The Washington Times complains that the death of Jesse Dirkhising shows a media double standard. Indeed it does. Whenever the subject comes up, the media invariably identify the alleged killers as homosexuals. Yet when a man rapes and murders a girl, is the killer ever identified as a heterosexual?

-- David J. Edmondson
Washington

Sean Elder attempts to enlighten us all with his insights into rhetoric in his piece "A Double Standard?" Well, Mr. Elder, you are correct. False parallels are indeed "classic rhetorical devices," as is attempting to show guilt by association. Would you really have us believe that because the Washington Times has a single opinion that happens to coincide with as loathsome an individual as David Duke that the Times staff is prepared to don hoods and masks and march against homosexuality and all of its perceived evils? Or is it simply that you, as the Times was suggesting, are engaging in the indefensible "My murder is better (or worse) than your murder" debate?

The brutal beating death of a gay man in Wyoming and the sexual torture and murder of a child in Arkansas have one very big, very true parallel: a dead body, which your biased score counting forgets to mention.

Your snide, agenda-laden sophistry completely misses the issue. The outrage in the Shepard case should not result from his sexual orientation. Neither should the outrage in the Dirkhising case come from his juvenile status or his murderer's sexual orientation. The outrage should come from the fact that two human beings were savagely murdered by others who lacked both compassion and the ability to empathize with their victims.

-- Teddy Carroll
Pittsburgh, Pa.

Matthew Shepherd was robbed and murdered for being gay. He was singled out for that reason alone. Simply put, there is a huge difference between murdering someone because you don't like their race, their religion, their sexual orientation and killing just 'cause you're crazy.

As a gay man, I don't want the media to treat gays with kid gloves. But I do hope that those who try the parallel thing based on their personal beliefs or politics realize that the majority of Americans (I pray!) are not being duped by them. Their biases are showing. And their ignorance.

-- Paul Evans
Lexington, Ky.

Turning Parisienne
BY J.A. GETZLAFF
(10/29/99)

It really isn't that hard to understand why French women are different. They don't hate men for being men. They don't think that being female is something shameful to suppress, like ancient foot-binding. They understand the difference between being sensual and being sexy, the latter of which in this country means having tits the size of watermelons and a brain about as substantive. They don't fear aging. They love sex, they don't use it like a weapon to manipulate love from pussified men. They don't view food as the enemy. And they don't view every compliment as sexual harassment.

No wonder French women are seductive. They aren't afraid of the true power of being female.

-- Pamela Tucker
Dearborn, Mich.

Next page | Recognize my voice? Plus: The trouble with "Trek"