Apparently those amusingly stifled people in charge of Tennessee want to ban teachers from talking about homosexuality (because silence will be highly beneficial to any young people going through their sexual awakenings...) and George has had some thoughts on it.
Some woman was talking about how dangerous and immoral it was to be gay on the phone at work today. I totally Marboed her and asked if she needed anything. She was a little shocked and immediately changed her conversation. If she wasn't saying something she felt like she shouldn't be saying on some level she wouldn't have changed what she was saying.
How is it dangerous to be gay?
I haven't heard of gay terorists or gay militants...
Equally being gay carries about the same risk to a person as it does being straight.
And morals are subjective so they don't really count.
Shadowbrand wrote:"I blew up the American Embassy because I love penis."
*So sayth the rainblow clad balacava wearing armed militant*
Wouldn't that be a sight?
I don't want to stereotype them but the American religious right would have a complete fit over that, luckily there would be comething to balance them out...
Then again America doesn't exactly have much in a way of a left... or a center come to think of it...
Our southern neighbours are so very,very confused. When your feeling down lads. Come to Canada, where here you can marry and practically feth in public and no one will care!
They're not performing their God-given duty of populating the Fatherland for our Holy Wars, I guess.
Mind you a lot of the kinds of people who dislike gays are the people who believe that there are angry sky wizards who will one day levitate them into paradise if they tell others about him hard enough. Paradise is apparently somewhere between the stratosphere and the ionosphere. It must also have a cloaking field.
"Every man is created equal... except those who are homo-, bi- or transsexual."
Good to see that Takei is still hanging in and "fighting the good fight". For a country that prides itself on "freedom" some Americans (not all, mind you, far from it!) sure act hostile.
This makes no sense; would it make more sense to tel students about homosexuality so they know its perfectly normal instead of them growing up hating gays because they know nothing about it.
heacy hitter wrote:This makes no sense; would it make more sense to tel students about homosexuality so they know its perfectly normal instead of them growing up hating gays because they know nothing about it.
MeanGreenStompa wrote:Apparently those amusingly stifled people in charge of Tennessee want to ban teachers from talking about homosexuality (because silence will be highly beneficial to any young people going through their sexual awakenings...) and George has had some thoughts on it.
MeanGreenStompa wrote:Apparently those amusingly stifled people in charge of Tennessee want to ban teachers from talking about homosexuality (because silence will be highly beneficial to any young people going through their sexual awakenings...) and George has had some thoughts on it.
I don't really care, but how about we talk about that math, English, History, and Government first? Too much focus on bs and not enough on 2+2=5.
Out of curiosity, why government instead of the sciences?
The American government won't give the school boards enough money to have more than four subjects. But considering the cuts that have already been made to the budget, most students won't actually be able to count above four anyway, meaning there's no real loss to be had there.
They're not performing their God-given duty of populating the Fatherland for our Holy Wars, I guess.
Mind you a lot of the kinds of people who dislike gays are the people who believe that there are angry sky wizards who will one day levitate them into paradise if they tell others about him hard enough. Paradise is apparently somewhere between the stratosphere and the ionosphere. It must also have a cloaking field.
Who can fathom why they feel the way they do?
Someone's a bit salty(aka bitter).
Mind you some people just don't like homosexuals because they're homosexuals and some decide that religion is enough of a reason. Others include insecurity in one's own sexuality and ignorance about the transmission of certain diseases.
I personally don't like the homosexuals who decide that everyone should know and proclaim it at the loudest. In fact a friend of mine got upset over a homosexual wearing a T-shirt saying "I'm Gaylic". His mom's from Ireland and she was none to pleased either.
Seriosuly, most people don't give a feth about who you feth. And for those who do, there's George Takei: Emperor of the Rising Sun and invader of Soviet Russia.
If I were a member of a not-really-dangerous group which has been labeled evil and sinful through much of history and even today is regularly murdered for their preference of sex partners or spouses, I might be tempted to be so bold as to wear shirts which said things like "l'm gaylic". I'm devoutly proud of my Irish heritage, and while I love Gaelic, I can't take any offense at "gaylic". I admire the sense of defiance.
Mannahnin wrote:If I were a member of a not-really-dangerous group which has been labeled evil and sinful through much of history and even today is regularly murdered for their preference of sex partners or spouses, I might be tempted to be so bold as to wear shirts which said things like "l'm gaylic". I'm devoutly proud of my Irish heritage, and while I love Gaelic, I can't take any offense at "gaylic". I admire the sense of defiance.
My aunt was beaten for being a lesbian and disowned by my grandmother, she didn't even announce that she was a lesbian to the guy who assaulted her and we didn't know that she was assaulted for being a lesbian until half a year before she died. Yet she stayed with her girlfriend to the day she died, she never was incredibly boastful about being a lesbian but still suffered from it, now that's defiance.
Most homosexuals now and days are lucky if the worst thing that happens to them is that they get offended by the usage of the word 'gay'. Some, like my mexican/black friend also go through a lot of stuff. For those who don't know, mexican fathers tend to frown upon homosexuality to the point that they beat their sons to the point of assault, so he hasn't told his father yet and is deathly afraid to.
I personally hate those who go out and think that they're being special by proclaiming it like its the world's business.
Yes, that would be lucky. Many get beat up. In sub-Saharan Africa, a common crime against homosexuals is "corrective rape". It's not as common in the US, but it still happens in first world countries.
Mannahnin wrote:If I were a member of a not-really-dangerous group which has been labeled evil and sinful through much of history and even today is regularly murdered for their preference of sex partners or spouses, I might be tempted to be so bold as to wear shirts which said things like "l'm gaylic". I'm devoutly proud of my Irish heritage, and while I love Gaelic, I can't take any offense at "gaylic". I admire the sense of defiance.
My aunt was beaten for being a lesbian and disowned by my grandmother, she didn't even announce that she was a lesbian to the guy who assaulted her and we didn't know that she was assaulted for being a lesbian until half a year before she died. Yet she stayed with her girlfriend to the day she died, she never was incredibly boastful about being a lesbian but still suffered from it, now that's defiance.
