we 'crucify' all who have made a past mistake, then gay men who
    practiced unprotected promiscous (sp) sex until they learned better
    would fall into that category. In both cases, people died because of
    their misguided actions. In both cases they changed their
    actions/beliefs.
    
    
    Steve

    >Well if we 'crucify' all who have made a past mistake, then gay men who
    >practiced unprotected promiscous (sp) sex until they learned better
    >would fall into that category. In both cases, people died because of
    >their misguided actions. In both cases they changed their
    >actions/beliefs.
    
    As have, I trust, all of us hetero men who at one time or another
    practiced unprotected promiscous sex.  Let's remember that AIDS is a
    sexual disease, not a homosexual disease.  It could have started its
    spread just as easily in the promiscous heterosexual population.  It
    just didn't.
    							- Vick
    
    P.S.  The only agenda I see being pushed much around here is the
    homophobic one.

    Okay, Herb, you go out and be promiscuous.  I'm staying home.  - Vick

    AIDS is epidemic in many African nations, largely, so I've read,
    because of heterosexual couples having large numbers of partners.
    This has combined with untreated V.D. which may serve as an avenue
    for infection, plus problems with blood checking and needle sterility
    in medical settings.
    
    Bonnie

    re.107
    
    >> RE: do you know someone who's been attacked
     > Yes, my wife, by a lesbian
    
    And your point?
    
    If a single attack is a valid reason for a phobia, then it follows that
    I should be a heterophobe in the wake of being raped by a heterosexual.
    
    Heterosexuals do not frighten me. Certain individuals frighten me, yes;
    but not the whole blooming mass of them.
    
      AJ

    Herb,
    
    I was saying that there are other ways of spreading aids than
    unprotected anal intercourse, I call that giving additional
    information.
    
    Bonnie

    AIDS is spread through the exchange of blood products.  Though it may
    be more common for blood to be exchanged during anal intercourse, it is
    certainly not uncommon for it to be exchanged during vaginal
    intercourse.  To suggest here or in any other relatively public forum
    that it has been somehow scientifically shown that AID's is hard to catch 
    via vaginal intercourse, is at least immoral.  Your "information" might
    kill someone.
    							- Vick
    
    P.S.  Anal intercourse is far from uncommon among heterosexual couples.

    re.114
    
>    >> RE: do you know someone who's been attacked
>     > Yes, my wife, by a lesbian
    
>    And your point?
    
    The question was asked in a previous note. I just answered. Nothing
    more.
    
>    If a single attack is a valid reason for a phobia, then it follows that
>    I should be a heterophobe in the wake of being raped by a heterosexual.
>    
>    Heterosexuals do not frighten me. Certain individuals frighten me, yes;
>    but not the whole blooming mass of them.
    
    I agree
    
    Steve

    i.e.  I'll let you quibble that it might not have spread as rapidly
    via heterosexual activities, but spread it would have, nonetheless.
    

    
    
    But you see, Herb, taking your statements at face value is deceiving.
    Your comment is true, presently, as to how AIDS has been transmitted in
    the gay community.  But, worldwide (I don't have exact numbers handy)
    there are many, MANY, more heterosexuals with AIDS than gays with AIDS. 
    Most people seem to CONVENIENTLY ignore this fact.  (Can someone help
    with the numbers?  I can't find the lastest pamphlet.)
    
    	Greg

    >"it could have started its spread just as easily..."
    >

    >That simply isn't true. The transmission of aids is VERY inefficient.
    >For many years, the principal cause of the spread of aids has been
    
    >	1)unprotected receptive anal intercourse (which is why heterosexual
    >	  sex has been such a poor transmitter of the desease, except in
    >     cultures -like the Haitian as i understand it- where heterosexual
    >     anal intercourse is common.
    	
    
    I can't seem to read your note, Herb, without thinking that you are
    saying that heterosexual sex isn't likely to give you AIDS.  If that's
    what you are saying, I think you are wrong.  If that's not what you
    are saying, then I just don't understand what you are saying.  Are you
    merely quibbling with my "just as easily"?  (I'm sorry that I misconstrued
    your indentation as implying a quote from some authority.)
    
    I'll let you know when I think I've been shown up.  
    
    							- Vick

    Hey while we on the subject, maybe someone like Bonnie can answer this:
    
    If a man and a woman have sex while the women is on the mens... would
    not that be a possible receptor while the uterus is shedding its
    lining?
    
    This is an homest question that I don't seem to have seen asked before.
    
    Steve

    Glen,
    
    	I am writing to you about .104. I have written to you off line with
    respect. Asking you about how open the gay note file really is. I have
    asked for its node address. I am looking to read to become more
    understanding. I am still a het, and will always be.:)

    Glen,
    
    	If it is so open as you have pointed out that IT is, why are you
    so reluctant to publish it in the file? And why do I have to contact
    a person to read? Guess its not so open as you wish us to believe.
    Walls Steve Lionel? Whose walls are we talking about now? 

    Steve

    I don't know for sure, but I don't think that women are more
    susceptible while menstruating. First off, tho I've read a lot
    of articles about AIDS I don't recall this being mentioned. I'm
    assuming that if it were a risk that it would be pretty widely
    mentioned.

    Further, when a woman is menstruating, it is not the same thing as
    bleeding from a wound or cut. The capillaries feeding the endometrium
    (the lining that surrounds the cavity of the uterus) seal off and
    the endometrium essentially starves to death and is sloughed off.

    It is kind of like you got sunburned and peeled off a whole layer
    of your outer skin.

    Bonnie

    inre .130
    
    The gay notes file is a members only file. Like other members
    only files, it is set up to protect the privacy of those members.
    Many gay people are still quite closeted and are concerned 
    of the consequences of their oreintation becoming public knowlege.
    
    There are other such files, such as a file for alcoholics, one
    for epilepsy sufferers, one for ACOAs, and one for persons interested
    in alternate types of spirituality that I'm personally aware of.
    All of these files are members only to protect the members. If
    a member is found guilty of breaching thaat confidentiality and
    outing a file member, they will be expelled form the file and
    can be reported to personnel.
    
    Anyone can join the gay file, I've been a member for years as have
    other straight women and men. You do have to agree to abide by
    their rules of confidentiality, however.
    
    Bonnie

    But Bonnie, it would be considered closed to the general public unlike
    this file or the womans file or the one on what ever else. So Glens
    .104 statment is bogus, wrong, and misrepresents himself.

