Re: Dan's response

Subject: Re: Dan's response
From: Michael LaTorra <mikel -at- ACCUGRAPH -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 1994 13:49:07 MDT

READER CAUTION: This is a long posting. Unless you're interested in
issues of free speech vs. political correctness, I'd suggest you skip it.

Dan --

Your ability to create straw-man agruments and then burn them down is
truly impressive. If I had said even half the things you claim, I wouldn't
recognize myself. Do you really believe that, because I am proud of who I
am, therefore I must be demeaning others? Come, come. As I said in my
original (terse & private) reply to your first flame, you need to sign
up for LOGIC 101 immediately.

Let's take a look at my original posting in response to Chuck Martin's
& then compare it to what you've said about it.

====== COPY OF MIKE'S ORIGINAL POSTING ================================

From: Michael LaTorra <mikel -at- huey>
Return-Path: <mikel -at- huey>
Subject: PC invective
To: techwriter -at- VNET -dot- IBM -dot- COM
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 94 16:26:18 MDT
Full-Name: Michael LaTorra
Cc: TECHWR-L -at- VM1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu, mikel -at- huey
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]
Status: RO

Chuck --

I have no objection to discussions of "non-sexist" (i.e., politically
correct) language, but if you want to start a flame war, just keep
making statements like:

> But that is probably something that White Heterosexual
> American Males often have trouble understanding and relating to,
> as they don't suffer from marginalization.

From a White Heterosexual American Male -- and PROUD OF IT! -- who
refuses to be cowed or "marginalized" by self-righteous purveyors
of victimology...

...and by the way, have a HECK of a nice day!

Mike LaTorra

Documentation Supervisor
Accugraph Inc.
mikel -at- huey -dot- accugraph -dot- com

======= END COPY ==============================================

Now let's look at some of what Dan has to say:

>I honestly don't understand why one would be proud of one's
>heterosexuality . . . unless, that is, it's quite a struggle for one to
>overcome her lesbian inclinations or his homosexual desires. I face no such
>struggle myself, so I don't find it anything to be proud of. I've never had a
>homosexual inclination in my life.

What have you got against homosexuality, Dan? If you were homosexual,
would you be ashamed? If not, then why should heterosexuals be ashamed
of their sexuality? (By the way, methinks thou dost protest too much in
saying "I've never had a homosexual inclination in my life". Now you're
raising suspicions.)

Next, let's consider why Dan hates (or is ashamed of being) White.

>What then is the problem with a white
>person saying he's proud of being white? The problem is that blacks in America
>were treated as subhumans by whites in America...

Apparently, Dan's reasoning is that since some American Whites
mistreated Blacks, all Whites are guilty. So if any member of any racial
group mistreats members of any other racial group, all members of the
group to which the evil-doer belongs are guilty by association. Well,
that's simple (-minded) enough! Then we're all guilty. Every
racial group on earth, and every tribal group on earth, bears some
historical or current connection with hatred of out-groups. "A round of
Guilt for everyone, barkeep! Put it on Dan's tab." But as for me, I'll
pass. I have never discriminated against anyone, and I decline to feel
guilty about what other members of my race have done. In my book, we
are each responsible for our own actions; no guilt by association.

Next, let's consider how Dan's guilt trip affects his view of men:

>If you mean that men have a need to say,
>"I'm proud to be a man," I'd again have to ask, "What does that mean?" Does it
>mean, "I'm glad I'm not a woman"? Does it mean, "I'm superior to women"?
>What's it supposed to mean?

No, Dan, it means -- hold onto your hat! -- just what it says. Pride, or
feeling good about oneself, in no way diminishes others' pride in themselves.
Feeling good about oneself is not a zero sum game, in which someone else must
feel bad so that you can feel good. That is, it's not a zero sum game for me.
I'm not so sure about you, Dan.

Dan's quotes above were all taken from his second flame post, the one sent
in reply to Beth's statement in defense of my posting. (Thanks, Beth!)
In his first posting, he made several statements about my employer,
hinting broadly that Dan would like to see me lose my job for being
politically incorrect. I guess when your arguments are so weak, Dan, you have
to try and win any way you can. Personally, I find your paranoid
imaginings quite disturbing. Your return address indicates that you are
with an educational institution. I certainly hope you are a student and
not a teacher. Your inability to take statements at face value, and your
continual imputing of dark motives, are a disservice to thinking people,
and would be especially tragic if inflicted by a powerful teacher on
defenseless students.

...And have a HECK of a nice day!

Mike LaTorra

Documentation Supervisor
Accugraph Inc.
mikel -at- huey -dot- accugraph -dot- com
The opinions expressed are my own, and not necessarily those of my
company -- but they probably should be.

Previous by Author: Re: You Use 'you'?
Next by Author: Dousing the flames
Previous by Thread: Re: Annual conference reports
Next by Thread: ISO 9000 Questions

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads