WFP & HRC

rc-am rcollins at netlink.com.au
Sat Feb 26 03:52:43 PST 2000


Nathan wrote:

Idiots. Opportunists. Whichever. You decide that you have the right to speak on behalf of gay interests more than activists you have spent their lives on the issue and represent often hundreds of thousands of gay activists who contribute to their organization. Its arrogant intellectual chutzpah.

It's fine to sketch an argument for why another strategy would make more sense or be more successful, but this "gayer-than-thou", "more rank-and-file than thou" rehtoric from a straight, middle class married intellectual is just ludicrous. ----

What with this pronouncement over representational legitimacy, you'd think someone was running for something -- and assuming that everyone else is too, where all comments are to be judged by that representational criterion.

I've a question though which does relate to representations, but perhaps not to elections: How did it come to pass that the issue of gays in the military achieved such prominence in the first place?

Angela _________



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list