the gay thread

[rainman::|:|]

we haven't had this thread since last spring i think, so here it is for all the newer gay users...

it's the official coming out thread :)

i'll start.

*raises hand*

i know a handful of others out there, but i'll leave that to them...

:)
pnw

[vniow]

Yo.

I guess I would be the #3 Powerdyke then?


Although sparkleytone's awful cute.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/winky.gif

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by vniow
Yo.

I guess I would be the #3 Powerdyke then?


Although sparkleytone's awful cute.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/winky.gif

amen to that..

i took my #1 PowerFag out of my sig because i thought it was annoying, but it's due for a comeback...

:)

pnw

[funkywhat2]

Yeah. Gay people are cool.

My parents think I'm gay. So do my friends.

[mymemory]

I had a friend, he was so arrogant, childish and nasty that no girl wanted to be with him. Finally after several years he found another guy just like him, nasty, fat, inmature, that loves computers too, etc.

So, the started to date each other and no one likes them booth.

The gay comunity here say "they are not gay", they are just two really discusting people that can share their world togather.

BTW, they use PC's:confused:

[vniow]

Originally posted by funkywhat2
My parents think I'm gay. So do my friends.


Well after this video, how could they not?

http://www.justinfeldman.com/video/milk.mov

I must say, you have a great figure, but you should try lowering your shoulders more next time, they look too broad.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/ppphhht.gif

[sparkleytone]

haha thanks vniow :P

my roommate is gay. is that enough??

best roommate i ever had, i showed up from work today and the apartment was clean.

w00t.

[funkywhat2]

Originally posted by vniow



Well after this video, how could they not?

http://www.justinfeldman.com/video/milk.mov

I must say, you have a great figure, but you should try lowering your shoulders more next time, they look too broad.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/ppphhht.gif

Nice, someone actually went to watch it. We're making another, but its scripted. It's about a panty sniffing repairman named Lester Weintrout. The script's on his page somewhere, but I don't have an address.

Guess who plays Lester :D

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by vniow



Well after this video, how could they not?

http://www.justinfeldman.com/video/milk.mov

I must say, you have a great figure, but you should try lowering your shoulders more next time, they look too broad.http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/ppphhht.gif

That video was neet...

They are little girls though. I drank a gallon and a half of milk in one sitting with some cookies.

Gimme a break!

No, I'm not gay.

[funkywhat2]

Originally posted by MrMacman


That video was neet...

They are little girls though. I drank a gallon and a half of milk in one sitting with some cookies.

Gimme a break!

No, I'm not gay.

The other kid drank his gallon in under 15 mins. How long did it take you?

[S_S]

Too bad I'm lactose intolerant...

Any respectable gay man (or woman) should own an Apple. Maybe it was the rainbow apple they used to use... Sucked us in. What will happen when the rainbow apple is forgotten? Where will gay youth turn? Although, the mirror chrome iMac apple does appeal to our sense of vanity... ;)

[SPG]

Originally posted by funkywhat2


The other kid drank his gallon in under 15 mins. How long did it take you?

Ahhh, the good ole "One Gallon Milk Challenge". A friend of mine once financed an entire summer while working at a camp by making outrageous offers to anyone who was willing to try it. "I'll bet you $200 to your $20 that you can't" was his rallying cry. He'd usually have four takers at a time and a fresh batch of suckers every week. With every trick though, there is always that chance...there was a guy who did it and I personally have beat the cracker challenge three times.

BTW...This thread is so gay!:p

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by SPG

BTW...This thread is so gay!:p

this time i'll agree :)

anyone watch the abfab special? patsy was telling eddy not to get a gay man for shopping: "you don't want a fagbangle"... i had to laugh...

:)
pnw

[springscansing]

I'm bi, do I get a cookie for that or something?

Half a cookie?

The girlfriend really gets off on it. Hum.. lol

[RaNdOm]

Ya, Ok, so I'm gay, but I still don't own a Mac. I was in awe of the 12"PB, but then I used it at CompUSA and it wasn't all that and bag of chips.
....although my ex-roommate was a Mac nut and he's gay too...

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by RaNdOm
Ya, Ok, so I'm gay, but I still don't own a Mac. I was in awe of the 12"PB, but then I used it at CompUSA and it wasn't all that and bag of chips.
....although my ex-roommate was a Mac nut and he's gay too...

"roommate"

hehehe...

you can tell us, brother :)

pnw

[janey]

wait are you guys all gay or something? it's just odd...you see so many gay people in forums like MR and you go out and ask everyone in the apple store if they're gay and nobody is.

[vniow]

Originally posted by übergeek
wait are you guys all gay or something?


Well it's not called 'the gay thread' for no reason.

[janey]

i know but EVERY single person who said they're gay in this thread? I don't think so...

[rainman::|:|]

do we have to send you pictures?? ;)

this site has something like 10,000 registered users (i don't really remember how many, someone correct me)... so we can whittle that down to the 200 or so that actually post, and you've got like two dozen gay people, statistically...

back when we first had this thread, something like 6 of us actually came out... and a lot more have since then...

:)
pnw

[vniow]

Hey paul, didn't you say there was a thread like this before?

Got a link?

[janey]

wasn't it something like
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5301 or something?

