Re: Tell Dr. Laura what you think of her hate-mongering

What gives?  Bij, Kendall, why did my long post in reply to Foster not
actually make it onto the listserv?  I'll send it again in a moment.

Damien,  I don't think that Foster's email was intended to directly link
pedophilia with homosexuality (regardless of his own beliefs), but rather to
reference a Dr. Laura canard to which (he thought) the article on MF
referred.  

Call it thermodynamics, if you like, but I don't see how responding with
vitriol (especially as expansive vitriol as "what all straight, white men"
do or do not) to someone whose post was pretty tame, does anything more than
get both sides over-heated.

Anyway, Damien, you noted that "statistically" heterosexual men are more
likely to be pedophiles than homosexual men.  By "statistically" do you mean
absolutely or proportionally, i.e., that for any given act of pedophilia it
is more likely to be a hetero perp, or rather that for any given hetero/homo
pair the hetero is more likely to be a pedophile?  Of course, the first
sense is true, since there are just more heteros.  But I would like a
citation for a source indicating that, at worst, any given homosexual man is
no more likely to be a pedophile than any given hetero.  That cite would
come in mighty handy!  Because, after all, the charge is usually that you
can't trust 'em around yer kids, since they are so much more likely to be
pedophiles.

mbz

> From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia-vEoVa6Jh+/J4piUD7e9S/[email protected]>
> Reply-To: bonobos-4GNy1lrxftmrG/[email protected]
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:24:43 -0400 (EDT)
> To: bonobos-4GNy1lrxftmrG/[email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Bonobos] Tell Dr. Laura what you think of her hate-mongering
> 
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, damien wrote:
> 
>>>> How do you know that Mr. Foster is white?
>>> 
>>> How do you know Clydefoster1 is a Mr.? :)
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Bijan.
>> 
>> Why is it that Clyde Foster's email associating homosexuals with
>> pedophiles flies by uncritiqued, Bijan,
> 
> Because I haven't had time to put together a response yet?
> 
>> but you single out my reply for
>> pointless, condescending sarcasm?
> 
> Actually, my attributions got screwed. It's *Jack's* response that I meant
> to single out for pointed, if condescending, sarcasm. I screwed it up, and
> I'm sorry.
> 
> 
>>  It's a truism on the internet that
>> identity cannot be proved, and pointing it out here is not only obvious,
>> but non-responsive to the thread.  I would have expected a bit more from
>> you.
> 
> That was the point I was trying to raise against Jack.
> 
>> Why is homosexual behavior open to unanswered critique here,
> 
> Come come! I think you know that, in general, it's not.
> 
>> but
>> stereotypically straight white male behavior (regardless of who may be
>> mimicking it at the moment) is not?
> 
> You know that it is.
> 
>> For the record, heterosexual males are more statistically likely to be
>> pedophiles than homosexual males.
> 
> Absolutely.
> 
>>  They also account for the vast
>> majority of rapes, murders, drug abuse and incest convictions.
> 
> Of course.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bonobos maillist  -  Bonobos-4GNy1lrxftmrG/[email protected]
> http://monkeyfist.com/mailman/listinfo/bonobos