I give honor to your aunt, but that's not the same thing as defiance. She was being true to herself, but in the few details you've given I don't see defiance. The word defiance has a meaning. And the folks who advertise; who proudly and publically state who and what they and spit in the face of fear are are showing it.
halonachos wrote:I personally hate those who go out and think that they're being special by proclaiming it like its the world's business.
Perhaps if you had to walk a mile in their shoes you might think twice before being so disdainful and judgmental of them. Much less using words like "hate".
halonachos wrote:
I personally hate those who go out and think that they're being special by proclaiming it like its the world's business.
You better stop telling women that they're attractive then.
You communicate your sexuality in myriad ways every day, most of them unconscious. Telling people that they shouldn't announce who they like to feth is like telling someone they should stop speaking with an accent.
And for the record, the whole 'acting gay' thing isn't an act. They're just like that. The reason gay men act feminine is because they are feminine. Likewise, the opposite is true for lesbians. There's obviously varying degrees, and quite the difference between an egalitarian homosexual relationship and a transexual one (not the correct term), but generally you'll find that that's how things are.
To some extent I think people forget how much of one's personality is conscious construction. Acting like a good person isn't simply a stoke of luck, but a decision made by the agent in question.
For example, when I was about 10 I decided that I liked being a bit of a prick, and so here we are today.
Most homosexuals I know you couldn't tell are homosexuals by looking at them. Unless they're at a gay pride parade or something, in which case they're often reveling in the eccentricities associated with their lifestyle choices.
Melissia wrote:Most homosexuals I know you couldn't tell are homosexuals by looking at them. Unless they're at a gay pride parade or something, in which case they're often reveling in the eccentricities associated with their lifestyle choices.
Maybe I'm just particularly conscious of it, but I always find it easy to discern in person. Its always minor things like a gay man saying "I went out with this guy." instead of "I went out." People don't generally mention people they socialize with unless they're telling a particular story, the person is of note to the listeners, or they're sexually attracted to them.
Well this is true, but that pretty much happens with any conversation that isn't with a particularly careful person. I'm just saying the flamboyantly gay stereotype or the muscular butch lesbian stereotype both appear, at least from my point of view, to be the exception rather than the rule.
Oh, I'm just mad I'm not sitting up on a cloud having a conversation with Doyle, Zappa, and Captain Lou Albano is all. Stupid rapture being a fake. Who would have seen that coming?
Mind you some people just don't like homosexuals because they're homosexuals and some decide that religion is enough of a reason. Others include insecurity in one's own sexuality and ignorance about the transmission of certain diseases.
I personally don't like the homosexuals who decide that everyone should know and proclaim it at the loudest. In fact a friend of mine got upset over a homosexual wearing a T-shirt saying "I'm Gaylic". His mom's from Ireland and she was none to pleased either.
Seriosuly, most people don't give a feth about who you feth. And for those who do, there's George Takei: Emperor of the Rising Sun and invader of Soviet Russia.
Yeah, that does grate on my nerves too. I mean, I don't feel the need to be running around in a shirt that says, "I like the wimmins." On one hand, I don't care if your idea of a good time is railing guys or chicks, or both, or neither. Do whatever it is that floats your boat. On the other hand, I don't care if your idea of a good time is railing guys or chicks. I don't care. If I have to hear about it, it might make me judgmental, and neither of us want that.
It's worth noting that being androphilic, gay men are attracted to... masculine men. Thus, to appear desirable to other gay men, assuming a more masculine appearance tends to be popular.
Mannahnin wrote:If I were a member of a not-really-dangerous group which has been labeled evil and sinful through much of history and even today is regularly murdered for their preference of sex partners or spouses, I might be tempted to be so bold as to wear shirts which said things like "l'm gaylic". I'm devoutly proud of my Irish heritage, and while I love Gaelic, I can't take any offense at "gaylic". I admire the sense of defiance.
Also an Irish pup here and, though my whole family would certainly disapprove, I love this play on words.
People who would be bothered about that shirt seem likely to either be the same kind of people that find every joke-shirt annoying, or they are the kind of person that finds homosexuality disturbing.
Fafnir wrote:And for the record, the whole 'acting gay' thing isn't an act. They're just like that. The reason gay men act feminine is because they are feminine. Likewise, the opposite is true for lesbians. There's obviously varying degrees, and quite the difference between an egalitarian homosexual relationship and a transexual one (not the correct term), but generally you'll find that that's how things are.
Crap, I didn't realize I was feminine. I'll be needing more pink clothes then
Heh. Reminds me of an old joke... a butch lesbian asks another woman out, whom responds "no thanks, I'm interested in women."
At any rate, just as there are heterosexual males that are into muscular females, there's homosexual males who are into effeminate males. I really don't care what the ratio is for either compared to the rest of the population
Fafnir wrote:It's worth noting that being androphilic, gay men are attracted to... masculine men.
I know plenty of gay men who would disagree.
Generalizations are generalizations. I'm sure there are also plenty of straight men who are attracted to masculine women. Yes, by and large it does depend on the individuals involved.
MeanGreenStompa wrote:Apparently those amusingly stifled people in charge of Tennessee want to ban teachers from talking about homosexuality (because silence will be highly beneficial to any young people going through their sexual awakenings...) and George has had some thoughts on it.
I don't really care, but how about we talk about that math, English, History, and Government first? Too much focus on bs and not enough on 2+2=5.
Out of curiosity, why government instead of the sciences?
It and music are covered under math.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mannahnin wrote:If I were a member of a not-really-dangerous group which has been labeled evil and sinful through much of history and even today is regularly murdered for their preference of sex partners or spouses, I might be tempted to be so bold as to wear shirts which said things like "l'm gaylic". I'm devoutly proud of my Irish heritage, and while I love Gaelic, I can't take any offense at "gaylic". I admire the sense of defiance.
Alot of people seem to be easily confusing sexual orientation, and gender preference. Not all gay men are effeminate, nor are all lesbians feminine. Nor all the all attracted to the same personal qualities in others. Theres a myriad of, sub-labels( for lack of a better term) that are used within the GLBT communities to express how people see themselves and who they find attractive.
If you don't know the jargon, its pretty easy to figure out since alot of it is innuendo based. But, it would mean educating ones self about another culture most people prefer to avoid because they too might catch some dreadful Takei cooties.