    
    Probably out of date .... but there's more than a couple of them:
    
    Contact DDIF::BAZEMORE for membership Contact OAXCEL::KAUFMANN for
    members   Contact VANGA::KERRELL for membership Contact VANGA::KERRELL
    for membership Contact JARETH::EDP for membership Contact IW::WARING
    for membership Contact XSTACY::JENNINGS for membership Contact
    CANAJN::DINGELHOFF for membership Contact HDLITE::BURNS for membership
    Contact MEWVAX::AUGUSTINE for membership Contact KYOA::MIANO for
    membership Contact SHODHA::DIDDLY for membership   Contact
    FUTURS::CROSSLEY for membership Contact VAXWRK::NEEDLE for membership
    Contact LUTECE::LELEGARD for membership  Contact MAYDAY::DANIEL for
    membership Contact WSINT::HOUSE for membership  Contact ULTRA::HERBISON
    for membership  Contact MAYDAY::DANIEL for membership  Contact
    OAXCEL::KAUFMANN for membership  Contact JGO::BARBONIS for membership 
    Contact TRUCKS::BOOTH for membership  Contact RDGENG::KINGSTON for
    membership  Contact FINALY::HAYNESRE for membership  Contact
    UTROP1::LAUREY for Membership  Contact WEDOIT::LALIBERTE for membership
    Contact SSDEVO::HUGHES for membership  Contact TSE::NEDER for
    Membership  Contact RICKS::CMILLER for Membership  Contact
    BTOVT::JPETERS for membership  Contact PSYCHE::DMCLURE for membership 
    Contact JRDV06::NAKAYAMA for membership  Contact CLT::GOOD for
    membership  Contact INDUCE::FINNERTY for membership  Contact
    A1VAX::WOOD for membership  Contact NULL::BHAVSAR for membership 
    Contact RAINBO::CANNOY for membership  Contact IMOKAY::DESMOND for
    membership  Contact KBOMFG::POST for membership  Contact HDLITE::BURNS
    for membership  Contact TPWEST::JOVAN for membership  Contact
    TPWEST::JOVAN for membership  Contact TPWEST::JOVAN for membership 
    Contact GR8FUL::WHITE for membership Contact DELNI::FORTEN for
    membership  Contact MILPND::CANSLER for membership  Contact
    VOGON::CAMPBELL for Membership  Contact PEKING::BECKC for membership
    Contact NUTMEG::LYMAN for Membership 

    nope,
    
    The general public can *join*, they just have to *ask*. This 
    prevents causal homophobic people from 'cruising the file' 
    just to find out who is a member.
    
    Glen's .104 statement is not bogus, or wrong, but you may have
    misunderstood the difference between a file where any one can
    read if they ask to, and a file where any one can read by
    adding it to their note book.
    
    Do you understand the need for privacy in such a file?
    
    Bonnie

    For the record, this is what Glen replied to a claim that the
    file was exclusive:
    
    
"	The file is open to anyone. A lot of hets write in it. It's not
"exclusive at all. It's about gay issues. "
    
    
    This statement is, as I said, neither bogus or wrong and I don't
    feel it is misrepresentative. I do understand that someone who
    didn't understand the nature of a members only file might have
    misunderstood however.

    
    
    re: .last
    
    	You're wrong (after I read your statement several times and finally
    was able to parse it).  The gay notes file IS open to everyone who
    requests membership.  But the membership requirement makes it
    considerably more difficult for any random person (who happens to
    dislike gays, say) to get into the conference, get a listing of
    participants, and make life miserable for those people.  The same thing
    could happen even in a membership only conference -- but any member who
    breaks the confidentiality rules of the conference will be expelled
    from the conference and (possibly) subject to personnel action.  
    
    	Anyone may request membership -- they just have to play by the
    rules!
    
    	Greg
    
    *******************************************
    
    	

    
    
    Whoops, Bonnie and I are stepping on each other's toes!  My .136 does
    NOT refer to .135, but rather, to .134.
    
    	Hi, Bonnie!!!!
    
    

    Hi Back, ;-)

    
    
    Well, Herb, as a person who makes his "living" via communicating,
    usually oral but often written, I find, most often that if people will
    take a couple of minutes (seconds) to read their intended message
    before actually shipping it off to be written into the conference they
    will find a re-write is in order.  Poorly written notes inhibit
    communication.  My intent is to communicate that.
    
    

    George
    
    It *is* open, you just have to ask to join. You don't have to prove
    you are gay friendly. Just write the contact person. Some files
    you have to prove you have the condition the file is organized for
    (epilepsy & alcoholism I believe) or are in a relationship with
    some one who is.
    
    Glen's statement was entirely correct. The file is open to anyone
    who asks to join and is not exclusive.
    
    Bonnie

I would appreciate it if detailed discussions of the policies of other
conferences occured by mail with the moderators of those conferences, and
not here.

As for the discussion on AIDS, perhaps it could be moved to another topic;
I don't quite see the relevance to the base note.

Thanks.

				Steve

    Wow! You unlocked it!:) Gee, now I know what its like to get
    shut off at happy hour.....:) 

    
    
    Back to the topic at hand:
    
    There are members of this conference who would just as soon gay people
    not participate (or at least not if they identify themselves as gay).
    
    I don't understand why this is.  I believe most people still live with
    a stereotypic view of what gay people are (especially how non-gay men
    view gay men).  I know very, very, very few gay men that match that
    stereotype.  What's the issue?  Ask me questions.  I'll answer.
    
    And, by the why, those of "you" who sent me the mail requesting me to
    "get the f**k out of the conference" and to "f**king go to hell" and
    who referred to various characteristics of my lineage -- the messages
    have been filed away for future use.  
    
    If you want frank, honest discussion, I'm open for it.  God know I LOVE
    a good intelligent argument.  I'm open to new ideas as to how gay
    people can fit in with the larger world.  You simply have to be open to
    some of the same ideas -- or at least the discussion of them.
    
    	Greg  

    
    
    Actually, I wasn't refering to this exchange, but to a previous
    exchange between myself and another person.  I though your note was
    kind of funny.  I've been called lots of things before, but never an
    "old school marm".  As a former high school teacher, college professor,
    and current ed. serv. instructor, it's somehow appropriate.
    
    	GJD

    
    >>re
    >><there are members of this conference who would just as soon gay people
        ^
        |-------- My first mistake in Q1 8-)!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    >><not participate (or at least not if they identify themselves as gay)
    
    >>Is there ANYBODY out there who believes or feels that?
    