[uhlawboi80]

look a gay thread :D i would have posted earlier but i was fighting all night with lexisnexis and westlaw so i didnt get to check up on the ole mac rumors.

certainly there must be more gay people than have posted so far...hop to it boys and girls, im interested to see

[janey]

wait i don't think that's the right one...

[drastik]

Fabulous

While I'm not gay, I have been a little bothered by some of the members appearant homophobia. More power to ya.

;)

[vniow]

Originally posted by drastik
Fabulous

While I'm not gay, I have been a little bothered by some of the members appearant homophobia. More power to ya.

;)

What? Where?

[scem0]

Originally posted by drastik
Fabulous

While I'm not gay, I have been a little bothered by some of the members appearant homophobia. More power to ya.

;)

I haven't noticed any homophobia on these boards, most people
post very respectfully.

[veedubdrew]

Well, chalk it up for another homo here. If anyone wants to see a gay las vegas video (clean!), head on over to www.homepage.mac.com/mtndrew1

As a side note, my AirPort extreme base station went from Tai Pei <sp?> to Anchorage and is on its way to Indiana en route to Los Angeles. There has to be a faster way. My iMac also took a trip around the globe on its way to West Hollywood...

[digitalgiant]

now if I start a straigt thread,,,,,will i get bashed on? Anyway the milk kids are funny. But weak,,I can drink milk right from the cow.:D

[drastik]

Originally posted by vniow


What? Where?

Nothing overtly offensive, I guess I should say its insiensitivity. things like using gay as a derogatory term, and I seem to remember somebody refeering to a gay person as disgusting. Oh, well, maybe I'm seeing ghosts.

[eyelikeart]

I'm not gay...I know I've been confused with being so on a few occasions because of my lifestyle decisions...

I exercise regularly, eat healthy usually, an into the arts, drink wine, usually am fashionable, am in touch with my emotions...

I once had a guy swear I was gay but just didn't realize yet because I dressed nice, was into art & was drinking wine...heh...

It doesn't bother me one bit. I figure, I know where I wanna be if I'm gonna have anyone in my bed, and that's fine for me. I do have a problem with the ones who aren't comfortable with their sexuality, who feel the need to overcompensate for that lack of what they feel to be masculinity. It's kinda sad actually, I know a guy who's dating one of my best friends who's a total homophoeb.

I have gay friends, mostly women though, but I feel it's just the way it goes. To say I don't care would sound harsh, so maybe to say I feel secure enough with myself that I can be around and joke a lot...? ;)

[scem0]

Ill just throw a discussion out here:

Am I the only person who is annoyed by the incorrect use of the
word 'gay'. Like when someone is talking about a large homework
assignment they might say 'problems 26-50 were gay' or something
like that. I must admit, I have done this from time to time, but I
try my hardest not to. ;)

[iAlan]

How about a quick round-up of where the gay guys are all from. Me, originally Melbourne Australia, now Tokyo (8 years and enjoying every minute of it).

Is there such a thing as hetrophobic? Now that would be intresting...!

I used to have a room mate who was straight, but that was OK. It didn't bother me that he was straight, as long as he didn't force his lifestyle on me!

I also have to admit that I had a 'straight experience' in university. I was really drunk and this girl came onto me, I just didn't know what I was doing, and felt really terrible for what I did the next morning!

Har-di-har-har!!

[sparkleytone]

Originally posted by scem0
Ill just throw a discussion out here:

Am I the only person who is annoyed by the incorrect use of the
word 'gay'. Like when someone is talking about a large homework
assignment they might say 'problems 26-50 were gay' or something
like that. I must admit, I have done this from time to time, but I
try my hardest not to. ;)

eh, i think its funny. i say it all the time. hell, my roommate says it all the time. its just an expression. i dont see it as commentary on homosexuality.

so how about american idol last night? speaking of gay, that guy Clay went to my HS.

[vniow]

Originally posted by scem0
Ill just throw a discussion out here:

Am I the only person who is annoyed by the incorrect use of the
word 'gay'. Like when someone is talking about a large homework
assignment they might say 'problems 26-50 were gay' or something
like that. I must admit, I have done this from time to time, but I
try my hardest not to. ;)


I don't know, I guess sometimes it can be used just as a regular term, but it makes me a bit uncomfortable when it's associated with a negative I guess.

[mymemory]

To be homophobic these days is like not having an ATM card.

[RaNdOm]

...I haven't really noticed any gay bashing or whatnot on this site, except for the few instances of saying "that's gay" and the like...

...Overall I think this forum is pretty gay indifferent, which is just fine with me. I was actually surprised to see outwardly gay members...

[jelloshotsrule]

Originally posted by sparkleytone
eh, i think its funny. i say it all the time. hell, my roommate says it all the time. its just an expression. i dont see it as commentary on homosexuality.

yeah, i agree to a point.

but i can also see where a gay person might take offense.

so i can see both sides of the coin. that said, i don't think that someone who uses the term "gay" as in "that's gay" as necessarily a homophobe or prejudice or anything else

i personally never got into the habit of saying it...

[funkywhat2]

I never actually came out, but I trhink I may be bisexual.

Anyone ever see Feamle Trouble, the scene where Gator and his Aunt are talking, and she sayd somethng like "The live of a heterosexual is a sick and boaring one." I don't remember the exact quote.

