... and the new Will (who, truth be told, is getting a bit rusty) weighs in. I'm certain I outweigh the lot of you, so don't make me come over there. Regarding StuD's departure: I think it is bittersweet. On the one hand, it means I'll never get to see B&S's full lineup in concert. On the other hand, I'm sure I'm not the only one who saw it coming, and more Looper is perfectly ok with me. OK Regarding the big gay discussion: First: those of you who have seen fit to flame the bejeezus out of young mr. crystalballs, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Remember he's young yet. Second: Young mr. crystalballs, there is a reason that everyone you know who is older than you (particularly when you are in your teens, as your previous posts have indicated) eventually manages to indicate that you are too young to understand one thing or another. I know that it always sounds like a horrible slight to you, but it's true. No matter who has beaten you up or how many times, there is just some shit that takes you until you are older than you are now to really know what you think about it. Protest as much as you like, but I guarantee you that when you are 23, you will look back at your teens and think "man, I had some extraordinarily dumb thoughts when I was in my teens." Trust me. It happens to everyone and nobody thinks it will happen to them. What remains to be seen is whether or not your opinions on the present topic are among the thoughts/beliefs you are referring to when thinking that. (At this point, I have just reread the above, and realized that it's not only terribly awkward in terms of syntax, but also that it seems to be calling young chris stupid. Neither of these is my aim at all, I just don't know how to say it better). That said, consider how you would feel if someone said it was ok with them and with god if you were heterosexual, as long as you're not a PRACTICING heterosexual. THAT said, I applaud your choice not to leave the list. The list means a lot to me, as I'm sure it does to you, and you've been a contributing member of the list for far longer than I have, and you've certainly got just as much right as anyone else to continue to be. Furthermore, I like most of your posts. NOW. What I think about the whole damned mess, and what you should know about me before wondering where in the hell I come up with this crap. This is about to get terribly dull. You really should give up now. What you should know about me: I am heterosexual. I am essentially an atheist. This in no way impedes my belief in the human soul. The mortality or immortality of said soul is outside my range of knowledge, so I don't speculate. But I am as certain that there is no such creature as god as I am of anything else (which, truth be told, is not terribly certain). The way I see the world and its wonders and terrors and terrible wonders is best summed up in the words of some anonymous guy I heard say one sentence as I was flipping through the channels on my television: "That's not a miracle, it's just complicated." As you'll find if you're still reading this crap, such sound-bytes constitute a considerable portion of the foundation of my belief system. If you have any questions about how I could possibly believe this, I'd be happy to respond to private mail. I do not believe that the only purpose of sex is procreation. Further, I do not believe that anyone else genuinely believes this. Perhaps in creatures without sufficient higher brain function to attach emotion or anything but the most basic compulsion to the act, but not in human beings, and even, I would say (given my utter lack of biological expertise, I can make sweeping statements like this) not in mammals. What I think about the whole mess: It is my belief that homosexuality (which strikes me as a poorly applied term that engenders bigotry by focusing on the sex part and not on the love part--I'd prefer homoamory, but it's not really my decision) is not only a perfectly ordinary and acceptable thing, but it is the single most important factor in inter- and intragender relations in the efforts to develop a post-patriarchal society (which have most certainly haven't finished doing, but we're still making progress). I came to this conclusion after waiting to give a paper at a symposium on gender. While I was waiting, I overheard a bit of a conversation. The woman who was speaking was named Katie, and I have a bit of a weakness for Katies, so I was paying attention to her, but I was still far enough away that I couldn't hear most of the conversation. (Incidentally, Katie was waiting to give an excellent paper on Oscar Wilde). The only bit of the conversation that I heard was as follows: Katie: ... meanwhile, the straight people are still wondering which one is the man and which one is the woman ... (referring to an outsider observing a gay relationship) Katie's friends: mad laughter My immediate reaction was to think "well, duh. I mean, we can't just tell which is which by looking at them." (yes, Katie and her friends were laughing at me, even though they didn't know it). It took me a while, mulling it over in my head to finally get it: neither of them is necessarily "the man" or "the woman". They're either both men or both women, and that is the way they want it. Given these circumstances, adhering to the broadly societally accepted norms of gender behavior (who irons, who mows the grass, who is most emotionally available, who initiates sex, etc.), there would be a lot of duplicated effort and a lot of things not getting done (to put it basely). What is created, then, in a gay relationship, is a relationship without a model, in fact a relationship that defies gender-based models because the two participants are necessarily gender-equal. The result is that the things that need to get done within that relationship fall into the hands the person who is most inclined or least disinclined to do those things--everything from ironing to initiating lovemaking. That being the case, the only hope we have to unburden ourselves from the eons of patriarchy that have been handed down to us is for straight couples to adopt the gay model (or unmodel, if you prefer) for their own relationships. In short, the widespread (universal would be preferable, but I don't want to sound too naive) acceptance of gay people as equals and as teachers is indispensable to advancing the cause of feminism and the quest for a post-patriarchal society. there, I said it will (phatlip in #sinister) +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ +---+ Brought to you by the undead Sinister mailing list +---+ To send to the list mail sinister@missprint.org. To unsubscribe send "unsubscribe sinister" or "unsubscribe sinister-digest" to majordomo@missprint.org. WWW: http://www.missprint.org/sinister +-+ "legion of bedroom saddo devotees" "tech-heads and students" +-+ +-+ "the cardie wearing biscuit nibbling belle & sebastian list" +-+ +-+ "sinsietr is a bit freaky" - stuart david, looper +-+ +----------------------------------------------------------------------+