From: "Shelly Roberts" Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 15:31:16 +0000 Subject: ROBERTS' RULES: Argument From: "Shelly Roberts" To: shellyr@newworld.bridge.net Date sent: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 15:27:47 +0000 Subject: ROBERTS' RULES: Argument Priority: normal Editors, It's the last gasp of this ol' year. Pat yourselves on the back. We done good one more year in a row. I hope that all of your hopes and none of your fears come true for 1997. The milennia approaches. And it's ours. All the best. Shelly Roberts. ======================> ROBERTS' RULES by Shelly Roberts WORDS WILL EVER HURT YOU. I used to be an adman. Then I was an ad person. Now I am a consultant. Not a bad progression for a Pampers-girl/Pepsi-generation teen/Charlie-woman/chic lesbian not yet ready for citizenship papers in Metamucil-land. As a writer living through the advertising wars, I learned how to sell ideas, political candidates, and tubs of frozen, whipped, emulsified palm kernal oil. (Cool Whip to you.) I learned the importance of words in making a sale or changing a mind. They taught me that there's a huge difference between saying something is the best, which you have to prove, and saying that "nothing beats" it, which means that it's at least as good as all the rest, even if just barely. (And, by the way, "Virtually Spotless" means it has spots.) Now these are subtle differences to some, but they're very telling arguments in the larger schemes. I'm not going to try to sell you anything here. (Though I'd bet that in your lifetime, you or someone in your family washed up, had a plate of, or a cup of, shaved with, or flew on something an ad I created told you all to use.) I'm going to try to convince you, instead, to quit using a argument in our defense. One that we ought to put in a hermetically sealed container up on a shelf in one of those closets so many of us have abandoned. I thought it was an argument we'd gotten past. Then I went to check my email for G/L/B/T news, and found a letter to the editor on our behalf. I think. It reads, in part (parenthetical comments mine): ".. Gays did not choose to be gay any more than these homophobics chose to be heterosexual. Would any sane person choose to be homosexual, knowing the consequences? (Do you think the writer means having a nice house with a pool and hot tub, right near the beach? A fulfilling career? A long term relationship? And two luxury cars? (Isn't it amazing what two fully employed "single" persons can afford?)) "Would they opt to be poster boy for discrimination, spat on by a homophobic society, beaten or even killed by gaybashers, shunned by their acquaintances, fired from their jobs, or forced to move? (These are not nice things. Just like being spat on for being Irish, or killed for being female, or "not from around he-ah." Or being fired because the old boss liked me better than the new one.) (I won't even get into mis-matched objects and predicates (they and boy) or gender parity here.) "Hatemongers who abhor gays should thank the Lord for inserting the heterosexual gene in their bodies, then remember, `There but for the grace of God, go I.'" O, my stars, and O, my soul, NO WONDER we're afraid to tell our parents we're gay or lesbian. NO WONDER they think we lead such sad, small lives. With such a dismal portrait of life on the homosexual side, it's no wonder they go into mourning when they find out. You've heard this "who'd-choose-it?" argument before. Maybe used it yourself. "Who on earth would CHOOSE to be gay?" is the declaration of the sentence structure, intending to mean, "Certainly it must be genetic, therefore they can't help it.So you should stop blaming them." Okay, Boys and Girls, gather `round and let me tell you what that little piece of tangled sophistry is really ad-vocating; "Homosexuals are so miserable, worthless, contemptible, despicable and wretched, that if you "chose" it, then you are clearly certifiable and in need of professional help. These poor, simple, pathetic bastards, with their abominable sexual urges, should be pitied for what they are: Sick. It's the same old message dressed in sheep's clothing. To which I say, "Thank you, Sir, for your good intentions. Now kindly follow your prescribed road to your eternal destination!" We don't need friends like these. Or at least, we don't need our friends to defend us by damning us with feint logic. The reality is that most of us are none of the above. Oh, some of us, sure, on a case by case basis, are some of the above. It's what makes us interesting. But so long as we are willing to share the fascinating realities of our lives (What do lesbians DO together. Pay the bills. Feed the kids. Wonder whatever happened to sex. Go to the movies.) we can, and, daily, do paint a better picture of our lives. The more we strengthen the argument that we aren't anything incarnate, except the usual variety of types and talents and interests, and hobbies and pastimes, just as "they" are. So I ask you, when you hear some one "helping" you out with this very specious argument, stop them in mid breath-catch, and correct them about how mean and deplorable your little life isn't. If you're tempted to use it yourself, don't. Arguments are intended to help you win. With this one, you might win the moment, but you sell them