Re: Sexual Orientation and Tech Comm (#836209)

Subject: Re: Sexual Orientation and Tech Comm (#836209)
From: Bill Burns <wburns -at- MICRON -dot- COM>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 08:35:30 -0600

25-APR-1996 05:59:24.65


>You've brought up some very good points concerning G/L/B that I really hadn't
>thought about. My first reaction was, as well, is homosexual tech writing any
>different than hetero tech writing, maybe not, but it seems that their issues
>certainly are. Up here in Canada, eh!! we have a Canadian Issues group within
>the STC, so I guess that if we need a Canadian Issues group (and we do), then
>maybe there is a need for a gay issues group too!


I agree with John, too. However, I think we need to rethink the intent of the
original message that was posted. Was the original poster's intent to say that
gays, lesbians, and bisexuals shouldn't be permitted to discuss these issues or
that they don't have valid concerns? I don't think so. I believe it was out of
a genuine desire not to increase the alienation of groups with alternative
living styles. It was a misguided suggestions in that the ideal behind his
sentiments concerning the relevance of sexual orientation to the workplace
doesn't bear out in reality. Does he deserve such harsh criticism for this, or
would we better honor diversity by pointing these issues out to him?

Bill Burns
Assembly Training and Documentation Supervisor

Post Message: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Get Commands: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "help" in body.
Unsubscribe: LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU with "signoff TECHWR-L"
Listowner: ejray -at- ionet -dot- net

Previous by Author: Re: To number or not to number (#732992)
Next by Author: Re: Websites (#841395)
Previous by Thread: Powerpoint v7 to v3
Next by Thread: Sexual Orientation......

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads