Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.os2.programmer:11488 comp.os.coherent:9254 comp.os.linux:37460 comp.os.mach:2870 comp.os.minix:22106 comp.periphs:3642 comp.unix.bsd:11984 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:2633 comp.os.386bsd.development:681 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!think.com!mintaka.lcs.mit.edu!GRAPEVINE.LCS.MIT.EDU!ai-lab!hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu!not-for-mail From: mycroft@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.programmer,comp.os.coherent,comp.os.linux,comp.os.mach,comp.os.minix,comp.periphs,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: PUT AN END TO JMONROY! (Was: QIC NEWS...) Date: 5 May 1993 05:17:58 -0400 Organization: dis Lines: 80 Message-ID: <1s80o6$1nlf@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu> References: <C653Au.Iqy@sugar.neosoft.com> <1993May4.034429.1146@nrao.edu> <1s5o9c$j3h@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <1993May4.160411.16584@nrao.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.ai.mit.edu In article <1993May4.160411.16584@nrao.edu> rgooch@rp.CSIRO.AU (Richard Gooch) writes: > > A few reasonable interpretations: I would hardly call them `reasonable'. > "I'm proud of being white" --> "Thank ... I'm not [black | Asian | > ...]" `I'm proud of being black. Thank God I'm not white, red, or yellow.' > "I'm proud to be heterosexual" --> "I'd hate to be a poof" `I'm proud to be gay. Breeders are just using each other.' > "I'm proud to be a male" -> "Males are better. It's good to be a > male". `I'm proud to female. Women are smarter.' > Is it actually your intention to offend people, or aren't you aware > that this is offensive? How is `white pride' any more offensive than `black pride' by your test? Is it possible in your world to praise anything without also implicitly insulting something else? Just today I picked up a copy of MIT's Tech Talk, and what did I find? Health Coverage Offered To Same-Sex Partners At first, this sounds okay; maybe even a Good Thing. But I read a little further and find that, essentially, any two men or women living together, not even necessarily lovers, can get the `family coverage' plan; however, unmarried heterosexuals cannot. Who is bearing the brunt of discrimination here? People have told me straight up that I should be ashamed of my heritage. Why is this? Why should I carry the burden of countless generations before me? Perhaps I should instead remind people of the tribal wars in Africa where one tribe would kill every living member of the other, or that tribal leaders participated in the slave trade? Does it matter? None of the people I know were there, and I doubt any of them condone it; nothing more need be said. It seems to be a popular trend to believe that it is alright to discriminate against the majority with the reasoning that the minority deserves `equal protection'. Whether a discriminatory policy is discriminatory and should not be condoned is independent of whom it discriminates against. If it is not alright to treat the minority unfairly, then neither is it alright to treat the majority unfairly. Frankly, I like my skin. I enjoy female companionship. Being male I can take or leave. B-) I'm told I should not be happy with what I am because of evil things people with the same color skin as mine have done in the past (as if each race has not done its own share), or because some men choose to abuse women (as if women don't ever abuse men). I am offended by this, but I never hint that the people telling me that should be censored. Instead, I encourage people to air their prejudices. Perhaps some day we can all realize that the other parties are just tired of the petty bickering, and of each group trying to get unfair advantages over the others. -- To all those who have replied to this thread either in email or news, I thank you. -- \ / Charles Hannum, mycroft@ai.mit.edu /\ \ PGP public key available on request. MIME, AMS, NextMail accepted. Scheme White heterosexual atheist male (WHAM) pride!