    	Herb, if it was allowed I'd forward copies of the mail messages I
    have received stating exactly such beliefs.  In fact, I believe if you
    look back at some of the notes earlier in this string (if they're still
    there) comments were made to that end.  
    
    	GJD

RE: .130


	Boy, you leave to do work and all hell breaks out! :-) 


| If it is so open as you have pointed out that IT is, why are you
| so reluctant to publish it in the file? 

	Because the guidelines state this. If I don't follow the guidelines,
then I will more than likely be kicked out. 

| And why do I have to contact a person to read? 

	To prevent homophobes from exposing people because of who they are.
There are many people who would love to do that!

| Guess its not so open as you wish us to believe.

	I see what you are implying, and I really expected it. In your second
mail message to me you stated how you really would like to get to know about
gay people, but I guess all you're really interested in is to prove a point,
and nothing else. Hmmm.... maybe tomorrow I'll post the message you sent me.
Would that be ok? After all, if you are as sincere as you say you are, it
should be alright. So how about it?

| Walls Steve Lionel? Whose walls are we talking about now? 

	There is a difference between protective walls and walls that shut
people out. Protective walls have a door so you can enter and leave, while
walls that shut people out have no such things. You can enter, but first you
have to knock, identify yourself, and then you will be let in. Is that really
so bad for someone who is supposed to be interested in learning about how gay
people tick?

RE: 133


| But Bonnie, it would be considered closed to the general public unlike
| this file or the womans file or the one on what ever else. So Glens
| .104 statment is bogus, wrong, and misrepresents himself.

	No, what has happened is in your mind you have viewed it this way. If
you can gain access, how is that a problem? How have I misrepresented myself?
I'm curious.

	My offer still stands, do I have your permission to put your letter to
me in here?


Glen

Re: .152
 
> Bate the homophobe???  must be working to at 150+ 

Oh if we only could "bate" the homophobes out there.
    
> Conferences for members only seem to me to have obvious implications 
> of why they are restricted. For example, specific work related items or 
> a very emotionally charged and private conference like alcholisim and such
> that you must show cause to join.

You seem to agree that homosexuality is "very emotionally charged" since you 
seem to be pretty riled up about it.

> Since as noted before the gay notes conference does not ask if you 
> are gay friendly to be a member, then it would seem to me it is 
> private only to take names and enforce some control over what is
> written.

You have no idea. I am a moderator and a contact person for the file. Would you
like to *know* 1) why it is restricted and 2) what the "requirements" are?

> Is this because:
> a. Some gays want to have a conference but do not want to be out.

That's right. There are some gays who work for Digital who don't believe it is
safe for them to be "out" in their groups. There are gays who work for Digital
who don't believe that they are safe. There are in fact gays at Digital who
won't even join a restricted conference BECAUSE we don't exclude non-gays -
they feel that that makes it an unsafe environment for them. That is the
primary reason for restricting the conference. Some people still stigmatize
bi's, gays, and lesbians, and so some bi's, gays, and lesbians prefer to keep
the fact private.

> b. Gay's in digital believe that the standards of conduct which are 
>    used in open notes files would not be applied to them.

Hah! You should try being a moderator for a few days. You'd get a rather
different view of the world. Our standards are actually significantly stricter
in many ways than unrestricted conferences.

> c. Used to control as in this notes as in shall I show the world the email
>    I just got!!!

It *is* used to control. One of the requirements for joining is that you not
be abusive about gays in the gay notesfile. Without restriction our only option
for dealing with abusive behavior would be administrative. While we can, and
have, gone that route, we feel that it is much more pleasant all around to
have a wider range of options. The gay notesfiles are places where gays do not
have to constantly justify their existance and lives to people.

> In any event there must be a reason, I expect its not a pleasant one 
> and it's probably very unique as to why other conferences are restricted.

Wrong. What possibly could your imagination have produced as the "unpleasant
reason" that the conference was restricted? My mind boggles.

> And maybe I really don't need to know, but I can't see such a knee jerk
> reaction to a fact.

The "knee jerk" reaction is to the unkind speculation and innuendo, not to any
"fact."

> The difference between this conference and the gay conference is the gay
> conference IS restricted. To represent it any other way is just not valid.

You have no idea, and all of the people who DO have any idea are telling you
that you're wrong. The only requirements for joining the Bisexual, Gay, and
Lesbian notesfile are:

	1) ask
	2) agree to respect the confidentiality of the file and members
	3) agree to not be abusive
	4) agree not to note from a pseudonym without the knowlege of the mods

Note that you don't have to be Bi, Gay, or Lesbian, or even supportive to be
a member. You do have to be polite, and to respect other peoples' privacy.

Pretty sinister, no?

	-- Charles

.153
 
 You misread my note. I simply think discrimination is an unpleasant
(read unfortunate) reason to restrict a conference. 
 But what I want to know is how do you infer that I am riled about 
homosexuality, and I don't care who writes in an open conference as long 
a they maintain reasonable standard of conduct. And not my standard
or yours alone!!! 
 Consider this, I think you read only what you wanted to because
you believe me to be homophobic. 

.153

> You misread my note. I simply think discrimination is an unpleasant
> (read unfortunate) reason to restrict a conference.

That, however, is NOT what you said, nor what you implied. If that is indeed
what you meant then we agree. There are no "fortunate" reasons for
restricting a conference.

> But what I want to know is how do you infer that I am riled about
> homosexuality, 

Because you protest too much.

> and I don't care who writes in an open conference as long they maintain
> reasonable standard of conduct. And not my standard or yours alone!!!

How tolerant of you. Personally I think everyone in notes should live up
to my standard of conduct and no other. To claim otherwise is self negating.

> Consider this, I think you read only what you wanted to because
> you believe me to be homophobic.

Tolerant AND psychic, my my you ARE talented.

I responded to your written words, at length, specifically, and in detail.
I suggest you do the same.

	-- Charles

John, Charles, good replies. I couldn't have said it any better.


RE: .152


| -< an open mind gets filled >-

	Your title says it all. The only thing is that the mind has got to be
opened first.

| I guess this string sure looks like a witch hunt to me.

	No witch hunt, it's just when someone comes off as being supportive,
and then turns the tables to suit his needs, to make a point, it has to make
one wonder just where this person is coming from.

| Bate the homophobe???  must be working to at 150+

	Actually, no one called him a homophobe. What lead you to believe he
is?

| Conferences for members only seem to me to have obvious implications
| of why they are restricted. For example, specific work related items or
| a very emotionally charged and private conference like alcholisim and such
| that you must show cause to join.
| Since as noted before the gay notes conference does not ask if you
| are gay friendly to be a member, then it would seem to me it is
| private only to take names and enforce some control over what is
| written.