Mistress of minis wrote:
If you don't know the jargon, its pretty easy to figure out since alot of it is innuendo based. But, it would mean educating ones self about another culture most people prefer to avoid because they too might catch some dreadful Takei cooties.
Or maybe they just don't care. I know thats about #9,875,252 on my priority list. In the words of the immortal bard: "Tune in, turn off, and drop out man!"
You start sex ed at the age of 11 in the UK, if I recall correctly.
Halonachos wrote:I personally don't like the homosexuals who decide that everyone should know and proclaim it at the loudest. In fact a friend of mine got upset over a homosexual wearing a T-shirt saying "I'm Gaylic". His mom's from Ireland and she was none to pleased either.
I feel the same way about people who put the fact that they're gay in their info bar on websites like Facebook, it's just stupid.
Once homosexuality has been socially acceptable for a bit longer I imagine people won't feel the need to be so vocal about it.
The less identity politics we have the more unified we'll be as people, as everyone will someday have the same worldview as me and (paraphrased)Gunnery Sergeant Hartman.
"There is no bigotry here... to me you are all equally worthless."
Mistress of minis wrote:Alot of people seem to be easily confusing sexual orientation, and gender preference. Not all gay men are effeminate, nor are all lesbians feminine. Nor all the all attracted to the same personal qualities in others. Theres a myriad of, sub-labels( for lack of a better term) that are used within the GLBT communities to express how people see themselves and who they find attractive.
If you don't know the jargon, its pretty easy to figure out since alot of it is innuendo based. But, it would mean educating ones self about another culture most people prefer to avoid because they too might catch some dreadful Takei cooties.
The tranny subculture is Tzeentchian in nature by itself. I'm more fem some days and more masc others, and my preferences, both sub/dom and masc/fem, tend to nudge accordingly. It's much more a wave to be ridden than anything predictable or clear-cut though. I dress what I would call fairly gay but people still can't tell about me for sure, which absolutely reflects my extreme Bi-ness.
Fafnir wrote:And for the record, the whole 'acting gay' thing isn't an act. They're just like that. The reason gay men act feminine is because they are feminine. Likewise, the opposite is true for lesbians. There's obviously varying degrees, and quite the difference between an egalitarian homosexual relationship and a transexual one (not the correct term), but generally you'll find that that's how things are.
Oh believe me, I know. I have no idea how my friend has been able to hide it from his dad with his voice and all fitting the stereotype perfectly.
@ Dogma, I don't tell women that they're pretty, hot, or anything really. I've always been kind of 'meh' towards the whole sex thing and I really don't care about it enough compared to school or work. I believe that one should keep their preferences and experiences to themselves. I don't think its cool if some guy boasts about banging a chick while doing a handstand and I loath people who think that they should tell everyone. If the government should have no say in what happens in the sack then I don't want to know either, especially when parents are concerned.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:
Mistress of minis wrote:Alot of people seem to be easily confusing sexual orientation, and gender preference. Not all gay men are effeminate, nor are all lesbians feminine. Nor all the all attracted to the same personal qualities in others. Theres a myriad of, sub-labels( for lack of a better term) that are used within the GLBT communities to express how people see themselves and who they find attractive.
If you don't know the jargon, its pretty easy to figure out since alot of it is innuendo based. But, it would mean educating ones self about another culture most people prefer to avoid because they too might catch some dreadful Takei cooties.
The tranny subculture is Tzeentchian in nature by itself. I'm more fem some days and more masc others, and my preferences, both sub/dom and masc/fem, tend to nudge accordingly. It's much more a wave to be ridden than anything predictable or clear-cut though. I dress what I would call fairly gay but people still can't tell about me for sure, which absolutely reflects my extreme Bi-ness.
I know this one tranny and that led to an awkward situation.
Some girl: [tranny] if you had a [male appendage] I would suck it. Tranny: I do. Some Girl: *feels leg of tranny* Oh my.
Best time at the lunch table ever, which is weird seeing as though my worst time at lunch involved seeing yaoi. Scrath that,the best time at lunch was when my friend had been silent until the last minute, in which case he raised his head and yelled "I killed Mufasa." yeah, that was the best time.
halonachos wrote:
@ Dogma, I don't tell women that they're pretty, hot, or anything really. I've always been kind of 'meh' towards the whole sex thing and I really don't care about it enough compared to school or work. I believe that one should keep their preferences and experiences to themselves. I don't think its cool if some guy boasts about banging a chick while doing a handstand and I loath people who think that they should tell everyone. If the government should have no say in what happens in the sack then I don't want to know either, especially when parents are concerned.
Lord-Loss wrote: I feel the same way about people who put the fact that they're gay in their info bar on websites like Facebook, it's just stupid.
So I take it you dislike people who advertise that they're straight on facebook as well?
You can choose whether to display if you're "interested in women/men/both", there's absolutely no point in putting your sexuality in your info box/bar.
Lord-Loss wrote:You can choose whether to display if you're "interested in women/men/both", there's absolutely no point in putting your sexuality in your info box/bar.
How is it ok for a man to put that he is interested in other men but if he uses the word homosexual that is crossing the line?
Lord-Loss wrote:By 'info box' I meant bio, that sort of thing. It seems unnessicary to put it in your bio and it makes you look like a bit of a gakker, in my opinion.
Unless you are willing to let gay people tell you what it means to be straight and how you should change your life and social dealings to fit their ideals better I don't think your opinion matters much.
Lord-Loss wrote:I'm not homophobic
Of course, you know, except for the ways in which you are. You just want to impose your own idea of how they should act and if they don't you'll be insulting, not beat them. I mean, you aren't vicious after all.
Lord-Loss wrote:
I feel the same way about people who put the fact that they're gay in their info bar on websites like Facebook, it's just stupid.
So I take it you dislike people who advertise that they're straight on facebook as well?
You can choose whether to display if you're "interested in women/men/both", there's absolutely no point in putting your sexuality in your info box/bar.
So yea, I think they're being a bit idiotic too.
Why? A person's sexuality is a very important part of their identity. Would you get offended if you saw a picture on FB of a straight couple kissing?
Lord-Loss wrote:
I'm not homophobic and I have no problem with gay people at all.
You just spent the last few posts elaborating on exactly how you do have a problem with gay people.
