Gays, lesbians, bisexuals, PART II

[The Gaffer]

I'll second that BoP. I've often seen "conservatives" questioned as to why they are so obsessed with what goes where and never seen a satisfactory answer.

* waits to see if one appears *

[Rían]

Well, I can give you a couple of responses to that, but I'm expecting someone any minute so it will have to wait a few hours.

[Elfhelm]

Well, I don't feel qualified to make blanket statements about gayness because it's not my life and my frame of reference is different.

But I do know that when they moved in next door, the property value went up. I kid you not. My new neighbors have really fixed up that run-down old place next door. I hope another gay couple moves in on the other side. I hope the whole street goes gay. Then I could re-finance and combine my two mortgages. As it happens the neighbors on the other side are the flag-waving leave-a-rusty-car-parked-on-the-lawn type. The guy has a mullet, even. Maybe if I put up a rainbow flag they'll sell their property to some more gays. If so, I'll be the first bring them a welcoming chocolate cake!

I suppose some folks will think I'm making this up. It's all true. My city is becoming a Mecca for gays, and our property values are going through the roof, so to speak! It's because they decorate, I think. The yards have flowers and they keep them mowed. It's really nice here now. When all the anti-gay people leave, it will be an even better place.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Lady Marion Magdalena

One of the problems I'm seeing with this debate we're having is that it is focusing exclusively on male-male relationships

The only reason it seems at the moment to be focused on male-male relationships at the moment is because the current topic of discussion is the ancient custom of pederasty, which is male-male.

Homosexual sex between two females is more likely to resemble heterosexual foreplay, does that make their attraction to eachother any less vaild?

No.

And you are all forgetting that homosexual relationships are not just about sex. Outside of the bedroom, can you truly say that behavior exhibited by homosexual partners is significantly different from behavior shown by heterosexual couples?

Would you claim that both types of couples don't go on dates, don't give eachother gifts, don't sneak cuddles when the parents aren't looking, etc.? That homosexual couples aren't couples until they've had sex and until that happens they're what? Just close friends?

I don't have the opportunity to observe gay and lesbian couples up close, so I won't claim anything about how they act. I'm not concerned with that.

What I see happening is a dehumanizing. People try to isolate one single, clear cut cause so that they can say 'That's wrong' or 'That's right'. But human relationships don't work that way. You can't say that sexuality is defined by behavior, or genetics, or choice alone because it's really defined by a combination of all three, just like everything else that we consider human.

I think there's a distinction to be made here, between sexuality and sexual orientation. Sexuality properly is defined by behaviour (which is in turn definied by choice). Sexual orientation, I think, is probably defined by a combination of genetics and environment, perhaps with a dash of choice thrown in.

And instead of actually listening to each other and resolving the true issue, that a majority group unjustifiably feels threatened by a minority group and is trying to limit them by excluding them from a cultural practice which the government rewards, is being drowned in statistics and subjective definitons and religion and politics and ridiculous cause/effect arguments.

What makes you assume that only those with heterosexual tendencies believe homosexuality is wrong?

It is rational consent. It is not informed consent. Therefore it does not constitute legal consent.

I don't give a damn about legality. It is absolutely and completely transitory, changes throughout history, and cannot be relied upon. I'm talking about making a real, valid decision. It seems to me, anyway, that a child can give informed consent. I am concerned solely with the act of consent.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

P. S. Marion, in response to your question: Any form of sexual activity.

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

You really seriously think a child can make competent rational consent choices about sexual activities on the same level as an adult? If so you need to catch up on some 150 years of child psychology data regarding both the cognitive and physiological reality of the average child’s brain. Either that or go sit in at a recess for a kindergarten class in your neighborhood and watch the interaction…

Not on the same level as an adult, but then neither can a 20-year old make such decisions on the same level as a 40-year old (assuming sexual activity and knowledge approximately proportional to the time spent as sexual mature beings; or perhaps even without). Who we should really ask are the 80-year olds.

It’s a great comparison. Don’t be afraid just because I make good analogies. I wasn’t speaking from the point of view of a dirty mind there necessarily. They both have the potential to cause great harm to the child do they not? They both require a kind of cognitive logical thinking that doesn’t develop until later in life. That’s simply a fact. So age restriction makes sense on both.