	It has always amazed me how someone can come to a conclusion without
really looking at the subject? You have taken how you view us, put that into
why the conference is restricted, and then call it control. I'm sorry you feel
this way, especially when you haven't taken any time to find out any real
facts. When the real facts are stated to you in here from both the gay and
heterosexual worlds, from people who know, you reject them and stick to your
own conclusions which are based on no fact. I'm sorry you feel this way.

| c. Used to control as in this notes as in shall I show the world the email
| I just got!!!

	That's not control. The person in question has appeared sincere in
getting some information. Then they took that information and twisted it into
his own way of thinking, which is all based on conclusions and no facts (sound
familiar?). If he is as sincere as he says he is, why not allow me to post it?
Why in e-mail there is one version of this person and in this notesfile there
is another?

| My question: Is it a bad thing to have values that are different or does
| valuing differences mean changing one values.

	It's not bad to have values that are different. That's what makes us
all unique. But I always thought that valuing differences was to value the
other persons differences, even when it doesn't agree with yours (as long as
the differences aren't going to hurt anyone). That's how I view it anyway. Just
how do you view valuing differences?



Glen

    
    I am truly sorry to read that some noters receive hate mail
    because of their participation here. I think that sucks!!!
    
    For a while I too had grown tired of mn. Not sure why.
    Lately it seemed to have increased activity, from all men,
    and I found that encouraging. I hope it continues and
    I hope all men feel welcome here. Personally, I just wish
    I had more time to note.
    
    						Hank
    
    ps. George,....regards!

    Hank,
    
    	How have you been fella! When you stopping by to workout in the ol
    Cruel Spa? Glad to see you here in the note. 
    
    
    
    George
    

    In reguards to Glen, go ahead Glen. I am sincere about meeting with you
    or others. I am a het who wishs to help bring down the walls. And if
    sometimes it means butting heads like we are in this file. So be it.
    Let the games being!:) Stop by MK01 as I have pointed out and coffie
    will be on me. No, Not poored on me, I'll buy. Can never turn down free
    coffie. 
    
    Insofar as walls, and knowing someone. As you have pointed out that you
    realize what my point made was about, you can see where many hets, like
    self, become paronic. And because it become paronic, we ALL start name
    calling, finger pointing, and general bad mouthing. No one can put a
    finger on it, its like a bomb, it goes off, everyone gets victumize by
    it and the worst part of all is that we, as a company do not work as a
    team anymore. WE work agianst eachother. Like tribal nations, and
    fedual warlords. When we must stop, think of each other with respect.
    For if we do not heade these words we will perrish as a company. As a
    society and thats a terrible thing to happen. YOU dont have to be a
    WASP to discriminate. And that is really the is going on here. 
    
    Peace.

    Hello,
    
    	I think that the definition given to VALUING DIFFERENCE seems to be
    unclear:
    	It appears that for some noters it deals with the DIFFERENCE
    compared to the majority's norm , and for other noters it is the
    DIFFERENCE of each individual: who is each of us and what each of us is
    interested in...
    
    	I understood it as valuing individual difference, but by reading
    these replies I discovered that it could also be interpreted the other
    way.
    	Could you give us more information on the real goals of VALUING
    DIFFERENCES .
    
    	Thank you!
    
    THIERRY

.148> <there are members of this conference who would just as soon gay people
.148> <not participate (or at least not if they identify themselves as gay)
.148>     
.148>     Is there ANYBODY out there who believes or feels that?

Isn't this like asking for all felons to please make their identity known
to the local authorities?

Bubba

| Isn't this like asking for all felons to please make their identity known
| to the local authorities?

	Jerry, that made my day! ;-) Believe me, I need that laugh. :-)


Glen

| In reguards to Glen, go ahead Glen. I am sincere about meeting with you
| or others. I am a het who wishs to help bring down the walls. And if
| sometimes it means butting heads like we are in this file. So be it.
| Let the games being!:) 

	I'm glad to hear that. I REALLY am. :-)

| Stop by MK01 as I have pointed out and coffie
| will be on me. No, Not poored on me, I'll buy. Can never turn down free
| coffie.

	Coffee does strange things to me. Oh, even if I could drink it, I doubt
I would pour it on you. But thanks for the idea! ;-) As far as going to MK0, I
don't know how soon that will ever happen. I doubt my boss would let me out for
coffee, never mind in MKO! :-) Maybe in the future.

| Insofar as walls, and knowing someone. As you have pointed out that you
| realize what my point made was about, you can see where many hets, like
| self, become paronic. 

	I understand why, mainly because I was there myself before, but now,
even though I see the reason, I can also see a solution. Communication is the
first step towards bridging the gap. The gap is caused mostly by the way
society views others. They catagorize them, put them in their respective groups
and then stamp them good or bad, stereotyped until someone actually tries to
find out if what society is saying is actually true, or just a misconception.
I'm happy that you're willing to look for yourself.

Glen

    The following reply has been contributed by a member of our community
    who wishes to remain anonymous.  If you wish to contact the author by
    mail, please send your message to QUARK::MODERATOR, specifying the
    conference name and note number. Your message will be forwarded with
    your name attached  unless you request otherwise.

				Steve






.94> Being "gay" is a large part of my life -- just like being straight is a
.94> large part of "your" life.  It colors the way I think, the way I
.94> perceive the world, etc....Some of "you" have trouble with that --
.94> I guess that's too bad!

.165> They catagorize them, put them in their respective groups and then
.165> stamp them good or bad, stereotyped until someone actually tries to
.165> find out if what society is saying is actually true, or just a
.165> misconception. I'm happy that you're willing to look for yourself.

Perhaps some comment is warranted here.  There are those who feel that
being "gay" is indeed a large part of their life and it colors (effects?)
the way they think and perceive the world.  I am relatively positive that
this person (in .94) is simply stating HIS opinion on HIS sexuality and
how hit effects HIS day-to-day life and it is not intended to be any sort of
"community" statement.  That's fine, we each have our own perspectives
on things like this and I certainly respect his.  I'm sure that there
are a number of other homosexuals who have the same perspective on their
sexuality.

However, the straight world should keep in mind that there is also a large
number of "us" (homosexual, gay, queer, etc....) who perceive our sexuality
to be just one part, perhaps an insignificant part, of our life.  It is not
the dominate factor, not the determining factor for the way we think, not the
determining factor for the stores we go to, the movies we go to, the events
we attend, the books we read, the candidates that we vote for, the conferences
we participate in, or, indeed, our friends and associates.

