Dear Editor:

I sooo agree with recent letters to the GLT Editor that moving beyond personal politics is the way we must go. The core of my personal philosophy is Progressive still, but it is not incompatible with feminist and civil rights/LGBT layers and lenses. The “Victimization Olympics” that sometimes predominates is an impediment that we must surmount in both the feminist and LGBT communities. E.g. last week’s editorial in the GLT analyzed candidates solely on their LGBT policies. It was a good job as far as it went. But 2 letters this week properly pointed out the wide range of issues that are also crucial to our community. I supported Dennis Kucinich, admittedly in part because of his support for marriage equality, but plan to contribute to, and volunteer happily for either Hillary or Obama, in the general election. I hope we can all move beyond any current rancor and unify before the general election for the sake of the future.

Charlie Pratt

Dear Editor:

The Feb. 7 column of In the Pit opens with a tribute to Black History Month...being from a racialized community I thought okay..this should be interesting....imagine my dismay as the article spirals to being nothing more than another sex column that sexualizes Black men and offers little in the way of an uplifting message. This is an ongoing problem for racialized gays and lesbians - the lack of foresight into how an article of this kind can negatively impact a group who are already double marginalized - from the straight world and within the WHITE gay world...

I thought, upon this being my first time looking at this publication, that I might be able to find interesting articles and stories for use in doing my anti-homophobia and anti-heterosexism educational program...Now I think there will never be a use for this publication - not unless it’s contributors undergo some training in understanding what impact their stories have on their readers!!!

Darrell Bowden

Dear Editor:

I’ve been following this ongoing dialog about the Gay Men’s Chorus Christmas Concert, and I’d like to add my .02 worth. A friend and I attended the concert the night the lady (and child) in question attended. While our seats were quite a ways away from hers, I do recall the evening quite clearly. If anyone was truly nasty to her because she was straight, they should be ashamed of themselves. There is NO excuse, ever, to practice such reverse discrimination.

That being said, I’d like to point out what I see is the heart of the problem. Selfishness… The ‘80s were frequently referred to as “the ME generation”. Sadly, I think this cultural phenomenon is far more prevalent now than it ever was in the ‘80s. How many times do I go to an R rated movie, only to have to the experience tainted by a fussing child? How many times do I go to Gordon Biersch, a micro-BREWERY, only to have my dining experience tainted by a fussing child?

There is a time/place for everything. Would I ever complain about fussing children at the Zoo, Denny’s, a public park, a G/PG movie (afternoon or early evening show-time,) or any other child-appropriate venue? NO, never. Should the couple have endured the glares and nasty comments when taking their children to the Sunday matinee showing of the Christmas Concert? NO, never. It seems, however, that some people are so wrapped up in their own personal satisfaction that they no longer consider how their actions impact others. Etiquette, like chivalry, appears to be dead.

Do I consider the Gay Men’s Chorus Christmas Concert a family event? Absolutely, by all means, bring your children. If your children are not yet of an age where they can be reasonably expected to sit through such an event without fussing, take them to the matinee show. This is, after all, the traditional time to take one’s young children to the theater or other such shows. Anyone buying a ticket for an afternoon matinee should know that there will likely be small children in attendance for such a show.

Eric Kennedy

Dear Editor:

I loved Andrew Towne’s letter published in the Jan. 17 issue of G&L Times. Here’s my follow-up.

“Gay” community is all-inclusive enough for me. We know it means gay men and women (i.e. gays and lesbians).

With as much baggage as “gay” carries, why should we be expected to add the fencing-sitting closet cases (bisexuals) and the sexually befuddled (cross dressers, transsexuals and trannys)? We’ve got enough to deal with being gay, let alone guys who can’t decide which they like better, pussy or dick, or guys who can decide whether or not they should have a pussy or a dick.

And then there’s the “queer” and “questioning” crew. If it weren’t for our generation and those before us, these young sissies and closet cases wouldn’t be able to call themselves “fag” and “queer.”

By the way, and for the record, go ahead and call me “queer” or “fag” and I’ll kick your ass! So there, Mary!

Jeff Wilson