You're either lying to us and to yourself, about this problem you have with gay people or your apparent lack of a problem with gay people, or you just aren't particularly self-aware. In either case you should be derided.
Simply putting their sexuality on Facebook isn't really going to irk me much. I don't really care much for it when people of any preference are in my face about their sexual orientation. Simply saying they are gay doesn't really strike me as "in my face" though.
Sexual preference is like religion. I dont care what yours is, just respect me enough not to try to force it down my throat and I will respect your decision in turn.
halonachos wrote:
@ Dogma, I don't tell women that they're pretty, hot, or anything really. I've always been kind of 'meh' towards the whole sex thing and I really don't care about it enough compared to school or work. I believe that one should keep their preferences and experiences to themselves. I don't think its cool if some guy boasts about banging a chick while doing a handstand and I loath people who think that they should tell everyone. If the government should have no say in what happens in the sack then I don't want to know either, especially when parents are concerned.
You must be a very angry guy if that's the case.
I tend to surround myself with people who feel the same way, my gay friends don't broadcast it to the world and my other friends don't talk about their choices of mate either. Now, if someone's having relationship issues then we talk about that, hell if my gay friend was having issues with his boyfriend and he wanted to talk about the issues then its all good.
I just don't care about what people do in the bedroom and would rather not hear about it. I don't feel the need to proclaim my choice either and I would prefer if a lot of things people do in the sack weren't brought up. Have you ever heard a blow-job described by a girl while you're still in middleschool, I have and I was veritably grossed out the entire day.
halonachos wrote:Have you ever heard a blow-job described by a girl while you're still in middleschool, I have and I was veritably grossed out the entire day.
halonachos wrote:Have you ever heard a blow-job described by a girl while you're still in middleschool, I have and I was veritably grossed out the entire day.
It's kind of hard to ruin the concept, it's a pretty simple process. Sure, there are plenty of things that you can do to spice things up, but the basic method itself is fairly rudimentary.
I mean... unless she was like... using her teeth or something. Had that happen to a friend once. He couldn't walk straight for a week.
AvatarForm wrote:Sexual preference is like religion. I dont care what yours is, just respect me enough not to try to force it down my throat and I will respect your decision in turn.
I dont care what yours is, just respect me enough not to try to force it down my throat and I will respect your decision in turn.
Respect me enough not to try to force it down my throat.
AvatarForm wrote:Sexual preference is like religion. I dont care what yours is, just respect me enough not to try to force it down my throat and I will respect your decision in turn.
I dont care what yours is, just respect me enough not to try to force it down my throat and I will respect your decision in turn.
Respect me enough not to try to force it down my throat.
halonachos wrote:
I just don't care about what people do in the bedroom and would rather not hear about it. I don't feel the need to proclaim my choice either and I would prefer if a lot of things people do in the sack weren't brought up. Have you ever heard a blow-job described by a girl while you're still in middleschool, I have and I was veritably grossed out the entire day.
Yes, I had a similar experience and I didn't think much of it. Sex is something people do, it is no more disgusting than eating, sleeping, or breathing.
halonachos wrote:
I just don't care about what people do in the bedroom and would rather not hear about it. I don't feel the need to proclaim my choice either and I would prefer if a lot of things people do in the sack weren't brought up. Have you ever heard a blow-job described by a girl while you're still in middleschool, I have and I was veritably grossed out the entire day.
Yes, I had a similar experience and I didn't think much of it. Sex is something people do, it is no more disgusting than eating, sleeping, or breathing.
Taking a massive gak is also something people do, but I'd rather talk about blowjobs.
halonachos wrote: @ Dogma, I don't tell women that they're pretty, hot, or anything really. I've always been kind of 'meh' towards the whole sex thing and I really don't care about it enough compared to school or work. I believe that one should keep their preferences and experiences to themselves. I don't think its cool if some guy boasts about banging a chick while doing a handstand and I loath people who think that they should tell everyone. If the government should have no say in what happens in the sack then I don't want to know either, especially when parents are concerned.
You must be a very angry guy if that's the case.
I actually agreed with this fellow, but I'm rather a prude, and would much rather talk about other, more interesting things. How does the loathing of sexual bragging make someone in general angry?
And I'm pretty sure that starfleet offers a damn good pension, so no price can be put on that man.
Off topic, but I was gone for a little bit, and there appears to be a new meme about assault rams. Anyone mind explaining without just using this question as a launching point for the meme?
micahaphone wrote:Off topic, but I was gone for a little bit, and there appears to be a new meme about assault rams. Anyone mind explaining without just using this question as a launching point for the meme?
dogma wrote:How much do you think George Takei would cost?
Probably as much as his CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT.
By 'info box' I meant bio, that sort of thing. It seems unnessicary to put it in your bio and it makes you look like a bit of a gakker, in my opinion.
But the option is there on facebook. how is it a big deal, Facebook just asks who you are interested in and she has filled it in to say men and women. It's a standard part of the face book page that most people fill in. Do you froth up about how unnecessary it is when a straight person fills it in? Probably not.
And then you say...
I'm not homophobic and I have no problem with gay people at all.
Of course you don't. That's why you seem to want them all to live under a rock and be almost invisible in a society overwhelmed with heterosexual imagery.
The reason why there are gay people that go on prides and draw attention to it isn't because they want to "force it down your throat" but because it raises awareness. They have to draw attention in order to make their voice heard and get things like equality, so that more people treat them like normal people instead of people that have something shameful or wrong about them. Awareness has to be raised because people like you under the claim of "not wanting to know about their bedroom activities" want them to seeming disappear from public visibility.
How many gay people actually demand you know what they get up to in the bedroom? Not many, no more than heterosexual people like to boast. And yet it is the gay people who are targeted with this idea that they are rubbing people's faces in it, while heterosexual people can proclaim their sexuality as loudly as they like because it is the norm. Someone wearing a t-shirt that says they are gay does not mean they are in any way sharing their bedroom activities any more than a straight person does if they wear a t-shirt that indicates they are heterosexual.
My wife works for Stonewall, the LGB charity in the UK and has been on a few prides, she has a t-shirt that reads "Some people are gay - get over it" and she has received abuse in the street when wearing it home afterwards. One bloke once hit her across the legs with his stick when she crossed the road.