For myself, there are many MANY factors to be considered in my personality
before "gay".  Some people put "gay" first.  I don't.  I ask that you do
not judge me, or others, as a "gay" individual, but, as an individual who's
personality has many other attributes.  Sure, it's a natural human tendency,
brought on by today's "society" to judge a person FIRST by his/her sexuality
and some gays WANT it that way.  I don't.  A lot of others don't.

If you want to know if I'm gay, just ask (privately, not in some public
forum).  It's certainly not something that I'm ashamed of, but, I simply
want to be judged FIRST as an individual and will do all that is in my
power to assure that.

Also, just because I'm of an "alternate sexual persuasion" do not assume that
I automatically share the values and/or political statements made by what is
called the "gay community".  I don't.

I am in individual and am a member of a large collection of individuals
called human beings.  Don't put me, or others, in some "niche" just because
of one facet of my being - please.

Thank you for listening.

    (I think I know the person who wrote the previous note.  This same
    discussion has been "had" in the gay notes file.  It wasn't resolved
    there, and probably won't be.)
    
    >>I am relatively positive that this person (in .94) is simply stating
    >>HIS opinion on HIS sexuality and how hit effects HIS day-to-day life
    >>and it is not intended to be any sort of "community" statement.  
    	
    	Absolutely.  And you knew that.
    

    >>However, the straight world should keep in mind that there is also a
    >>large number of "us" (homosexual, gay, queer, etc....) who perceive our
    >>sexuality to be just one part, perhaps an insignificant part, of our
    >>life.  It is not the dominate factor, not the determining factor for
    >>the way we think, not the determining factor for the stores we go to,
    >>the movies we go to, the events we attend, the books we read, the
    >>candidates that we vote for, the conferences we participate in, or,
    >>indeed, our friends and associates.
    
    	Of course.  I don't personally understand a person who doesn't seem
    to realize that they are seen as a pervert, a reject, a morally
    reprehensible person, an "abomination", etc., because of an
    "insignificant" part of their life.  Specifically, I don't understand
    how such a person can remain quiet and willing to deal with the status
    quo which is, rather significantly, anti-gay.
    

    >>For myself, there are many MANY factors to be considered in my
    >>personality before "gay".  Some people put "gay" first.  I don't.  I
    >>ask that you do not judge me, or others, as a "gay" individual, but, as
    >>an individual who's personality has many other attributes.  Sure, it's
    >>a natural human tendency, brought on by today's "society" to judge a
    >>person FIRST by his/her sexuality and some gays WANT it that way.  I
    >>don't.  A lot of others don't.

    	Exactly.  But, Mr. Anonymous, the issue (IMO) is that many people,
    once they "find out" someone is gay, immediately seem to dismiss as
    invalid any opinions that person has.  It is as if we (gay people) as
    expected to not identify ourselves as gay when the situation (imo)
    indicates that that fact is relevant to the discussion.  For example,
    in an earlier note in this conference (the "compliments" note) I (and
    Gerry) made the comment that we liked receiving compliments from and
    give compliments to our "boy friends".  We caught all sorts of crap for
    that?  Why?  Should we have left it ambiguous as to our sexuality?  If
    we had, people would have immediately assumed we were non-gay.  Would
    you like it if some ambiguous situation left people assuming that you
    were gay?  I think not.
    
    >>If you want to know if I'm gay, just ask (privately, not in some public
    >>forum).  It's certainly not something that I'm ashamed of, but, I
    >>simply want to be judged FIRST as an individual and will do all that is
    >>in my power to assure that.
    
    	If a person asks you, will you REALLY be honest and answer them? 
    Or will you answer only if it's "convenient" and your career isn't in
    danger.  

    >>Also, just because I'm of an "alternate sexual persuasion" do not
    >>assume that I automatically share the values and/or political
    >>statements made by what is called the "gay community".  I don't.

    	Nor do I share all the views of the gay community.  The gay
    community is a group of human beings which have very, very diverse
    opinions on all issues.  The only gay people I have no time for are
    those which, through their being closeted, hurt the gay community.
    I don't think all closeted gay people are buttheads.  There are some
    which are and are deserving of scorn.  Of course, there are people that
    think the same of me.  It's a fact I think they probably can deal with
    and that I know I can deal with.

| And it will be much easier for ME to judge you as a man/human/mensch if you
| don't encumber our interractions with subordinate issues like your
| orientation.
| But, if you try and keep trying to foist your orientation upon me, my
| hackles are going to rise, and you are going to make it more and more
| difficult for us to have any kind of an interraction except an adversarial
| one.

	If a subject deals with a relationship, and hets use wives and
girlfriends for terminology, why would you expect someone who is gay to not
mention his boyfriend? How is that foisting our orientation on you? If it is,
does that mean when you talk about a wife or girlfriend you are in essence
foisting your orientation on us? If so, why is that version ok but not ours?


Glen

>I would say that my first agenda was to come in here to teach the
>ingorant hets a lesson.  Blast 'em.  The way it would usually work is
>that we gay folk would hear about an "antigay" discussion going on in
>some file (it wasn't just MENNOTES, it was SOAPBOX and a few other
>places, too), and then individuals would go into the file and blast
>away. 

Gee could be........

 

    RE: .-1

    It's called the "sea gull" noters.

    Bubba

| you said...
| <why would you expect someone who is gay to not mention his boyfriend? How

| What causes you to ask that question? There is nothing in my statement
| that could cause one to reasonably infer that I believe that.

	On numerous occasions it has been asked to explain just what is meant
by throwing (or foistering) our orientation at you means. No one has really
answered. From reading notes, whenever anyone mentions the word boyfriend,
that's one instance where people start ratholing a topic. That's one time where
people ask why are we bringing up our orientation. This is why I connected the
two. 

| It looks to me that you may for some reason want to change the
| conversation to something else. If that _is_ true, why do you find it
| necessary to distort what i said?

	Herb, why not give us all as many examples that you can about how we
foist our orientation upon you. This will clear the whole thing up, right?


Glen

| I don't believe that you are so stupid as to believe that is necessary
| for me to give specific examples. Therefore I find it necessary to
| conclude -and resent-  that you are trying to bait me into an argument
| on your terms by trying to change the nature of this discussion. 

