"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"JJ" wrote:

LOL!! My wife, who seldom makes
any comment on anything pretaining to
amature radio, just walked into the
room, looked over my shoulder and
upon seeing kim's call sign displayed
in the newsgroup header said, "who
would be issued a call sign like that?"
After explaining it was a vanity call
sign and the person requested it, her
comment was, "what kind of idiot
would ever choose such a call sign?"
I ask her if she thought it was vulgar.
"Not really vulgar, just suggestive
and totally lacking in taste, I suppose
some people have to get attention
anyway they can".


My wife's consistent response to the ongoing debate about Kim's callsign
is, "who cares?" In short, with all the things going on in the world
today,
she thinks it is absolutely amazing that so many would waste time
discussing
a trivial issue like this.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


Actually, Dwight, the only "place" that my callsign gets so much discussion
is right here in this newsgroup. I have been involved in a lot of stuff
since I've had this callsign--on the air, off the air, women and men, served
agencies, hundreds of other amateurs. No where, once, did my callsign ever
get discussed, and there was plenty of opportunity.

I am a in-your-face kind of person. It's obvious there's folks in this
newsgroup who can't handle that. My callsign is but one aspect of my
character and personality--both of which are unquestionable in matters that
count. I have that opinion of myself because I believe in myself due to the
encouragement, respect, appreciation, thoughtfulness and even admiration of
people in my life and all around my life.

Oh, wait, there was *one* time when I got an email from a club president who
made a comment to the negative about my callsign--*after* I'd withdrawn as a
member for pointing out that he was not abiding by club bylaws and would not
even discuss the matter. He'd had no problem with me, my rabble rousing, or
my money and time donations for two years previous...

Kim W5TIT

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Actually, Dwight, the only "place"
that my callsign gets so much
discussion is right here in this
newsgroup. I have been involved
in a lot of stuff since I've had this
callsign--on the air, off the air,
women and men, served agencies,
hundreds of other amateurs. No
where, once, did my callsign ever
get discussed, and there was plenty
of opportunity. (snip)


I don't doubt that, Kim. The debate here only points to how far some in
this newsgroup are out of touch with reality.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article . net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Actually, Dwight, the only "place"
that my callsign gets so much
discussion is right here in this
newsgroup. I have been involved
in a lot of stuff since I've had this
callsign--on the air, off the air,
women and men, served agencies,
hundreds of other amateurs. No
where, once, did my callsign ever
get discussed, and there was plenty
of opportunity. (snip)


I don't doubt that, Kim. The debate here only points to how far some in
this newsgroup are out of touch with reality.

Dwight, that's all too common in computer-modem "communications,"
just as it is with morse code beeping on ham band ragchews.

No real clues on a person, no human data input, just a lot of
imagination and too much concentration on the writer in a public
forum. Those with an agenda, a hatred of something/somebody,
living in a quasi-fantasyland, brainwashed into a different reality,
are all into their own "reality of sight and sound," just like a
Twilight Zone.

To those too caught up in the unreality don't have a hobby of ham
radio anymore, they have a Lifestyle and Belief. Any puncturing of
that fantasy will send them off into paroxysms of rage, offense at
imagined slights, and the usual bigot's demands of What is Right
Should Be Right.

U.S. amateur radio seems to be another center for national
misogyny. It is a hobby activity engaged in largely by white
males.

LHA / WMD

"Len Over 21" wrote:

Dwight, that's all too common in
computer-modem "communications,"
just as it is with morse code beeping
on ham band ragchews.

No real clues on a person, no human
data input, just a lot of imagination and
too much concentration on the writer
in a public forum. Those with an
agenda, a hatred of something/somebody,
living in a quasi-fantasyland, brainwashed
into a different reality, are all into their
own "reality of sight and sound," just like
a Twilight Zone.

To those too caught up in the unreality
don't have a hobby of ham radio anymore,
they have a Lifestyle and Belief. Any
puncturing of that fantasy will send them
off into paroxysms of rage, offense at
imagined slights, and the usual bigot's
demands of What is Right Should Be
Right. (snip)


Well said, Len. I often find it amazing to read some of the messages here
after being distracted from the newsgroup for a few days. The attitudes and
realities here seem far out of touch with the realities of the world.


