Don't buy Keith's bullshit, boys.

Go read his vanity page. He's a registered Republican who puts his economic concerns first. At the same time, he boasts that he has been arrested 12 times in non-violent civil-disobedience actions pertinent to AIDS, including protests against unfair DRUG PRICING. In other words he has protested private enterprise's rights to do what it wants (charge what it wants)...while reserving the right to do what he wants here, including manipulating and controlling effective protest.

Perhaps those of you who post "out of forum" could characterize your actions as "civil disobedience" and he would be more charitable. (yeah right) The irony of someone using the privacy clause to argue that he doesn't have to allow discussion of government interference is obvious. Well, "obvioius" is the nicest word I can think of.

Keith really doesn't care about sexual politics except insofar as they inhibit his ability to make a buck. He made a colossal fool of himself at the Sex Panic convention in Southern Calif. a few years ago. In his "association" with Steam Magazine, he never got what Scott was attempting, which was far more than the right to shove your cock through a glory hole or to make money in the sex industry.

There is NO sex, particularly public sex, without political discourse. You don't establish a board for interaction -- like the message board -- and then tell people how they are supposed to treat sex (as stripped of political meaning, for example). The "stall wall" is the place for pure sexual advertisement. Discussions on the message board evolve naturally.

Those of us who have read CFS for a few years are well familiar with the hypocrisy that rules it. I noticed that Keith has taken down his own column. Otherwise, I could point you to his own direct refutations of his own point here.

You're dealing with a businessman, not a serious sex radical. (Oh, and notice who's modifying --er, moderating -- this forum. DUH.)



[This message has been edited by bongo (edited January 13, 2001).]