When society has changed so that gay people are normalised and people don't think they can shout "You f-ing dyke" at a woman for wearing a t-shirt indicating they are gay then there might not be a need to raise awareness. But until then claiming that gay people should go out of sight and out of mind *is* prejudiced and homophobic.
By 'info box' I meant bio, that sort of thing. It seems unnessicary to put it in your bio and it makes you look like a bit of a gakker, in my opinion.
But the option is there on facebook. how is it a big deal, Facebook just asks who you are interested in and she has filled it in to say men and women. It's a standard part of the face book page that most people fill in. Do you froth up about how unnecessary it is when a straight person fills it in? Probably not.
And then you say...
I'm not homophobic and I have no problem with gay people at all.
Of course you don't. That's why you seem to want them all to live under a rock and be almost invisible in a society overwhelmed with heterosexual imagery.
The reason why there are gay people that go on prides and draw attention to it isn't because they want to "force it down your throat" but because it raises awareness. They have to draw attention in order to make their voice heard and get things like equality, so that more people treat them like normal people instead of people that have something shameful or wrong about them. Awareness has to be raised because people like you under the claim of "not wanting to know about their bedroom activities" want them to seeming disappear from public visibility.
How many gay people actually demand you know what they get up to in the bedroom? Not many, no more than heterosexual people like to boast. And yet it is the gay people who are targeted with this idea that they are rubbing people's faces in it, while heterosexual people can proclaim their sexuality as loudly as they like because it is the norm. Someone wearing a t-shirt that says they are gay does not mean they are in any way sharing their bedroom activities any more than a straight person does if they wear a t-shirt that indicates they are heterosexual.
My wife works for Stonewall, the LGB charity in the UK and has been on a few prides, she has a t-shirt that reads "Some people are gay - get over it" and she has received abuse in the street when wearing it home afterwards. One bloke once hit her across the legs with his stick when she crossed the road.
When society has changed so that gay people are normalised and people don't think they can shout "You f-ing dyke" at a woman for wearing a t-shirt indicating they are gay then there might not be a need to raise awareness. But until then claiming that gay people should go out of sight and out of mind *is* prejudiced and homophobic.
Frazzled wrote:I have to ask, do you feel nice and superior now?
Do you dispute the points made?
I have some difficulty having sympathy with someone complaining about going onto someone else's facebook page and then making a fuss because they've actually filled in the bit where Facebook ask whether you are interested in men or women. If that's objectionable they have problems IMO.
Frazzled wrote:I have to ask, do you feel nice and superior now?
Do you dispute the points made?
I have some difficulty having sympathy with someone complaining about going onto someone else's facebook page and then making a fuss because they've actually filled in the bit where Facebook ask whether you are interested in men or women. If that's objectionable they have problems IMO.
Oh not at all (ok I kinda got bored and fazed out in the second paragraph-look shiny! I blame American Television). That just came off a bit chip on the shoulderish.
By 'info box' I meant bio, that sort of thing. It seems unnessicary to put it in your bio and it makes you look like a bit of a gakker, in my opinion.
But the option is there on facebook. how is it a big deal, Facebook just asks who you are interested in and she has filled it in to say men and women. It's a standard part of the face book page that most people fill in. Do you froth up about how unnecessary it is when a straight person fills it in? Probably not.
And then you say...
I'm not homophobic and I have no problem with gay people at all.
Of course you don't. That's why you seem to want them all to live under a rock and be almost invisible in a society overwhelmed with heterosexual imagery.
The reason why there are gay people that go on prides and draw attention to it isn't because they want to "force it down your throat" but because it raises awareness. They have to draw attention in order to make their voice heard and get things like equality, so that more people treat them like normal people instead of people that have something shameful or wrong about them. Awareness has to be raised because people like you under the claim of "not wanting to know about their bedroom activities" want them to seeming disappear from public visibility.
How many gay people actually demand you know what they get up to in the bedroom? Not many, no more than heterosexual people like to boast. And yet it is the gay people who are targeted with this idea that they are rubbing people's faces in it, while heterosexual people can proclaim their sexuality as loudly as they like because it is the norm. Someone wearing a t-shirt that says they are gay does not mean they are in any way sharing their bedroom activities any more than a straight person does if they wear a t-shirt that indicates they are heterosexual.
My wife works for Stonewall, the LGB charity in the UK and has been on a few prides, she has a t-shirt that reads "Some people are gay - get over it" and she has received abuse in the street when wearing it home afterwards. One bloke once hit her across the legs with his stick when she crossed the road.
When society has changed so that gay people are normalised and people don't think they can shout "You f-ing dyke" at a woman for wearing a t-shirt indicating they are gay then there might not be a need to raise awareness. But until then claiming that gay people should go out of sight and out of mind *is* prejudiced and homophobic.
I could not agree more. I cannot say that emphatically enough.
By 'info box' I meant bio, that sort of thing. It seems unnessicary to put it in your bio and it makes you look like a bit of a gakker, in my opinion.
But the option is there on facebook. how is it a big deal, Facebook just asks who you are interested in and she has filled it in to say men and women. It's a standard part of the face book page that most people fill in. Do you froth up about how unnecessary it is when a straight person fills it in? Probably not.
And then you say...
Lord-Loss wrote:You can choose whether to display if you're "interested in women/men/both", there's absolutely no point in putting your sexuality in your info box/bar.
Lord-Loss wrote:By 'info box' I meant bio.
I didn't say I had a problem with people saying they're gay on facebook, it's just a bit stupid when someones profile clearly shows that they're gay and then they choose to put it in they bio. It's not something big but it irritates me a bit.
Why does it irritate you so much? and why call it stupid?
I'm not gay, but if i was and i choose to put it on facebook, then whats you problem where i write it? How does it affect you in any way whatsoever?
Revenent Reiko wrote:Why does it irritate you so much? and why call it stupid?
I'm not gay, but if i was and i choose to put it on facebook, then whats you problem where i write it? How does it affect you in any way whatsoever?
Lord-Loss wrote:
I didn't say I had a problem with people saying they're gay on facebook, it's just a bit stupid when someones profile clearly shows that they're gay and then they choose to put it in they bio. It's not something big but it irritates me a bit.