[uhlawboi80]

HAHA...he went to your HS sparkleytone? thats how i refer to him when we discuss the show "the gay one"

so, now im just wondering, do you know for sure that hes gay? i mean my gaydar is excellent, but via tv it may not be quite so exacting:p

[sparkleytone]

Originally posted by uhlawboi80
HAHA...he went to your HS sparkleytone? thats how i refer to him when we discuss the show "the gay one"

so, now im just wondering, do you know for sure that hes gay? i mean my gaydar is excellent, but via tv it may not be quite so exacting:p

oh, go ahead and get the fire extinguisher ;)

in HS he was on FIRE. his real name is Clayton Grissom. Its pretty obvious to me that he has been paying someone to help his image. He used to have longer hair and toss it about all the time. And he just had so many effeminate qualities. Its obvious that he has worked hard to be at least ambiguous. All you have to do is see the episode where he makes the top 32. He gets all excited and TOTALLY gives himself away :D

[vniow]

Originally posted by sparkleytone
ambiguous


An I the only one that thinks of that damn SNL cartoon every time I see that word?http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/grinning.gif

[sparkleytone]

Originally posted by vniow



An I the only one that thinks of that damn SNL cartoon every time I see that word?http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/grinning.gif

the ambiguously gay DUO

[vniow]

The Ambiguously Gay Duo videos!
http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/veronica/eek21.gif (http://www.quicktimeflix.net/agd/)

[Backtothemac]

Straight as an arrow. Hold nothing against those who are not though, their choice, and none of my business.

Secondly, hey eye, next time you come visit, bring some of those gay women friends;)

Gay women are so cool.

[vniow]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Gay women are so cool.


True dat.

[uhlawboi80]

i think str8 women like gay men more than str8 guys like gay women...but for totally different reasons.

i dont think i could ever understand a str8 mans lesbian fantasy...i mean, if they are lesbians they probably dont want your ass.

[beez7777]

people at my school call me gay for using a mac, does that count?

[scem0]

Originally posted by beez7777
people at my school call me gay for using a mac, does that count?
see? I get annoyed when people use the word out of context like
that. What is homosexual about using a mac? Or when you are
being loud and obnoxious people might say 'stop acting gay' which
really makes me mad.

[agreenster]

Ive heard this arguement many a time and am wondering what you all think.

A claim against homosexuality as a healthy part of society:

-Homosexuality keeps otherwise healthy and successful people from forming a male-female parenting group and raising healthy children, thus forming a more healthy society. (Most experts would agree that a child needs both a male and female parent to help develop their understanding of how opposite sexes manage to live with each other on a daily basis. This eventually leads to their own healthy relationships with other people regardless of gender)


-Homosexuality, without the additional aid of other members in society would absolutely fail to survivie as a human lifestyle. In other words, it only burdens society to have homosexuality around.

Not necessarily my opinions, but Id like to know what homosexuals think about these points. Ive argued both sides of this in many a debate.

I also think it should be noted that in this theory, homosexuality and homosexuals are two different things. Homosexuality is viewed as destructive to society, while homosexuals are simply people who choose an alternate lifestyle. No segregation nor special privaledges should be placed on these individuals.

Okay.....argue it!

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by agreenster
Ive heard this arguement many a time and am wondering what you all think.

A claim against homosexuality as a healthy part of society:

-Homosexuality keeps otherwise healthy and successful people from forming a male-female parenting group and raising healthy children, thus forming a more healthy society. (Most experts would agree that a child needs both a male and female parent to help develop their understanding of how opposite sexes manage to live with each other on a daily basis. This eventually leads to their own healthy relationships with other people regardless of gender)


-Homosexuality, without the additional aid of other members in society would absolutely fail to survivie as a human lifestyle. In other words, it only burdens society to have homosexuality around.

Not necessarily my opinions, but Id like to know what homosexuals think about these points. Ive argued both sides of this in many a debate.

I also think it should be noted that in this theory, homosexuality and homosexuals are two different things. Homosexuality is viewed as destructive to society, while homosexuals are simply people who choose an alternate lifestyle. No segregation nor special privaledges should be placed on these individuals.

Okay.....argue it!

barely worth arguing. first off, it's not a choice, despite how a lot of people try to make it seem that way-- it can't be evil if you're gay by birth. i've never chosen to be gay, the same way none of you straight people (breeders! hehe) chose to be straight... and if you did, you're bisexual, choice notwithstanding.

homosexuality is actually very good for the human species right now... the earth is dangerously overpopulated and i think that homosexuality is nature's (god's) answer to it-- when there are millions of kids around the world that can't get adopted, having children is not beneficial to mankind. gay people can, however, reduce society's burden by adopting children. while there are some studies that say that a child will be damaged by lack of traditional family roles, those studies mainly came around to support overly-conservative people that wanted to point out how evil single mothers are. the studies are conflicting with a great number of studies that show children grow up no differently in a single parent, nontraditional, or gay household.

personally, i can't understand how people that believe children will suffer losses in the hands of gay parents would rather them grow up moved in and out of foster homes all their lives. studies conclusively show that children raised in the system are much more likely to commit crime, suffer great depression (sometimes leading to elevated suicide rates) and are often routinely abused by people who don't want them.

anyway...

i know many people that are 100% heterosexual and, i must say, about the most well-adjusted people i know, who were raised by one or two gay parents.

now of course, i'm talking about gay people that are morally responsible, in a monogamous relationship that's as long term as marriage. many gay people are not like that, and give us a bad name. but then, many heterosexual people are like that, aren't they?

pnw

[S_S]

Originally posted by paulwhannel


homosexuality is actually very good for the human species right now... the earth is dangerously overpopulated and i think that homosexuality is nature's (god's) answer to it

pnw

Wow! I think exactly the same thing. I've never heard anyone else say it tho. It makes me sick to see all these married couples using fertility drugs and having muliple babies at a time. Then the whole community has to give them money to raise them. What kind of up bringing is it to be raised like a car on an assembly line. A lot of married couples don't have children at all. Does that mean they are bad for society?