	No baiting going on here. But maybe in your eyes it's stupid for me to
ask for examples. But, I keep hearing that we foister our orientation, and I'd
just like to know how. Also, by examples, I don't mean you have to quote
anyone's notes, but to just give examples of how someone is foistering. Take
this for example:

	Last night my boyfriend and I.... blah blah blah....

	Would that be considered foistering?

| When I reacted to Gerry Fisher, I reacted to the entire set of
| communications he made, not one specific communication. At that time, i
| stated that 34 out of his last 100 replies contained reference to his
| orientation. I also stated that I found that excessive, and that I
| concluded he was in a campaign to "badger this conference into
| submission" new words but not a bad metaphor (but only a metaphor)

	If you were in the gay conference, and you were putting in notes about
whoever you're seeing, I don't anyone would feel that it's excessive, and I'm
sure no one would feel you were badgering the conference into submission. I
know you have heard this many times before, but whenever you mention who you
are seeing, you yourself are in essence letting people know you are
heterosexual. If we went thru your notes, would the number be greater than 34
out of 100? The whole point is that it really shouldn't matter. 

Glen

    

    >>You have fortified my conclusion that you are not worth talking to.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>				herb

    	Or that maybe YOU, Herb, aren't really interested in hearing any
    discussion that doesn't meet with your personal agenda.  Your personal,
    agenda, as I see it, is to NEVER have any reference to homosexuality
    made in this conference.  YOU are the one who in the earlier discussion
    said that YOU resented the fact that I made reference to being gay.
    You, Herb, can not be "talked to".  You, Herb, might want to remove
    yourself from this conversation because it is OBVIOUS to anyone listing
    (reading) that your mind is closed to the issue.  
    
    	I'm disgusted..............................
    
              GJD
    

I'd appreciate it if people could stop the personal insults and name-calling.

Thanks.

				Steve

    Well, Herb, anger isn't such a bad thing to "feel", on occasion.  In
    fact, it's how I often feel when I read your notes.  8-), kind of.

    I really don't understand where you're coming from, and I've tried,
    through what you've said in this conference and through our off-line
    discussions to get a peek into your side of things.

    I'll set up the scenario very simply.  I only ask that you answer the
    questions -- yes or no is sufficient.

    ================

    An earlier note asked about "compliments":
    
    >>Do you like to be told that you're good looking by your
    >>girlfriend/wife?  How do you take compliments from her.  Do you
    >>believe her?  How often do you compliment her?  In private? in public?
    >>What if you don't give her compliments, why not?
    
    
    	I responded:
    
    >>The man I'm seeing right now frequently calls and leaves wonderful
    >>little messages on my machine (both at home and at work) like "you're
    >>cute", "you looked great when you left this a.m.", etc.  They always
    >>make my day.  I reciprocate, as well.
    
    >>     Greg
    
    
    	Is this "foisting" my sexuality?  I only ask a "yes" or "no"?
    
    **********************************************************************
    
    And, by the way, I have given up all attempts at having you "accept"
    homosexuality as healthy, alternative lifestyle.  You've made it
    abundantly clear that you will never "see things" that way. You resent
    (your word, not mine) my "gay" presence  in this notes file.  I suppose
    the appropriate response is "tough"; I'm not going away and I'm not
    going to be quiet just because you (and a limited other few members)
    wish me to.  The mail I have received has OVERWHELMINGLY been in
    support of my presence in this conference.  You opinion seems to be in
    the minority (based on my mail sample only).
    
    The difference, as I see it, is that I'm willing to discuss openly
    and honestly, with anyone who reciprocates openly and honestly, the
    issues at hand.  I don't see that from you Herb.  I see a person who
    reacts to the word "gay" or "homosexual" in a manner which appears to
    be totally irrational.  I'd like to understand why that's the case. 
    Wouldn't you?  
    
    What are you afraid of?  What are you going to do someday if one of
    your children announces to you that they are gay?  Have you even
    considered that?  Just because they happen to get married and even have
    children, that doesn't mean that at some point in time in the future
    they might not realize what they have repressed for years and years and
    decide to "come out" and be who they really are.  It seems that if such
    a situation were to occur, you have three possible responses.
    
    	1.  You can say "so what" and continue to love them (and their
    	    same sex partner) unconditionally.
    
    	2.  You can say "so what", but refuse to discuss it and refuse to
    	    acknowledge the legitimacy of their relationship (this is the
    	    choice my parents made)
    
    	3.  You can say "blast off" and remove them from your life (this is
            pretty much the decision my brother and his wife have made).
    
    What would you do?  (Or what do you THINK you would do?)  (I realize
    this who situation is purely rhetorical, but if more parents would
    think about "gay" issues from the perspective that it really might be
    the case that their child could be gay rather than from the perspective
    that "my child could never be gay", there would be considerably more
    mentally-healthy, and therefore physically healthy, young gay people on
    this earth.)
    
    	I await your response.
    
    	    Greg -- who's NOT going away

 Snap!

    
    
    
    ...and of course, none of the questions (politely and seriously) asked
    were answered.
    
    	Sorry, very sorry indeed.
    
    	And trust me, somehow the idea that you don't wish to associate
    with me isn't going to cause me to lose any sleep.  
    
    	I'm sure the gay men you have associated with are fine, wonderful
    men.  They also happen to behave in a way which you don't find
    offensive.  I don't happen to think that I should have to modify my
    behavior to suit you or anyone else for that matter.  Herb, grow up!
    
    	Greg

| I feel _you_ are trying to bait me as well.

	Herb, all anyone is asking for is for you to tell us how you feel. In
this note you have said that you wish not to do this. You answered our
questions the best way you knew how. 

| My personal opinions on homosexuality are irrelevant. 

	I can't believe this to be true. You have stated that there are things
you don't like, things you don't want to hear. For some, you have not told us
what you don't like (specifically), and the only thing you mentioned you didn't
want to hear was a generalzation. It's fine if you don't wish to discuss it,
but then please do just that, don't discuss it. You keep throwing your opinions
around, but when asked about them it turns out that we're just baiting you.
Maybe your views won't match ours, but at least we would know where you're
coming from.

| However, if I feel that somebody is making excessive reference to
| ANYTHING, I am going to express my opinion.

	Just offhand, besides the subject of homosexuality, what other topics
where someone is making any sort of excessive reference have you written about?
This is not a bait, but a serious question. What other subjects would you not
want to hear?

| That is what would motivate me to react to all sorts of persistent
| badgering. I don't like being evangelized!
| As i already have said, i am _beginning_ to question the motives of people
| who persist in addressing THIS matter.

