E-mail from anonymous hetero offers a disturbing glimpse into the “‘gays-against-straights’ mindset that keeps communities divided
I received an interesting e-mail this morning. So interesting, in fact, that I’ve decided to share it right now. I’d be doing the LGBT community a disservice if I didn’t pass along such an insightful piece of work.
The writer declined to sign the paragraph-length note. All I had was an AOL address, and since I use AOL too, I looked up the writer’s member profile.
Based on the tone of the missive, I had already suspected he’s a guy. His profile didn’t confirm this, but I don’t think many women would choose as their personal quote, “If you want the ultimate, you have to be willing to pay the ultimate price.”
I fear my correspondent is G. Gordon Liddy or Oliver North.
Whoever he is, he lives in the U.S., is single, and enjoys sports, reading, music and “intellectual conversation.” He began his intellectual conversation with me by typing “hey heterophobe” into the subject line.
I’ve placed the other pearls he proceeded to offer in italics:
Hey you straight-bashing freak.
And a pleasant good morning to you, too.
Isn’t it funny that the whiny, sensitive, sissy homosexuals who always cry about intolerance, end up being the most intolerant of any once they get a little bit of power in little tiny parcels of land spread out through the country?
You left out “faggotty.” I can only guess that you mean when laws to protect every citizen are passed, those who yearn to discriminate feel their rights have been infringed. Yes? No? You’ll have to help this whiny freak understand.
Can you IMAGINE if gays ever became 15-20% of the population
Good heavens no.
Admit it . . . you gays hate straights and if it was possible . . . you’d make straight people adopt gay ways . . . or else.
I admit no such thing. We gays don’t hate straights. Most of us come from straight parents, have straight siblings and friends. Certainly there are individual straights we don’t like, but that’s because they’re none too fond of us.
As to making straights adopt gay ways, is this again a reference to the notion of gays treading on individual freedoms? Being thought police? Political-correctness Nazis? Or do you actually believe we want to force you to get it on with your racquetball partner?
Or maybe to you adopting gay ways means you’d be required to use hair products and wear designer clothes? Fear not. So far gay men haven’t even been able to induce lesbians to do that.
Thank GOODness homosexuals aren’t in power and man-hating lesbians don’t rule the day.
As you implied earlier, more and more gays are creeping into power. Furthermore, closeted gays have always held positions of power, all over the world and throughout time. Bet that gives your willy the willies.
Answer me . . . if there was a gay president (either a sissy male homosexual or a tough lesbian), what kind of laws would you set down for straights?
Any out gay male who achieved the presidency couldn’t possibly be a sissy, considering all he’d have to endure. Ditto for any lesbian, or for that matter, any woman.
Laws for straights? Please. The only policy a gay president would have toward straights is not to sleep with one.
But since I doubt that satisfies you, I’ll say a homosexual president would demand Congress pass laws against public heterosexual conduct. To be followed by laws against private heterosexual conduct. Then, no thinking straight allowed. No walking in a straight line.
Finally, no American shall ever again get straight to the point.
How’s that?
Leslie Robinson’s columns are available online at www.GeneralGayety.com
E-mail LesRobinsn@aol.com
This article appeared in the Dallas Voice print edition, October 27, 2006.