U.S. amateur radio seems to be another
center for national misogyny. It is a hobby
activity engaged in largely by white males.


I've thought about that many times and don't really see a problem with it.
As long as there isn't a widespread effort to intentionally exclude, not
everything in this world has to be all inclusive (to each his own). While
some will obviously always want to exclude, it isn't more commonplace in
Amateur Radio than elsewhere.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article . net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote:

Dwight, that's all too common in
computer-modem "communications,"
just as it is with morse code beeping
on ham band ragchews.

No real clues on a person, no human
data input, just a lot of imagination and
too much concentration on the writer
in a public forum. Those with an
agenda, a hatred of something/somebody,
living in a quasi-fantasyland, brainwashed
into a different reality, are all into their
own "reality of sight and sound," just like
a Twilight Zone.

To those too caught up in the unreality
don't have a hobby of ham radio anymore,
they have a Lifestyle and Belief. Any
puncturing of that fantasy will send them
off into paroxysms of rage, offense at
imagined slights, and the usual bigot's
demands of What is Right Should Be
Right. (snip)

Well said, Len. I often find it amazing to read some of the messages here
after being distracted from the newsgroup for a few days. The attitudes and
realities here seem far out of touch with the realities of the world.

Dwight, that's what I meant about the "fantasyland." With so few
clues on another person (especially with morse beeping), it's a
wonderful opportunity to imagine all sorts of things about the
other radio operator. :-)

Unfortunately, too many apply the same fantasy-imaginary things
to a computer screen.

Blend all of that in with: (1) A NEED to belong...to something...to
anything; (2) A need to VENT daily frustrations, take them out on
another who cannot possibly harm the venter...and you've got the
recipe for Instant Flame War. :-)

The League has constantly self-promoted itself and many have
allowed that self-promotion to brainwash them into thinking they
are this tremendous asset to the nation, are gifted radio operators
who stand ready to jump into action to save something whenever
called, and are better than ordinary people. Combined with an
honest-to-gosh Federal Certificate (suitable for framing) and they
start taking themselves sooooo seriously. They slip off reality and
enter the Twilight Zone of their imagination.

Amateur radio is a fun hobby, a recreational activity for personal
pleasure...but...a few NEED the status symbolism, the Titles,
all the pretty adornments to show off to others...instead of doing
an enjoyable thing with radio. As a result the U.S. got this
"incentive system" of professional-like rank-status (classes of
licenses) in an avocational amateur endeavor which is not a guild
or union or anything else but a hobby. Rank-status-privilege are
the thing, not the radio communication.

The League now wants to revisit all of that with Their Plan, complete
with emotional loading of the "Novice" name for "entrants." Gee suss,
are those 15 old men so out of touch with reality that radio is still
"new" or "mysterious" to the general population? Don't they under-
stand that radio is in widespread use in other radio services and that
there are hundreds of thousands of non-amateurs who have used
radio for years? Weird, wired apprentice-journeyman-master in a
still in a HOBBY activity!

It's like the Twilight Zone on a bad hair day...

U.S. amateur radio seems to be another
center for national misogyny. It is a hobby
activity engaged in largely by white males.

I've thought about that many times and don't really see a problem with it.
As long as there isn't a widespread effort to intentionally exclude, not
everything in this world has to be all inclusive (to each his own). While
some will obviously always want to exclude, it isn't more commonplace in
Amateur Radio than elsewhere.

I disagree but won't press the point.

Just think of before 1960 the Civil Rights Laws. The atmosphere
might refresh the memory. Look at the pictures of hams in the
US shown in the ham publications. Check out their legal names.

The various ARCs encourage members "like them" which means
white male adults. Women are categorized as "special," not quite
on par with the men; wives are always "EX-young-ladies" regardless
of their real age. In many places it is like the 1930s and 1920s in
attitudes. Sometimes with members' radio smarts to match...even
if they've memorized every single radio ad in QST for the last 20
years.