Lord-Loss wrote:
It doesn't irritate me much, I never said it did.
The text speaks for itself.
My question to you is how can you know someone is 'obviously' gay? WHat? Stereotypes? See if he walks around like a Sassy Gay Friend? Your comment here is, to me, more offensive than anything ele you've said. How can you tell someone is OBVIOUSLY gay? My friends who are bi and gay both look and act like they're totally normal people. I have female friends who are completely straight, but their profile pictures have them kissing a close friend on the cheek. I have male friends who are straight, and their profile pictures show them sitting in other guys laps.
You really can't say that someone is 'obviously' gay, and what I want to know is what the hell your basing your definition of 'obviously' gay on. I mean, look at my dakka profile. My avatar is a frigging yellow and pink pony prancing along, does that make me OBVIOUSLY gay? Would I be obviously straighter if it was some macho Space Marine killing gak?
Lord-Loss wrote: I didn't say I had a problem with people saying they're gay on facebook, it's just a bit stupid when someones profile clearly shows that they're gay and then they choose to put it in they bio. It's not something big but it irritates me a bit.
So what is that then? EDIT: ninja'd, and epically, well said Chris
i find it funny when people say that Gay people ram their preferences down other people's throats
aside from the obvious sex joke, these people forget that for centuries they've been doing the oppressive ramming of preferences
and to be honest, Gays have a healthier message to say than the current hetero agenda imho
Gay people champion "be yourself" "love yourself" while the hetero agenda fosters "you aint a man if..." and "lose weight so you can be prettier" etc...
Lord-Loss wrote: I didn't say I had a problem with people saying they're gay on facebook, it's just a bit stupid when someones profile clearly shows that they're gay and then they choose to put it in they bio. It's not something big but it irritates me a bit.
Lord-Loss wrote: It doesn't irritate me much, I never said it did.
The text speaks for itself.
My question to you is how can you know someone is 'obviously' gay? WHat? Stereotypes? See if he walks around like a Sassy Gay Friend? Your comment here is, to me, more offensive than anything ele you've said. How can you tell someone is OBVIOUSLY gay? My friends who are bi and gay both look and act like they're totally normal people. I have female friends who are completely straight, but their profile pictures have them kissing a close friend on the cheek. I have male friends who are straight, and their profile pictures show them sitting in other guys laps.
You really can't say that someone is 'obviously' gay, and what I want to know is what the hell your basing your definition of 'obviously' gay on. I mean, look at my dakka profile. My avatar is a frigging yellow and pink pony prancing along, does that make me OBVIOUSLY gay? Would I be obviously straighter if it was some macho Space Marine killing gak?
First of all, I said clearly, not obviously.
I was talking about on facebook and how it would be unnessicary to put something like "Scott. 20. Gay/straight" whatever in your profile when there is an option to put whether you're interested in men/women/both and it's displayed right under your bio.
Stop overreacting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Revenent Reiko wrote:
Lord-Loss wrote: I didn't say I had a problem with people saying they're gay on facebook, it's just a bit stupid when someones profile clearly shows that they're gay and then they choose to put it in they bio. It's not something big but it irritates me a bit.
So what is that then? EDIT: ninja'd, and epically, well said Chris
"Why does it irritate you so much?"
"Irritates me a bit"
It's not a massive deal, I don't instantly dislike someone if I see they've done it. It's just something i've never really understood. I feel the exact same way about people who put something like "Scott. 20. Straight" or something like that in their bio.
Clearly, obviously, whatever. I'm calling you out on falling back on semantics.
It seems that this is a change of tune, and earlier you were railing against people even saying they were gay on facebook.
BUt fine, change ever instance of the word obviously in my post to clearly if it makes you feel any better. That question still demands an answer, how can you tell someone is CLEARLY gay?
ChrisWWII wrote:It seems that this is a change of tune, and earlier you were railing against people even saying they were gay on facebook.
I really wasn't. I've said the exact same thing throughout the thread.
ChrisWWII wrote:But fine, change ever instance of the word obviously in my post to clearly if it makes you feel any better. That question still demands an answer, how can you tell someone is CLEARLY gay?
Bakerofish wrote:and to be honest, Gays have a healthier message to say than the current hetero agenda imho
Gay people champion "be yourself" "love yourself" while the hetero agenda fosters "you aint a man if..." and "lose weight so you can be prettier" etc...
Truly. Gay people put no stock in their personal appearance.
Lord-Loss wrote:
I didn't say I had a problem with people saying they're gay on facebook, it's just a bit stupid when someones profile clearly shows that they're gay and then they choose to put it in they bio. It's not something big but it irritates me a bit.
So what is that then?
EDIT: ninja'd, and epically, well said Chris
"Why does it irritate you so much?"
"Irritates me a bit"
It's not a massive deal, I don't instantly dislike someone if I see they've done it. It's just something i've never really understood. I feel the exact same way about people who put something like "Scott. 20. Straight" or something like that in their bio.
well why even mention it then? If it is something that you dont understand, why not ask why people why they do it instead of calling it stupid.
And i want to know your answer to ChrisWWII's question as well, how do you decide who is 'obviously' gay??!!
Lord-Loss wrote:
I really wasn't. I've said the exact same thing throughout the thread.
ChrisWWII wrote:But fine, change ever instance of the word obviously in my post to clearly if it makes you feel any better. That question still demands an answer, how can you tell someone is CLEARLY gay?
You can't and I never said you could.
You've said that you believe that people should not advertise that their gay on facebook, later amending it to say that it was stupid to do so if they were clearly gay. This implies that you believe there is a way to tell if someone is clearly gay.
Lord-Loss wrote:
I feel the same way about people who put the fact that they're gay in their info bar on websites like Facebook, it's just stupid.
So I take it you dislike people who advertise that they're straight on facebook as well?
You can choose whether to display if you're "interested in women/men/both", there's absolutely no point in putting your sexuality in your info box/bar.
So yea, I think they're being a bit idiotic too.
By info box, I meant bio.
My first post wasn't very clear and badly worded but I have made myself clear since then.
ChrisWWII wrote:This implies that you believe there is a way to tell if someone is clearly gay.