Plus, my dar went off on that guy big time during Am. Idol. last night.

Someone else said they ask people at the Apple Store if they are gay. I know I was at the Apple Store the other day and spotted at least two brotha's. But, I was to busy shopping for a digi cam to be on the prowl. Mix mall shopping with fashionable computers and things are bound to get crazy.

My little sister (9!) has started using the word "gay" a lot. I'm trying to get her off of it. She also started referring to people as "gay wad" which horified me. I mean think about what that is really saying. But there are a lot of words people use that have no reference to what they really mean anymore ie: What the 'have sex' are you doing? or "What a 'having sex' mess." Now, as a gay person I feel I have the right to say "This shirt is really gay." Just as a black person can say "What's up all my n*g*s". It's just one of those unwritten rules. I save the word for really speacial ocations where I feel it is the only way to truely describe something.

That is enough ranting for now ( I love this thread :p )

[vniow]

But am I the only lesbian to post in it?

[Xero]

Originally posted by paulwhannel


barely worth arguing. first off, it's not a choice, despite how a lot of people try to make it seem that way-- it can't be evil if you're gay by birth. i've never chosen to be gay, the same way none of you straight people (breeders! hehe) chose to be straight... and if you did, you're bisexual, choice notwithstanding.

homosexuality is actually very good for the human species right now... the earth is dangerously overpopulated and i think that homosexuality is nature's (god's) answer to it-- when there are millions of kids around the world that can't get adopted, having children is not beneficial to mankind. gay people can, however, reduce society's burden by adopting children. while there are some studies that say that a child will be damaged by lack of traditional family roles, those studies mainly came around to support overly-conservative people that wanted to point out how evil single mothers are. the studies are conflicting with a great number of studies that show children grow up no differently in a single parent, nontraditional, or gay household.

personally, i can't understand how people that believe children will suffer losses in the hands of gay parents would rather them grow up moved in and out of foster homes all their lives. studies conclusively show that children raised in the system are much more likely to commit crime, suffer great depression (sometimes leading to elevated suicide rates) and are often routinely abused by people who don't want them.

anyway...

i know many people that are 100% heterosexual and, i must say, about the most well-adjusted people i know, who were raised by one or two gay parents.

now of course, i'm talking about gay people that are morally responsible, in a monogamous relationship that's as long term as marriage. many gay people are not like that, and give us a bad name. but then, many heterosexual people are like that, aren't they?

pnw

very well put man. the original argument is definatly an interesting one, but i think what you said here makes perfect sense! just thought id comment on that.

no im not gay, and no i have absolutly nothing against that lifestyle.

i agree tho that women seem to [at least in my experiences] really enjoy the company of gay men. not sure about the other way around, though i have some bi/lesbian friends who are some of the coolest people i know!:)

[uhlawboi80]

aw...sparkleytone, your uber gay HS co-attendee didnt make it through on american idol.

i would have voted for him if i had no life and time to call and give a $h!t:p

[beez7777]

Originally posted by uhlawboi80
aw...sparkleytone, your uber gay HS co-attendee didnt make it through on american idol.

i would have voted for him if i had no life and time to call and give a $h!t:p

he was pretty good too, i was rooting for him. oh well, at least there's the wild card show. :)

[funkywhat2]

Originally posted by beez7777


he was pretty good too, i was rooting for him. oh well, at least there's the wild card show. :)

What a waste of broadcasting time. I'm looking foward to the MJ Interview Debunking Special. That'll be worth it!;) ;)

[Xero]

5 words: National Prime Time Television Blows.

Tis all i got to say about that. ;)

EDIT: a little of topic, i know, but ive made my point, hehe.

[beez7777]

Originally posted by Xero
5 words: National Prime Time Television Blows.

Tis all i got to say about that. ;)

EDIT: a little of topic, i know, but ive made my point, hehe.

Yeah, primetime tv is so incredibly gay. j/k. (that one's for you, scem0) :) ;)

[WinterMute]

"I'm not gay, but my lover is...;)"

My bestest friend in the whole world is gay, he introduced me to macs, in fact the first mac I owned was his old 160 PB when he bought a 3200.

We played in a band together for 5 years, shared a house for most of that time and he was best man at my wedding, poor boy was terrified...

Needless to say, I've spent a lot of time in gay company over the years, and found the vast majority to be enlightened and very friendly.

I was stabbed in a gay nightclub once, but that was by my girlfriend! (Long story).

Sadly, homophobia is alive and well in the area of London I live in, and we still get assaults on "openly" gay couples, it has always been my greatest pleasure to kick the living ****** out of such neanderthals, the world is a better place for the gay persuasion, long may you live.

[janey]

my boyfriend is gay. really sucks because i'm a straight woman and it's just so INFURIATING when your boyfriend's going out with his best friend.

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by funkywhat2


The other kid drank his gallon in under 15 mins. How long did it take you?