But, all must march to the same drumbeep, close ranks and cheer
the leadership. Keep those 1930s and 1920s feelings alive. Ham
radio is a SERVICE and every newbie (to hamming, not radio) has
to "learn their place" or the "NCOs" will have them "get down and
give them twenty." Lifestylers. Narrowed in focus almost to
tunnel vision.

It's not completely like that, of course...but there are just enough of
the Lifestylers to allow them to force an eliteness de facto if not
de jure. They don't see it even when looking in a mirror. :-)

LHA / WMD

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Actually, Dwight, the only "place"
that my callsign gets so much
discussion is right here in this
newsgroup. I have been involved
in a lot of stuff since I've had this
callsign--on the air, off the air,
women and men, served agencies,
hundreds of other amateurs. No
where, once, did my callsign ever
get discussed, and there was plenty
of opportunity. (snip)


I don't doubt that, Kim. The debate here only points to how far some in
this newsgroup are out of touch with reality.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


Someone came up with a great analogy today, and I don't know why I've never
thought of it before. In fact, maybe y'all won't see this--but I sure do.
Relating the callsign I have to the type of person I am, makes as much sense
as relating the authorship of Stephen King to him being a mass murderer; or
the character of Andy Sipowitz to being the same person as that actor; or Al
Pacino being the exact persons he depicts in his characters (remember the
tirade he goes off on in the movie "Devil's Advocate").

While amateur radio is not an acting venue, it is a
hobby/avocation/distraction/extracurricular activity. The callsign of an
individual in amateur radio, and even the way they act within that venue,
may have nothing at all to do with who or what they are. In fact, many
times when I meet amateurs face-to-face, they are not the person they
"depict" on the air.

Anyway, I liked the scenario...that's my story and I'm sticking to it... ;o

Kim W5TIT

Kim W5TIT wrote:



Someone came up with a great analogy today, and I don't know why I've never
thought of it before. In fact, maybe y'all won't see this--but I sure do.
Relating the callsign I have to the type of person I am, makes as much sense
as relating the authorship of Stephen King to him being a mass murderer; or
the character of Andy Sipowitz to being the same person as that actor; or Al
Pacino being the exact persons he depicts in his characters (remember the
tirade he goes off on in the movie "Devil's Advocate").

Spin it anyway you wish, the choice of that callsign shows a complete
lack of taste.

"JJ" wrote in message
...
Kim W5TIT wrote:



Someone came up with a great analogy today, and I don't know why I've
never
thought of it before. In fact, maybe y'all won't see this--but I sure
do.
Relating the callsign I have to the type of person I am, makes as much
sense
as relating the authorship of Stephen King to him being a mass murderer;
or
the character of Andy Sipowitz to being the same person as that actor;
or Al
Pacino being the exact persons he depicts in his characters (remember
the
tirade he goes off on in the movie "Devil's Advocate").

Spin it anyway you wish, the choice of that callsign shows a complete
lack of taste.


JJ, are you *really* that desperate? No spin at all, I happen to agree with
the analogy. If you don't, that's your preference. I happen not to believe
that my callsign shows a lack of taste. If you do, that's your preference.
Either way, it's my call, I like it, you don't have to, and that's all there
is to it.

Now, if it's such an issue for you, to continue looking at it, dealing with
it, in any way thinking about it is your choice to stay upset about it.
That's your choice too, 'magine dat!

Kim W5TIT

Kim W5TIT wrote:

I happen not to believe
that my callsign shows a lack of taste.

To someone with no taste I imagine it wouldn't. You really should think
about operating on CB, you're their kid of gal.

"JJ" wrote in message
...
Kim W5TIT wrote:

I happen not to believe
that my callsign shows a lack of taste.

To someone with no taste I imagine it wouldn't. You really should think
about operating on CB, you're their kid of gal.


OK, I see, you are that desperate...and you're also obsessed. Oh well.
Have a really happy life, JJ, or at least try to!

Kim W5TIT