You know, all this conversation, and I can't help but ask: If you don't want people to tell you about themselves, why the FETH are you looking at their GODDAMNED FACEBOOK PAGES? That's what a facebook page is FOR. Quit [censored] and stop using facebook if you don't like it when people talk about themselves. I hate facebook as much as the next sociopathic loner, but this is just stupid.
Honestly some people, grow up...
*now wishes she hadn't looked at this thread again after the last time she left it*
I get irritated by gay people who constantly tell me how gay they are as well, but to be honest, it's the same level of irritation as the guy who won't shut up about the hot chick he picked up at the bar last night and banged in the alleyway, or the nerd who wants to tell me every detail about his Level 18 demon gnome wizard with a Staff of the Magi.
themocaw wrote:I get irritated by gay people who constantly tell me how gay they are as well, but to be honest, it's the same level of irritation as the guy who won't shut up about the hot chick he picked up at the bar last night and banged in the alleyway, or the nerd who wants to tell me every detail about his Level 18 demon gnome wizard with a Staff of the Magi.
Oh, please, tell me more about your demon wizard's staff! It is a very. . . stout staff, yes?
Bakerofish wrote:and to be honest, Gays have a healthier message to say than the current hetero agenda imho
Gay people champion "be yourself" "love yourself" while the hetero agenda fosters "you aint a man if..." and "lose weight so you can be prettier" etc...
Truly. Gay people put no stock in their personal appearance.
Bakerofish wrote:and to be honest, Gays have a healthier message to say than the current hetero agenda imho
Gay people champion "be yourself" "love yourself" while the hetero agenda fosters "you aint a man if..." and "lose weight so you can be prettier" etc...
Truly. Gay people put no stock in their personal appearance.
Tell me more about the hetero agenda.
*fish ignores bait*
It wasn't bait, it was a cheekily worded real question.
"Heterosexuals" are a pretty large group to organize an agenda around. I'm just wondering what you based your statements on.
I also just used the word "cheeky." I have been interacting with you folks across the pond so much it's influencing my vocabulary.
What specifically in the popular media led you to believe that heterosexuals are a monolithic entity with a cohesive agenda? Contrast this with the seemingly contradictory statements about the "hetero agenda" being disproportionately engaged with self-image when it is apparent in the same popular media that you cite that homosexuals are also capable of being concerned with their looks, weight, etc.
1. while i dont think there is a "monolithic entity" globally you cant deny that there are certain prevalent themes and mindsets that pervade pop media. (How do we make this villian interesting? make him British! no thats been done. Lets make him a closet homosexual! Brilliant! )
I live in a mainly Catholic country and there IS a monolithic entity that is pushing an agenda using current media where I am. (The Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines. They push their weight on the government, media, everything. Even moreso with the big debate in the country being about Reproductive health)
The scary part about this is that a lot of countries are worse off than mine. Middle eastern countries and India spring to mind.
2. I never said that Gay people arent preoccupied with looks. Thats all you
My first post wasn't very clear and badly worded but I have made myself clear since then.
I see what you're saying, and I apologize for not getting it sooner.
I still disagree with you though, and I fail to see any problem in a guy or girl saying that he or she's gay in her bio. I mean hell, in my bio I say I'm a geek and nerd, even though there are photos of me cosplaying right atop the screen.
Ummm, not really.
If you can say someone is clearly gay without them informing you of that fact, clearly you think there's some way to identify gay people. Agree, disagree?
ChrisWWII wrote:If you can say someone is clearly gay without them informing you of that fact, clearly you think there's some way to identify gay people. Agree, disagree?
Yes. There are ways of identifying gay people.
Take this picture for instance:
MOD edit: No, lets not
Do you think these gentlemen are homosexuals, without them explicitly mentioning that they are?
biccat wrote:
Yes. There are ways of identifying gay people.
Ways for you to identify them as gay, or ways in which they can identify themselves as gay?
Straight allies have a way mirroring conventionally homosexual behaviors, you know.
It was clearly a very poor attempt at humor.
There are certain circumstances where you can unquestionably identify someone as gay, particularly behaviors that even "straight allies" wouldn't engage in.
biccat wrote:
There are certain circumstances where you can unquestionably identify someone as gay, particularly behaviors that even "straight allies" wouldn't engage in.
I know straight people who have engaged in the activities that I believe you're referencing.
Melissia wrote:
You mean like the gusy that go "woot lesbians" every time two women who happen to be friends hug in greeting?
No, I mean straight people that march in gay pride parades wearing rainbow t-shirts and chaps of a particular sort.
Bakerofish wrote:i find it funny when people say that Gay people ram their preferences down other people's throats
aside from the obvious sex joke, these people forget that for centuries they've been doing the oppressive ramming of preferences
and to be honest, Gays have a healthier message to say than the current hetero agenda imho
Gay people champion "be yourself" "love yourself" while the hetero agenda fosters "you aint a man if..." and "lose weight so you can be prettier" etc...
just throwing that out there
I suspect the gay scene has just as much body fascism as the hetero media.
You don't notice it so much because there is less gay media around and hetero people don't read it much, because they aren't interested.
My office is on the floor above "Sweatbox, London's Premier Gay Sauna and Gym" in Soho.
As my brother sometimes says, "Just because you are a member of an oppressed minority, it doesn't mean you aren't an arsehole".
biccat wrote:
There are certain circumstances where you can unquestionably identify someone as gay, particularly behaviors that even "straight allies" wouldn't engage in.
I know straight people who have engaged in the activities that I believe you're referencing.
Then "gay" has an entirely different meaning than I am accustomed to.
dogma wrote:
biccat wrote:You mean like the gusy that go "woot lesbians" every time two women who happen to be friends hug in greeting?
No, I mean straight people that march in gay pride parades wearing rainbow t-shirts and chaps of a particular sort.
biccat wrote:
Then "gay" has an entirely different meaning than I am accustomed to.
Oh, "gay" is a wonderful word which means basically whatever you want it to. Anything can be "gay", even video games, 40k units, and certain practices in Halo.
Anyway, "gay" usually doesn't mean, not when used in civil conversation, "I once did that one thing with that one dude, but I didn't like it."
corpsesarefun wrote:Awesome a dual thread duel between dogma and biccat.
This must be a different definition to "awesome" than I am used to.