12 1/2 why?

you need a challange?

I ate 14 slices of Pizza in a sitting.

No I'm not fat I just fasted (I'm jewish) and our play was giving out free pizza, why not.


Back to the Gay.

I'm afraid to say I had a bad experence with gay people. I tried to be friedly and were all (no pun) assholes. They shuned me and (ha) were making fun of me for being straight.
(How ironic, eh?)

[scem0]

Originally posted by beez7777


Yeah, primetime tv is so incredibly gay. j/k. (that one's for you, scem0) :) ;)
hehe, stop acting gay.

jk ;) :D :p

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by MrMacman
I'm afraid to say I had a bad experence with gay people. I tried to be friedly and were all (no pun) assholes. They shuned me and (ha) were making fun of me for being straight.
(How ironic, eh?)

well obviously i cant speak for them, but my experience with gay people is that many of them shun even other gay people-- like a lot of minorities, we segregate ourselves based on a number of factors. i think gay people in general feel very isolated and distant from straight people, and the coldness is a defense mechanism...

and then it turns into a lifestyle...

god there's so much emotional and mental disorder among gay people it's not even funny-- my HS principal and i are writing a book about my coming out experience, i'm hoping to consult with a couple of good psychologists to cover this kind of thing--

anyway, my point is, i still love you, MrMacman... :)

hehe

pnw

[FatTony]

Originally posted by S_S
Wow! I think exactly the same thing. I've never heard anyone else say it tho. It makes me sick to see all these married couples using fertility drugs and having muliple babies at a time. Then the whole community has to give them money to raise them. What kind of up bringing is it to be raised like a car on an assembly line. A lot of married couples don't have children at all. Does that mean they are bad for society?

What do you think of married couples who have spontaeous multiples? Does that make it OK? Is raising them on an assembly line OK then? Parents of conjoined twins must really get under your skin!

[uhlawboi80]

wow fat tony...thanx for the flash back to all the bad legal briefs i read. Much like a bad lawyer, you make an ok argument, you just missed the POINT.

his point wasnt anything about having multiple children, rather, his point was that having str8 parents doesnt mean your upbringing will be perfect and further, plently of married couples dont have children, so arguing that a gay couple cant have children making them a "dysfunctional union" is also a poor argument

[FatTony]

I got the point, its just that it used offensive analogies. Quite ironic in this thread!

[dMac2k3]

It's so good 2 find some family in here. I b'came a member of the Forum, mainly so I could post a reply 2 this thread!!!! :)

BTW.......I watched that Milk movie.......I must say, I wouldn't have been able 2 do it. Just one glass would make me sick. But oh well.

[dMac2k3]

I didn't realize my picture would b so big.........or i wouldn't have added it.........hehehehe :D

Oh well, now u all know what I look like. (No Stalkers Please!!!)

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by uhlawboi80
i think str8 women like gay men more than str8 guys like gay women...but for totally different reasons.

i dont think i could ever understand a str8 mans lesbian fantasy...i mean, if they are lesbians they probably dont want your ass.

No a lesbian fantasy. It is 2 girl fantasy :)

They are bi-sexual, and both are sad and need special attention :eek:

[vniow]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
No a lesbian fantasy. It is 2 girl fantasy :)

They are bi-sexual, and both are sad and need special attention :eek:


Well that counts me out then, the only guy I might go straight for would be sparkelytone, sorry B2TM.http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=252654

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by vniow
Well that counts me out then, the only guy I might go straight for would be sparkelytone, sorry B2TM.http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=252654

Awww. That makes me sad. Oh well, I guess I will go home to my one girl fantasy ;)

[rainman::|:|]

admittedly i'm not a straight man but i love lesbians... i collect them, my fav. lesbian is coming over tomorrow night. i once read the term for a guy that likes lesbians (because dyke-hag doesn't really flow)- dutchboy. no one else has ever heard it tho :rolleyes: so everyone thinks i wanna stick my finger in them...

:rolleyes:

:D
pnw

[dMac2k3]

DUTCHBOY...........that rocks........i definitely have not heard that term b4, but i will b using it. thanx ;)

ROCK ON!!!!!

[vniow]

Dutchboy....that's a new one, haven't heard that before.

What do you call the opposite, a lesbian who loves gay men?

[dMac2k3]

Originally posted by vniow
Dutchboy....that's a new one, haven't heard that before.

What do you call the opposite, a lesbian who loves gay men?


BEA ARTHUR???????


ROCK ON!!!!!!

[MacFan25]

Originally posted by scem0
Ill just throw a discussion out here:

Am I the only person who is annoyed by the incorrect use of the
word 'gay'. Like when someone is talking about a large homework
assignment they might say 'problems 26-50 were gay' or something
like that. I must admit, I have done this from time to time, but I
try my hardest not to. ;)

It doesn't make any since for people to say, "that's gay" on things that really aren't gay. Why don't they just say, that's dumb? :confused:

[sinclairZX81]

Originally posted by MacFan25
It doesn't make any since for people to say, "that's gay" on things that really aren't gay. Why don't they just say, that's dumb? :confused:

prolly for the same reason that people in the UK now say "that's pants" when they think something is/was crap.

don't over analyse slang. you might end up with a sociology degree.:D

[beez7777]

Originally posted by sinclairZX81
prolly for the same reason that people in the UK now say "that's pants" when they think something is/was crap.

heh, i think i'll start using that one.