	To ask why you feel the way you do is going to make you wonder what
people's motives are? Why?

| I trust my feelings. If I feel somebody is doing something that I find
| offensive, then I am going to express my feelings in as intelligent and
| careful a manner as I can.

	Herb, that's what you should be doing. If something bothers you, tell
someone. But what you seem to be doing is complaining, then when someone asks
what's up, you duck out. I'm sorry you do this. I wish you were more like the
person in the above paragraph.

| There are lots of issues men have that could unite us. 

	Such as........

| You seem to
| insist on addressing issues that succeed in dividing us.

	Such as.......

	I hope to get a response, but I know, you will only feel that I am
baiting you. I wish you wouldn't feel this way, as all I want to know is how
you feel. You complain about a lot of things, but you don't ever explain why.



Glen

    Herb,
    
    Any chance you're related to General George Custer?  Have you ever
    visited the Little Big Horn? :-)
    
    Bubba
    

.168> ...the status quo which is, rather significantly, anti-gay.
    
.168> ..in an earlier note in this conference ... I  ...made the comment
.168> that we liked receiving compliments from and give compliments to
.168> our "boy friends".  We caught all sorts of crap for that...

.181> The mail I have received has OVERWHELMINGLY been in support of my
.181> presence in this conference.

Help me to understand a "significantly anti-gay" status quo and catching
"all sorts of crap" along with OVERWHELMING support for your presence
in this conference.  Maybe I missed something in the translation.

Bubba

    
    
>>Help me to understand a "significantly anti-gay" status quo and catching
>>"all sorts of crap" along with OVERWHELMING support for your presence
>>in this conference.  Maybe I missed something in the translation.
    
    	The "significantly anti-gay" does NOT refer to this conference.
    
    	The catching "all sorts of crap" refers mainly to the off-line mail
    messages I received (and referred to in another note) making in quite
    clear that my comments and presence were NOT welcome.
    
    	The "OVERWHELMING" support (perhaps an over-estimate) refers to the
    even larger number of off-line mail messages thanking me for my
    continued presence and contribution in this conference and others.
    
    **********************************
    
    	Herb, all I'm asking is for you to answer the questions presented.
    I await your answer(s).
    
    		Greg
    

    
    
    In other words, you've said all you're going to say?
    
    

    .191> -< op. cit. >-
    
    Herb be a man of few words.  Short.  Eloquent.  A flair for the
    international (Latin) ... yet ... unheard.  Hummmm.  Meybe dey don'
    spoke dat good English, Herb.
    
    Beauregard

    RE: .-1
    
    Do we allow "instant replay" in this one?
    
    Nah .... forget it ... the Raiders and the Cowboys last night was
    better .. I'll just wait for next Monday's game ...
    
    Bubba

    YEAH!   Football is finally back...I hate baseball!
    
    
    
                                    L.J.

Or maybe you all should just drop it for now, huh?  There's no law that
requires you to keep at it until the disk fills up.  There's always
MAIL for one-on-one discussions.

				Steve

Sure I'll play, What side The NY hets of course, and the bi's can be 
the umpires, and the homophobic's can be the scorekeepers...
with Geroge on our side we'll need all the help we can get.

    By the way, does anyone know of a lesbian notes conference that's open
    to non-lesbian, interested readers?
    
    Alice T.

| Well if Herb doesn't want to play what does anyone else think? 

	I think I'll play! It should be a good time. It will let people
"really" see who is behind the words. It's too bad Herb won't play. I think it
would be fun. Also, it might be hard for Greg to be a capitan, as he lives in
the mid west.

| Good way
| to get together with "NO" threats to eachother? A good clean game of
| ball with only a friendly handshake before and after the game? 

	Sounds good to me!

| I will play on the hets side.

	Would it be any other way? ;-) Great idea on the game! 


Glen

Re: .206

I'm sorry, George, but I have no idea what you're trying to say.  But seeing
as how Herb has opted out of the discussion, perhaps it can continue with
those who are interested.

Re: .208

From EASYNOTES.LIS:

Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual Employees  Contact RANGER::LLEE or WSL::HAYNES for
membership.

It is open to all who ask, as has been noted previously.

			Steve

Re: .205

> There's always MAIL for one-on-one discussions.

Not true Steve. Herb has asked many people not to interact with him in mail, for
us the only avenue to respond to him at all is Notes - or sitting on our hands.

I find the latter to be by far the more productive use of my time.

	-- Charles

    
    
    I would like to continue the "conversation", but work has gone
    ballistic -- I'll be read only (if that) for the next several days.
    Have fun!
    
    	Greg

Re: .211

Since Herb has stated here that he does not wish to discuss the matter further,
I would recommend you take him at his word.  As you say, there are more
productive ways of spending one's time.

			Steve

	So, seeing the discussion with Herb is going by the wayside, who else
is interested in playing softball in September? I think George had a great idea
on how to bridge the gap (or make an attempt) and maybe understand each other's
positions a little better by getting to know the person, not the label. Then it
might be easier to see that we aren't always pushing our agenda as some people
have stated. :-)



Glen

    I'll play. It's been twenty years since I swung a bat or caught a fly
    ball, however, so I'll probably have a flashback and break out in acne.

    GREAT! Another for the games!!!

    ..what about a paintball match (used to be called the "survival game")?
    
    

    That could be fun too!:) But, the baseball is less of a threat to each
    other. 

| -< Why softball? >-

	Softball might be better as it's just a casual type-o-thing. Maybe you
can swing out to the right coast in September to play!!!????



Glen

.220> Maybe you can swing out to the right coast in September to play!!!????

I flew to New England for a SOAPBOX party in March ... also just returned
from three weeks in New England ... my visa has now expired and I'd have
to go through the paperwork with the Republic of Texas to insure that my
citizenship is not revoked for too many trips to Yankee territory. However,
if I do find myself up in that part of the country at that time ... I'll
be more than happy to stop by and give you Yankees a good whoppin' ...
fur' sure.

Bubba

    No doubt about it. Us yankee's need a whop'en! So the invite stands!
    
    

.222> Us yankee's need a whop'en!  So the invite stands!

    You know ... with an invitation like that ... I may just use some of
    the frequent flier mileage that I have ... hop a plane and come up
    there show y'all how real men play baseball ...

    Bubba

    O.K.! Put your money where your frequent flier points are!!!:) PLAY
    BALL!!! 

    I would love it, Jerry, if you would drive up in your pick-up, so we
    could get the full effect.