And "dual."
dogma wrote:
biccat wrote:
Then "gay" has an entirely different meaning than I am accustomed to.
Oh, "gay" is a wonderful word which means basically whatever you want it to. Anything can be "gay", even video games, 40k units, and certain practices in Halo.
Then I can say yes, I can objectively tell from a person's appearance whether they are gay or not.
Anyway, this has gone on long enough, I don't care about George Takei any more than I care about the rest of the cast from that inferior Star Trek series.
biccat wrote:
Then I can say yes, I can objectively tell from a person's appearance whether they are gay or not.
Well, not objectively, you can't use a subjective word to reach an objective conclusion.
Yes I can. If I assign a fixed value to "gay" (all blonds are gay), I can create an objective test to determine whether a person meets that definition. Your definition of 'gay' is simply subject to individual interpretation. It doesn't mean that I can't have an objective test for determining someone's "gayness."
You might disagree with that assesment, but that doesn't change my application of the label.
Bakerofish wrote:i find it funny when people say that Gay people ram their preferences down other people's throats
aside from the obvious sex joke, these people forget that for centuries they've been doing the oppressive ramming of preferences
and to be honest, Gays have a healthier message to say than the current hetero agenda imho
Gay people champion "be yourself" "love yourself" while the hetero agenda fosters "you aint a man if..." and "lose weight so you can be prettier" etc...
just throwing that out there
I suspect the gay scene has just as much body fascism as the hetero media.
You don't notice it so much because there is less gay media around and hetero people don't read it much, because they aren't interested.
My office is on the floor above "Sweatbox, London's Premier Gay Sauna and Gym" in Soho.
As my brother sometimes says, "Just because you are a member of an oppressed minority, it doesn't mean you aren't an arsehole".
this is always going to be true for both sides of the argument though.
As for gay media being not so prevalent: the only way for LGB POVs to be heard in the mainstream is if it is overwhelmingly positive. And even then the message tends to be filtered and censored down to "Is there a way we can avoid mentioning you're gay at all?"
In the meantime, mainstream media lets mysogyny, sex, drugs, etc air through with not a lot of trouble barring extreme cases. Take a look at an average rap video or Britney spears video. Lots of airplay. Sure concerned parents would gripe about it but really...not a lot of trouble. Turn it around though, make a video where adam lambert and ricky martin are grinding with half naked dudes and im betting you that's not seeing airtime without a some drama over it.
personally i really dont want to see that video but why the double standard?
Also, Martin Luther King Jr. was one loud bad-ass mofo. He had to be to get his message across.
I guess what I'm saying here, if people want the LGB community to dial it down a bit just let them have the same rights and treatment as any average joe. That way they can go through the sweet and crap of regular life in peace.
biccat wrote:
Yes I can. If I assign a fixed value to "gay" (all blonds are gay), I can create an objective test to determine whether a person meets that definition. Your definition of 'gay' is simply subject to individual interpretation. It doesn't mean that I can't have an objective test for determining someone's "gayness."
Yes, but the test is created via subjective means, which is an admitted problem of all non-mathematically determined sciences (and, if we're being really picky, even those), but still a real thing that you need to account for.
What is blonde, after all?
biccat wrote:
You might disagree with that assesment, but that doesn't change my application of the label.
Yes, you can objectively said to apply label X, but the application of label X is subjective.
corpsesarefun wrote:
Are you really arguing you can stop something being subjective by having a personal definition of it?
As you have identified, that is basically the definition of "subjective".
corpsesarefun wrote:
Also, dual means of two parts and was used correctly.
One might contend that an argument must be of two parts, though people do argue with themselves, so maybe not.
biccat wrote:
Yes I can. If I assign a fixed value to "gay" (all blonds are gay), I can create an objective test to determine whether a person meets that definition. Your definition of 'gay' is simply subject to individual interpretation. It doesn't mean that I can't have an objective test for determining someone's "gayness."
Yes, but the test is created via subjective means, which is an admitted problem of all non-mathematically determined sciences (and, if we're being really picky, even those), but still a real thing that you need to account for.
What is blonde, after all?
Are you a radical nihilist? It sure sounds like it. If so, then I'm not sure there's even any point in discussing anything with you.
biccat wrote:
Yes I can. If I assign a fixed value to "gay" (all blonds are gay), I can create an objective test to determine whether a person meets that definition. Your definition of 'gay' is simply subject to individual interpretation. It doesn't mean that I can't have an objective test for determining someone's "gayness."
Yes, but the test is created via subjective means, which is an admitted problem of all non-mathematically determined sciences (and, if we're being really picky, even those), but still a real thing that you need to account for.
What is blonde, after all?
Are you a radical nihilist? It sure sounds like it. If so, then I'm not sure there's even any point in discussing anything with you.
Anyway, I have spiders to paint.
As I noted before, IGNORE is your friend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:
How is it dangerous to be gay?
Because you might take someone's eye out with it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
This must be a different definition to "awesome" than I am used to.
I think you just convinced me that Americans really don't do irony Frazzled!
Neither do Canadians. Its a continental thing. Its like rain on your wedding day (wait thats not ironic, thats unfortunate)
biccat wrote:
Yes I can. If I assign a fixed value to "gay" (all blonds are gay), I can create an objective test to determine whether a person meets that definition. Your definition of 'gay' is simply subject to individual interpretation. It doesn't mean that I can't have an objective test for determining someone's "gayness."
Yes, but the test is created via subjective means, which is an admitted problem of all non-mathematically determined sciences (and, if we're being really picky, even those), but still a real thing that you need to account for.
What is blonde, after all?
Are you a radical nihilist? It sure sounds like it. If so, then I'm not sure there's even any point in discussing anything with you.
Anyway, I have spiders to paint.
As I noted before, IGNORE is your friend.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:
How is it dangerous to be gay?
Because you might take someone's eye out with it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
This must be a different definition to "awesome" than I am used to.
I think you just convinced me that Americans really don't do irony Frazzled!
Neither do Canadians. Its a continental thing. Its like rain on your wedding day (wait thats not ironic, thats unfortunate)
Although I could honestly care less about the issue, it's nice to see that someone has a good sense of humor! This damn world takes itself way too seriously.
Life is nothing but a fething joke, so laugh at it!