[iAlan]

Originally posted by vniow
Dutchboy....that's a new one, haven't heard that before.

What do you call the opposite, a lesbian who loves gay men?

The term I hear most often is Fag Hag, but I don't use that. I call my lesbian friends Guy Dykes, no less PC but it is appreciated!!

Woohoo...

[danishboy]

First off I have to say reading this thread has brought a smile to my otherwise dull (and often hated) Monday. I've been following the MacRumors for a while now as I've been awaiting the 15" AlBook update, but I broke down and got a 12" AlBook to replace my work-issued p.o.s. PC.

Anyway, this thread has made me giggle, and to put it out there - yup I'm GAY.

Now as to the gay issues most recently discussed - I like the term Dutchboy...seeing as I actually speak Dutch (amongst other languages) and live in a very lesbian-ated neighborhood that makes me smile.

Now let me add to the list of terms - anyone out there ever hear of "fruit fly" used to describe people (usually college-aged single gals) that hang out with gay boys? My girlfriends in college got sick of it and came up with "fruit basket" as they liked to go out and collect new gay boyfriends.

Just my $0.02...

my third cent is that paulwhannel is way cool - very well spoken in this thread!

[vniow]

Wow, all these new slang terms I have to keep track of, Bea Arthur, fag hag, Dutchboy, fruit basket, any more to add to the list?

And I would also like to concur that paulwhannel rocks also.http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251618

[uhlawboi80]

hmm, fruit fly and fag hag im familiar with. The only time ive ever used bea arthur though was in reference to some drag queens *shrug*

im sure there are other phrases i have used.

Oh, and thought some of you would get a kick out of this. today we were discussing the "reasonable man" standard in criminal law. After reviewing a case we asked the question...should the court have instructed the jury on the "reasonable man rejected by his lesbian mother" standard?

we all just couldnt help put laugh :p

GO PAUL! (just seemed to be the post ending trend ;) )

[rainman::|:|]

yay me! hehehe... i just really really love how cool this site is with gay people, there are a handful of people that don't agree with it but they are extremely respectful. let's be real, how many non-GLBT forums can you post a 'gay thread' on and not get flamed? i like the idea of keeping in touch with other GLT (no flakey bi's hehe) MR readers... the MacRumors Family...:)

and yes, i've heard of fruit fly... i always used fag-hag instead, just sounded less... fruity...

the bea arthur thing... well, he is a gay icon...

;)

pnw

[iBear]

How about a beard? A gay man has one so others think he's straight.

Hurray I'm gay!!!

[rainman::|:|]

speaking of gay, did any of you catch tonight's Boston Public? the principal came out, after a gay beating and an unsuccessful attempt to start a gay/straight alliance. it was very moving... they'll be getting (well deserved) awards for this one...

pnw

[vniow]

Originally posted by paulwhannel
speaking of gay, did any of you catch tonight's Boston Public? the principal came out, after a gay beating and an unsuccessful attempt to start a gay/straight alliance. it was very moving... they'll be getting (well deserved) awards for this one...

pnw


Haven't seen it yet, comes on on a couple hours here, watch it every Monday.http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251585

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by danishboy
First off I have to say reading this thread has brought a smile to my otherwise dull (and often hated) Monday. I've been following the MacRumors for a while now as I've been awaiting the 15" AlBook update, but I broke down and got a 12" AlBook to replace my work-issued p.o.s. PC.

Anyway, this thread has made me giggle, and to put it out there - yup I'm GAY.

Now as to the gay issues most recently discussed - I like the term Dutchboy...seeing as I actually speak Dutch (amongst other languages) and live in a very lesbian-ated neighborhood that makes me smile.

Now let me add to the list of terms - anyone out there ever hear of "fruit fly" used to describe people (usually college-aged single gals) that hang out with gay boys? My girlfriends in college got sick of it and came up with "fruit basket" as they liked to go out and collect new gay boyfriends.

Just my $0.02...

my third cent is that paulwhannel is way cool - very well spoken in this thread!

welcome to macrumors... glad to have you on board :)

the Mac Gay Agenda needs more users, so i hope to see you posting...

;)

vniow-- sorry i kind of ruined the ending! act surprised...

pnw

[beez7777]

Originally posted by paulwhannel
speaking of gay, did any of you catch tonight's Boston Public? the principal came out, after a gay beating and an unsuccessful attempt to start a gay/straight alliance. it was very moving... they'll be getting (well deserved) awards for this one...

pnw

i saw it tonight, for the first time. i never really bothered to watch the show, but i must say it was quite a moving episode. i'll definitely be watching it in the future.

[voicegy]

Vniow, I didn't know you were a sis-tah! You da bomb, girlfriend.:)

I agree with most of the posters, usually talking GLBT stuff on "nerd" boards gets instant flame, but the people here overall rock so much...especially arn, of course. So, to my straight bro's and sisters here, thanks!

I was co-chair of the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN...it's on the web) in my town for 3 years, and I got our superintendant of San Diego City Schools, where I work, to march in our contingent at Pride San Diego. Now THAT totally rocked.

Since a previous poster decided to post his pic, I'll make him feel more comfortable and throw mine out there...and, no, we don't grow beards to make others' think we're straight. hahaha!

[cleo]

How'd I miss this thread? For those of you I don't know, let me introduce myself.

