From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Sun Aug 10 2003 - 13:06:17 EDT
In a message dated 8/9/03 11:46:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jwburgeson@juno.com writes:
> rich remarks:
> could it be that the discrimination, harassment, and stigmatization
> "well established" by the '60s could also be the backlash to the
> homosexual agenda which also began organizing during the sexual
> revolution of the '60s? "
>
> I think this is probably true. The backlash against those with dark skins
> lobbying for equal rights in the 60s obviously was caused, in large part,
> "because of those uppity n. "
>
> Dear me -- agreeing with Rich! <G>
>
>
Agreeing on what ? race relations? There's that faulty analogy again and
you've tried to make it work but it doesn't. race and sexual prefernce are two
different things - we were talking about sexual preference - race is not an apt
analogy - you can manage your sexual behavior - not so your race - you're born
with it - race is not an opportunitic "behavior" under any circumstances.
homosexuality is, under most circumstances - and as for your friends not
demonstrating homosexual mannerisms - I believe its correct to conclude that the
culture of homosexuality will mainfest itself with greater density of homosexuals -
having lived in or near one of the greatest densities of avowed homosexuals in
the world - I regularly witness those "limp wrist" behaviors and they're
deliberately magnified so homosexuals recognize one another. It's called
"flaming."
rich faussette
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Aug 10 2003 - 13:09:48 EDT