.225> I would love it, Jerry, if you would drive up in your pick-up, so we
.225> could get the full effect.

Look for a red Ford step-side pickup truck ... gun rack in the back with
a .22 and a .30-.30 Winchester ... there's a Stetson straw hat on the
front seat ... a .357 under the seat.  Some alfalfa hay on the floor.

As for me ... 5'9", 175#, glasses, the haircut of a discriminating United
States Marine Corps officer ... the name on the back of my jeans says "Levi"
- not some fancy-dan "status" jeans.  The cowboy boots are Lucchese ... I'll
wear the elephant ... they're RUGGED.  The belt is Lucchese (probably lizard)
and the big belt buckle has the Seal of the State of Texas on it.  There may
or may not be Winston or Marlboro in the pocket of my Panhandle Slim cowboy
shirt ... I'm trying to get rid of the things.  The language is the giveaway
... I tend to speak with a "southern" accent ... now ... you still want me
up there?

Sorry, but in all seriousness I can't make it ... for a party, yes, I'd
probably use my frequent flier .. but for what could be a touchie-feelie
mind game - y'all have fun.

Now, on my next trip up there ... let's have what we in the south called a
"Meet Jesus" meeting ... that is to say ... a beer or twenty ... C&W music,
lots of yackin' and two-steppin' .. finally you get so bombed you ... 
"see Jesus" ... then ... pilgrim ... you gotta deal!

Bubba

    No mind games, just a ball game. Nothing more nothing less. Both teams
    play a fair game, no name calling, no bat bouncing, no discussions of
    shop. Just a game. All hands to home, no touchie feel-iee. Just a
    glove, a bat, a swing and a hit to center field. And if the base is
    loaded on brew, who cares? Just a good game to promote good will amonst 
    Digitals troops. A game ment to break walls, to understand that we are
    all people and put our( pants/dress's/what evers ) on like every one
    else. One leg at a time, one step at a time, and thats as honest as
    it gets. I have my views about life as everyone else has theirs. They
    differ as anyone elses. Who cares? It just doesn't matter. Lets play
    ball! 

    And if it makes any difference, we will ban cameras. That way if
    someone is scared of something, they will not have to fear that phobia.
    

    Well, Jerry, I'll just have to head your way, then. I'm sort of
    planning a drive-about (U.S. version of the Australian walk-about) for
    next spring. If I can get the Buick Conestoga that far, maybe you can
    introduce me to your tailor, then teach me how to walk (swagger) and
    talk and dance the two-step. Then we'll go swill beer, pick up REAL
    women, etc. I think that would permanently blow out my political
    correctness fuses.

    ...come on Hoyt ... I'll take you to some of the most redneck bars that
    you've ever in your life seen ... my "tailor" is J.C. Penney, I'll put
    you on horseback for about 12 hours and he "swagger" is no problem ...
    you'll have to "cultivate" the language ... we can drink beer from
    sunrise to sunrise (DECwork notwithstanding) ... but be careful - the
    women out here are just as redneck as he men ... some even more so.
    Youah' PC days are offically *over* once you visit Beelersfield.
    
    Bubba
    
    PS - when ya' drive through Texas ... keep you grubby mits off of my
    daughters! :-)

    
    
    Pardon me while I blow chunks all over my new workstation.
    
    Give me a frickin' break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    	Greg

.230> ...women out here are just as redneck as he men ... some even more so.
                                               ^^
...should have read "as redneck as THE men".

I'm ah' goin' dancin' and drinkin' tonight ... mah' favorite redneck bar in
beautiful downtown (all two blocks of it) Taft, CA ... ya'll come!

Bubba

PS - eat your heart out you po' city folk.

    
    Re .231
    
    > Pardon me while I blow chunks all over my new workstation.
    
    Not valuing Bubba's redneck difference ? :-)
    
    Rich

 Not snobby enough I guess...

.234> Not snobby enough I guess...

    I had a croissant for breakfast this morning ... does that count?

    

    ...with jalapeno jelly.

    Bubba

	George! Have you found a field yet?



Glen

    Glen,
    
    	I have not got any responce from the hets nor the gays to make it
    work. So far just yourself and two others. Sorry kettle of fish, aint
    it. 

    I've now been called "heterosexist" for having mentioned pregnancy and
    birth control. My patience is exhausted. I fear I'm polluting this
    notes conference with strident views which seemingly strike resonance
    with NOBODY. It's more frustrating than fun. I'm really sick of having
    to hit "next unseen" because 90% of the energy in this conference is
    consumed by sequences like "I'M right!", "No, I'M right!", "No, I'M
    right!", ... I'm increasingly feeling like this is a dangerous place,
    where frank expressions is likely to incur CONTEMPT, rather than the
    thoughtful exploration I'd find helpful.
    
    And I cannot affront my demi-gods, Ray Davis and Charles Haynes.

    Hoyt,
    You're the one defending the "I'm right"ism of Herb.  Everyone else in
    this conference seems to be trying to get dialog going.  Why is it such
    a problem for you to have someone disagree with you?  Whenever I write
    a reply I get a few people on my side and a few people on the other
    side and some in the middle, and that suits me fine.  I LIKE to have
    people point out to me when I'm being heterosexist or male chauvinist
    or whatever.  It helps me become attuned to the people around me.
    The wounds I've received in the womannotes conference have helped me
    grow, helped me understand my wife and my daughters and the other women
    around me and helped me understand myself, my preconceived notions,
    my style of communicating, etc.  Same thing in this conference.  This
    conference is kind of a support group.  But support cuts both ways.
    You have to learn to accept the others in the group if you expect them to 
    accept you.  You can't come into a support group and state, "Okay, I
    want in, but I'm not putting up with any crap from you homosexuals and
    I expect you to listen to what I say without disagreeing with me or
    pointing out to me whem I'm being insensitive."
    
    					- Vick

 I understand that OSHA has rated Hoyt's back for two people only. As you
are the nth in line, please get off his back and take a number. Thank you. :-)

    Thanks, Mark.
    
    We need a lighter element from time to time.
    
    Still holding my number. (Missed the last call a few years ago.)
    
    ed

    This place used to be fun and informative.  Now it's become too much
    like the playgrounds of my childhood, echoing with the shouts and
    taunts - "Girls are better than boys!"  "Boys are better than girls!"
    
    I really don't need to be reminded of how our differences wait to
    transform into hostility at every turn and at the drop of every word so
    I'm outta here.
    
    Good luck.  See you around the network.