I'm a 22-year-old gay woman with a physical disability and a large amount of debt attributable to my Mac compulsion. :D

While we're on language issues, what do you boys think about lesbians identifying themselves as "gay women"? That's my label of choice (when such a choice is compulsory), but I know a couple of gay men who think "gay" is exclusively for those with *****es. I personally hate the way "lesbian" has been commodified by our culture and the media ("girl on girl" is such a "cool" thing these days), and I find that identifying myself as such makes me feel like a trendy follower instead of someone who has really struggled with what it means to be a sexual being in an unconventional body. "Gay" elicits a negative enough reaction that it somehow vindicates that struggle. Until, of course, my sexist gay male friends try to put me in my place.

Your thoughts?

[vniow]

Originally posted by cleo
While we're on language issues, what do you boys think about lesbians identifying themselves as "gay women"?

Your thoughts?

Hey cleo, I was wondering when you'd post here.http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251585

As for your question (speaking as a gay womanhttp://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=257466) I actually prefer 'dyke' above anything else and I'm not exactly sure why, maybe it has to do with 'dyke' being used as a negative term and I'm somehow turning it around by using it as a positive or maybe it has to do with the fact that gay women in our culture are either seen as Hyper-Fem™ (think one of the espisodes of Fastlane, never saw it but I got the impression that it's like what I'm describing) where the women seem to be there only to pleasure the men so they act all girlish and whatnot and the guys are turned on and whatever...http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251202 and the other side of the coin is butch where the women act like men.
Since I'm somewhere inbetween, people are a bit suprised when I tell then that I'm gay because I'm definately not butch and I seem to lean more towards the Ultra-Fem™ side of things where I'm not a woman in the mind of a man, I'm a woman in the mind of a woman so people are a bit dumbfounded.

Did any of that make sense? (guessing no)

[dMac2k3]

Originally posted by voicegy
Vniow, I didn't know you were a sis-tah! You da bomb, girlfriend.:)

I agree with most of the posters, usually talking GLBT stuff on "nerd" boards gets instant flame, but the people here overall rock so much...especially arn, of course. So, to my straight bro's and sisters here, thanks!

I was co-chair of the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN...it's on the web) in my town for 3 years, and I got our superintendant of San Diego City Schools, where I work, to march in our contingent at Pride San Diego. Now THAT totally rocked.

Since a previous poster decided to post his pic, I'll make him feel more comfortable and throw mine out there...and, no, we don't grow beards to make others' think we're straight. hahaha!

Not that i felt uncomfortable, but thanx 4 adding ur pic as well. :D

ROCK ON!!!!

[agreenster]

If anyone here didnt already know, Im not gay. However, Im very interested (more on a scientific standpoint) in what makes people gay.

Which leads itself to the question I always wrestle with: How is being gay a biological trait?

No conventional science has proven it. No physical trait signals it (including the stereotypical high-pitched male voice, which many a gay man has admitted to be a tactic to attract other men, therefore making it a practice, not a trait) Nothing more than practices render an individual as 'gay.'

Just because one has a tendency to be attracted to the same sex doesnt mean they have a biological, uncontrollable urge to be gay. Hell, Im a man, and Im attracted to other men. I find attractive people attractive, male or female. But it is my choice to have a member of the opposite sex as my life-partner. Does that mean I have the heterosexual gene? Of course not. That would be like saying I have an Apple gene instead of a Microsoft gene.

My point is, if you are gay-be gay. Enjoy your life as much as I enjoy mine. But please dont try to fool the public and your friends into thinking you were always 'meant' to be gay because of science.

You chose to be gay. Stand up for that--dont blame genes or biology like other groups in our neo-science society where everything has a reason, and no one has accountability. Leave that for alcoholics, murderers, and rapists who have nothing else to use as an excuse.

Im not being harsh, (or at least not trying to be), so please dont flame me. Im just trying to understand why no one in our society (in any particular group) wont tell the truth about who they are.

[dMac2k3]

Originally posted by agreenster
If anyone here didnt already know, Im not gay. However, Im very interested (more on a scientific standpoint) in what makes people gay.

Which leads itself to the question I always wrestle with: How is being gay a biological trait?

No conventional science has proven it. No physical trait signals it (including the stereotypical high-pitched male voice, which many a gay man has admitted to be a tactic to attract other men, therefore making it a practice, not a trait) Nothing more than practices render an individual as 'gay.'

Just because one has a tendency to be attracted to the same sex doesnt mean they have a biological, uncontrollable urge to be gay. Hell, Im a man, and Im attracted to other men. I find attractive people attractive, male or female. But it is my choice to have a member of the opposite sex as my life-partner. Does that mean I have the heterosexual gene? Of course not. That would be like saying I have an Apple gene instead of a Microsoft gene.

My point is, if you are gay-be gay. Enjoy your life as much as I enjoy mine. But please dont try to fool the public and your friends into thinking you were always 'meant' to be gay because of science.

You chose to be gay. Stand up for that--dont blame genes or biology like other groups in our neo-science society where everything has a reason, and no one has accountability. Leave that for alcoholics, murderers, and rapists who have nothing else to use as an excuse.

Im not being harsh, (or at least not trying to be), so please dont flame me. Im just trying to understand why no one in our society (in any particular group) wont tell the truth about who they are.