an impression of a lifestyle we don't wear. And we all lose. ________________________ (C) 1996. Shelly Roberts. All rights reserved. May be reprinted only in its entirety with written permission. Shelly Robertsthe author of the #1 best-selling Roberts' Rules of Lesbian Living. Spinsters Ink. ROBERTS' RULES by Shelly Roberts WORDS WILL EVER HURT YOU. I used to be an adman. Then I was an ad person. Now I am a consultant. Not a bad progression for a Pampers-girl/Pepsi-generation teen/Charlie-woman/chic lesbian not yet ready for citizenship papers in Metamucil-land. As a writer living through the advertising wars, I learned how to sell ideas, political candidates, and tubs of frozen, whipped, emulsified palm kernal oil. (Cool Whip to you.) I learned the importance of words in making a sale or changing a mind. They taught me that there's a huge difference between saying something is the best, which you have to prove, and saying that "nothing beats" it, which means that it's at least as good as all the rest, even if just barely. (And, by the way, "Virtually Spotless" means it has spots.) Now these are subtle differences to some, but they're very telling arguments in the larger schemes. I'm not going to try to sell you anything here. (Though I'd bet that in your lifetime, you or someone in your family washed up, had a plate of, or a cup of, shaved with, or flew on something an ad I created told you all to use.) I'm going to try to convince you, instead, to quit using a argument in our defense. One that we ought to put in a hermetically sealed container up on a shelf in one of those closets so many of us have abandoned. I thought it was an argument we'd gotten past. Then I went to check my email for G/L/B/T news, and found a letter to the editor on our behalf. I think. It reads, in part (parenthetical comments mine): ".. Gays did not choose to be gay any more than these homophobics chose to be heterosexual. Would any sane person choose to be homosexual, knowing the consequences? (Do you think the writer means having a nice house with a pool and hot tub, right near the beach? A fulfilling career? A long term relationship? And two luxury cars? (Isn't it amazing what two fully employed "single" persons can afford?)) "Would they opt to be poster boy for discrimination, spat on by a homophobic society, beaten or even killed by gaybashers, shunned by their acquaintances, fired from their jobs, or forced to move? (These are not nice things. Just like being spat on for being Irish, or killed for being female, or "not from around he-ah." Or being fired because the old boss liked me better than the new one.) (I won't even get into mis-matched objects and predicates (they and boy) or gender parity here.) "Hatemongers who abhor gays should thank the Lord for inserting the heterosexual gene in their bodies, then remember, `There but for the grace of God, go I.'" O, my stars, and O, my soul, NO WONDER we're afraid to tell our parents we're gay or lesbian. NO WONDER they think we lead such sad, small lives. With such a dismal portrait of life on the homosexual side, it's no wonder they go into mourning when they find out. You've heard this "who'd-choose-it?" argument before. Maybe used it yourself. "Who on earth would CHOOSE to be gay?" is the declaration of the sentence structure, intending to mean, "Certainly it must be genetic, therefore they can't help it.So you should stop blaming them." Okay, Boys and Girls, gather `round and let me tell you what that little piece of tangled sophistry is really ad-vocating; "Homosexuals are so miserable, worthless, contemptible, despicable and wretched, that if you "chose" it, then you are clearly certifiable and in need of professional help. These poor, simple, pathetic bastards, with their abominable sexual urges, should be pitied for what they are: Sick. It's the same old message dressed in sheep's clothing. To which I say, "Thank you, Sir, for your good intentions. Now kindly follow your prescribed road to your eternal destination!" We don't need friends like these. Or at least, we don't need our friends to defend us by damning us with feint logic. The reality is that most of us are none of the above. Oh, some of us, sure, on a case by case basis, are some of the above. It's what makes us interesting. But so long as we are willing to share the fascinating realities of our lives (What do lesbians DO together. Pay the bills. Feed the kids. Wonder whatever happened to sex. Go to the movies.) we can, and, daily, do paint a better picture of our lives. The more we strengthen the argument that we aren't anything incarnate, except the usual variety of types and talents and interests, and hobbies and pastimes, just as "they" are. So I ask you, when you hear some one "helping" you out with this very specious argument, stop them in mid breath-catch, and correct them about how mean and deplorable your little life isn't. If you're tempted to use it yourself, don't. Arguments are intended to help you win. With this one, you might win the moment, but you sell them an impression of a lifestyle we don't wear. And we all lose. ________________________ (C) 1996. Shelly Roberts. All rights reserved. May be reprinted only in its entirety with written permission. Shelly Robertsthe author of the #1 best-selling Roberts' Rules of Lesbian Living. Spinsters Ink.