Feeling forced into or violated, yes, or being ill-treated in some way afterwards, yes, but not the sexual act itself, if true consent of the will was given. I'm not talking about legality, merely about the possibility of a non-damaging or even healthy relationship, and again I'm not talking about five-year olds.

Sure they are either a celibate homosexual or a celibate heterosexual…

See above regarding behaviour vs. predilection defining us.

[Old toby's wicked weed]

[QUOTE=Gwaimir Windgem]
What makes you assume that only heterosexuals believe homosexuality is wrong?
QUOTE]

you be saying personally be yes Mr Gwai man Windy gem that this is case no?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

Yes it is. Disciminate is to "make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit; show preference or prejudice"; and I think it's done when preventing homosexuals from getting the rights heterosexuals get (i.e. marrying).

Besides, it's not only actions or behavior, and it's not like if they stop doing one thing or another they'd stop being homosexuals...

It seems to me, Raddy, that "class or category" would be in reference to their predilections, and "individual merit" to what each as an individual does with those predilections.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

I'll second that BoP. I've often seen "conservatives" questioned as to why they are so obsessed with what goes where and never seen a satisfactory answer.

* waits to see if one appears *

(Generating answer...)







We're not.



Anyway, I object to the label "conservative".

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

I'll second that BoP. I've often seen "conservatives" questioned as to why they are so obsessed with what goes where and never seen a satisfactory answer.

* waits to see if one appears *

Fear of change.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

[QUOTE=Old toby's wicked weed]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

What makes you assume that only heterosexuals believe homosexuality is wrong?
QUOTE]

you be saying personally be yes Mr Gwai man Windy gem that this is case no?

If by "this is case no", you mean "this is not the case",

Yes.

If "this is case, no?"

No.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Sorry, BJ, the so-called "conservatives" are supposed to answer.

Anyway, you're not supposed to say "Fear of Change", but "Fear of Things They Don't Know".

[Old toby's wicked weed]

thanking you be anyways Mr gwai man windythingy ... hah ha funny name be!

mr Gwaimir Windgem

easy peesy be to copy name is!

[Lady Marion Magdalena]

I don't have the opportunity to observe gay and lesbian couples up close, so I won't claim anything about how they act. I'm not concerned with that.

Then what are you doing dissaproving of them?
If you aren't concerned with how they act, what are you concerned with?

What makes you assume that only those with heterosexual tendencies believe homosexuality is wrong?

... Who else is there? Besides self-hating homosexuals. Transgenders? Bisexuals? Everyone except heterosexuals are just as or more discriminated against than homosexuals for many of the same 'reasons'.

I don't give a damn about legality. It is absolutely and completely transitory, changes throughout history, and cannot be relied upon. I'm talking about making a real, valid decision. It seems to me, anyway, that a child can give informed consent. I am concerned solely with the act of consent.

Yes. Legality does change. But the link between legality and consent when there is a possibility of sexual abuse isn't likely to go away during your lifetime, so it really doesn't make a difference if you 'give a damn' or not. It exists and some of us are concerned with it and would appreciate it if our concerns were not brushed aside so rudely.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

Well, I don't feel qualified to make blanket statements about gayness because it's not my life and my frame of reference is different.

But I do know that when they moved in next door, the property value went up. I kid you not. My new neighbors have really fixed up that run-down old place next door. I hope another gay couple moves in on the other side. I hope the whole street goes gay. Then I could re-finance and combine my two mortgages. As it happens the neighbors on the other side are the flag-waving leave-a-rusty-car-parked-on-the-lawn type. The guy has a mullet, even. Maybe if I put up a rainbow flag they'll sell their property to some more gays. If so, I'll be the first bring them a welcoming chocolate cake!

I suppose some folks will think I'm making this up. It's all true. My city is becoming a Mecca for gays, and our property values are going through the roof, so to speak! It's because they decorate, I think. The yards have flowers and they keep them mowed. It's really nice here now. When all the anti-gay people leave, it will be an even better place.

