Re: I Am Homophobic

--- "Flynn, Patrick M" <[email protected]> wrote:

Mr. Flynn,

First, thank you for responding.

> This guy is crazy.

Who are you referring to, and what does that have to
do with the rest of what you say?

>  Assumptions are based on common sense and 
> observations made from
> everyday life. Questioning those assumptions is not
> necessarily
> reasonable , nor even healthy.

Really? Am I, then, to take what you write below as
not asking me to question my assumptions? If it's not
*necessarily* reasonable or healthy, then in which
instances is it or is it not?

>  Homosexuals are above average in income, 

I wasn't aware that that had been proven to the extent
that one can simply assume that it is true. Would you
care to offer some proof? 

Oh wait, I'm questioning your assumption. Sorry - I
haven't quite figured out when it's ok to do so.

> and
> considered the darlings of
> popular media. 

*Considered* by you, indeed. I, on the other hand,
don't consider this to be the case. If you tell me why
you consider that to be the case, I'll tell you why I
don't.

>Notions of "oppression" become silly
> when even discussing
> homosexuals in our society.

Why is that, exactly?

> Of course there is some kind of spectrum or range of
> sexuality. So what?

Well, there are some conclusions that I draw from
that, which I have attempted to illustrate in the
article that I assume you're responding to.

> I don't know what grade school you went to, but I
> never heard anything
> bad about homosexuals from my teachers , and I went
> to Catholic schools
> in the 50's and 60's.

It's good to hear that your teachers were so
open-minded and understanding. However, I wonder if
you're missing one of the points of my article, where
I note that one does not need to be overtly hostile to
homosexuals to harm them, make life hard for them,
etc.

>(Try to avoid stereotyping ME
> after hearing that
> tidbit) Unless of course you think teaching children
> morality is some
> kind of oppression.

Are you implying that homosexuality is immoral? Or
that it is moral? Or was that just a random comment
that should be taken out of context?

> I feel very sorry for people who worry about
> oppressing others all the
> time. Look around-- the people oppressed today are
> those who publicly
> espouse their religion, speak frankly on issues of
> sex and"gender" from
> a traditional perspective, and refuse to Kowtow to
> the P.C. police. 

Interesting. I wasn't aware of this. Could you offer
some examples?

> And
> the ones doing the oppressing don't worry about it
> one bit.

I'm not sure, but I suspect that we are operating from
slightly different definitions of oppression. What do
you think oppression is? If you're interested in the
definition of oppression I had in mind while writing
the article, please take a look at Marilyn Frye's
essay, "Oppression". It can be found in the collection
"The Politics of Reality", available at many fine
bookstores, or Amazon.com.

If you do look it up, I'd be happy to discuss it with
you further.

cheers,

dru

=====
--
dru.ca/misnomer

______________________________________________________ 
Send your holiday cheer with http://greetings.yahoo.ca