I'm waiting for angry outcries from the pro-homosexual people here. If an "anti-gay" person made those kinds of statements, he/she would be excoriated.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

I'll second that BoP. I've often seen "conservatives" questioned as to why they are so obsessed with what goes where and never seen a satisfactory answer.

* waits to see if one appears *

I spoke too soon - I can only give one of the several responses now, because a bunch of kids are coming over shortly.

I'll have to speak only for myself, and I'll say that I am NOT by any means "obsessed" with "what goes where". If the pro-gay people want to stop bringing things into public, then I'd be thrilled. I'd love to stop hearing about the details of other people's sex lives, believe me - I'm tired of signs like "Gay Love Rules" which shoves "what goes where" into my face. Tell the people who go to the White House Easter Egg roll wearing rainbow hats to stop being "obsessed" and putting their sexuality in the public square. They are supporting homoSEXUAL marriage - of course it involves sex. And I repeat - I'd be thrilled if they take it out of the public and do whatever they want to in private.

So this "obsession" about "what goes where" knock about conservatives is just totally invalid, IMO.

More later - gotta get ready for the kiddos!

[Insidious Rex]

Yeah great but the point is that you arent letting them keep it in private and out of your face. Thats WHY they are demonstrating. Because they are being told what they can and cant do. Wouldnt you demonstrate and keep it in public? Its folly to blame people for reacting to restrictions imposed on them by others.

[inked]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I'm waiting for angry outcries from the pro-homosexual people here. If an "anti-gay" person made those kinds of statements, he/she would be excoriated.

Rian,

You'll be waiting a long time. These people have TV shows based on this premise - you know, the gay guys make over some poo hetero slob so he can look nice for a date with (yuch!) a girl.

On the other hand, if I were to say that limp-wristed effiminate acting alleged males who wore pink and purple well always made superb interior designers, I'd probably get blasted for being bad, acting nasty, and violating the political correctness taboo. And don't even get me started on the need for a national society for the protection of gerbils - wait, doesn't PETA do that when they're not doing each other (without regard to gender or orientation)?

[Lady Marion Magdalena]

You'll be waiting a long time. These people have TV shows based on this premise - you know, the gay guys make over some poo hetero slob so he can look nice for a date with (yuch!) a girl.

Certain of 'these people' refuse to watch such shows precisely because they are so stereotyped, and will not watch any reality tv shows at all if they can help it.

As for getting blasted for violating political correctness... some will blast you, yes. For my part, I know blasting you, or anyone else for not being politically correct won't do any good. It won't eliminate any stereotypes and no one can be politically correct all the time, if you try, you just end up sounding silly.

If the pro-gay people want to stop bringing things into public, then I'd be thrilled.

There are plenty of us who'd be thrilled if it wasn't necessary. We'd love it if it wasn't controversial, if we could happily go about our courtships and partnerships just as any heterosexual couple might without having to worry about getting ostracized from our families or communities, without constantly having to wonder if someone is going to decide that we're abominations that need to be 'taken care of', without being afraid of our partner getting hurt and us being barred from seeing them in the hospital because we don't count as family...

The 'don't ask, don't tell' system only fosters the inequality. And even when homosexuals do keep to themselves it doesn't make them any less discriminated against.

Do you see what I'm getting at? About why it has to be brought into the public?

Very few people really want to flaunt themselves and make others uncomfortable. That is not the goal, the goal is to be treated on an equal level, to not be forced to hide our relationships with the threat of ostracism or violence hanging over our heads if we don't and to have our long term relationships be recognized by the government as being on an equal level with marriage.
Is equality really so much to ask?

[Elfhelm]

I thought gay rights were about hospital visits, parental privileges, inheritance, and all that. I didn't know it was about sex. Whoa!

I am a bisexual, and a member of PETA. So, hi!

I'm sorry, let me clarify, I am a monagamous bisexual in a committed relationship with a member of the opposite sex, who is also a monogamous bisexual in a committed relationship with a member of the opposite sex. As I said, my frame of reference is different.

[inked]

That's called civil partnership. Marriage is a different issue - for which we have a separate thread.