Let me start off by saying that I didn't choose 2 b gay. that doesn't mean that it's biological or something like that. Who really knows? Who really cares? I know this is who I am, and who I've always been. I've known since I was very young that I was different, I didn't know what it was until I got a little older. But I didn't choose 2 b gay. Not in this world. I mean, don't get me wrong, it's a lot easier b'ing gay now-a-days. But it's still not TOTALLY accepted and people still talk about me and look at me strange when I walk down the street.

I guess I'm just trying 2 say, stop wrestling with the idea that it's biological. We don't know.

This was such a fun thread, y'd u have 2 go and turn it serious?

Where's Bea Arthur when u need her? :D

ROCK ON!!!!!!

[vniow]

Originally posted by agreenster
If anyone here didnt already know, Im not gay. However, Im very interested (more on a scientific standpoint) in what makes people gay.

Which leads itself to the question I always wrestle with: How is being gay a biological trait?


What makes you think it's biological?
My sexuality has little to do with my biology, it has much more to do with my spirituality than anything else.

You chose to be gay. Stand up for that--dont blame genes or biology like other groups in our neo-science society where everything has a reason, and no one has accountability. Leave that for alcoholics, murderers, and rapists who have nothing else to use as an excuse.


No we don't, no more than people 'choose' to be straight.
I don't know a single person who points out a random person in a crowd and says to themselves, I'm going to force myself to fall in love with that person, I'm going to choose to love them.
Love doesn't work that way, there's litle choice involved, I don't choose to fall in love with who I fall in love with, love chooses me. Sure I could find a random guy on the street and go have sex with him, but I'm not going to enjoy it very much because there's no love there.

[voicegy]

Originally posted by paulwhannel
speaking of gay, did any of you catch tonight's Boston Public? the principal came out, after a gay beating and an unsuccessful attempt to start a gay/straight alliance. it was very moving... they'll be getting (well deserved) awards for this one...

pnw

That was one of the BEST Boston Public's I've ever seen..I'm a big fan of that show.

However, the vice principal didn't "come out", I believe he was making an example when he talked to the various classrooms. Still, very cool to see them start a Gay/Straight Alliance...something I was involved in at my old High School when I went back a few years ago and helped organize a meeting via GLSEN.

[danishboy]

Originally posted by vniow
What makes you think it's biological?
My sexuality has little to do with my biology, it has much more to do with my spirituality than anything else.

[b]

No we don't, no more than people 'choose' to be straight.
I don't know a single person who points out a random person in a crowd and says to themselves, I'm going to force myself to fall in love with that person, I'm going to choose to love them.
Love doesn't work that way, there's litle choice involved, I don't choose to fall in love with who I fall in love with, love chooses me. Sure I could find a random guy on the street and go have sex with him, but I'm not going to enjoy it very much because there's no love there.

vniow - you're absolutely grand! So great to have a fabu grrl here!

Seeing as I'm a medical professional and I'll admit to paying attention to some of the research and publications out there asking the very question as to the biology of sex-identification, I'd like to add a few comments. I don't think any "gay gene" can be found, nor do I believe I chose to be gay. There's no possible way I could have been "taught" to be gay as I remember having a crush on one particular boy in my kindergarten class. Did anyone get the gay lesson after the lesson on sharing and naptime with cookies and milk??

agreenster - I like your curiousity and openness in questioning, and certainly it's hard to understand another's perspective inside their head, hopefully we can help explain ourselves and our gay/mac/fabulous/stylish genes-as-an-expressed-trait.

okay, I'm punchy - as to Boston Public, now I'm sad I didn't watch...though funny that a gay straight alliance would fail in a Massachussets school - there are a bunch of them here...Mass has been typically very gay friendly...

[voicegy]

Originally posted by agreenster
If anyone here didnt already know, Im not gay.

Just because one has a tendency to be attracted to the same sex doesnt mean they have a biological, uncontrollable urge to be gay. Hell, Im a man, and Im attracted to other men. I find attractive people attractive, male or female. But it is my choice to have a member of the opposite sex as my life-partner. Does that mean I have the heterosexual gene? Of course not.

Please dont try to fool the public and your friends into thinking you were always 'meant' to be gay because of science.

You chose to be gay. Stand up for that--dont blame genes or biology [...] Leave that for alcoholics, murderers, and rapists who have nothing else to use as an excuse.


Oh, my. I could go on for hours about this. Let's see, where do I start? (and I'll TRY to be brief, because I like the original intent of this post, which is basically FUN:) but I also want to respect the posters' questions and comments)

1. I hate to say it, but I will. If you don't know what it's like, don't attempt to analyze it. It's cool you're accepting of it, and that's great, because I'm pretty accepting of heterosexuals.;)

2. Homosexual culture has, for centuries, been a favorite target of persecution, distrust, fear, blah blah blah. In our Scientific age, I, for one, welcome the idea of finding biological causation. I don't have to use it as an "excuse" or "reason" because, personally, I couldn't care less why I prefer having a partnership with a man over a woman. I've known it since 5th grade. But if it helps the heterosexual community at large to be more accepting of the existence of homosexuality, then all the better. It's not US that have the "problem" here.:)

3. Overall, the jury is still out on the infamous "gay gene." On the flip side of things, I fear that if, indeed, there is discovered a sound, biological causation for bisexuality or homosexuality, genetic or otherwise, it may be looked upon as something to "fix" and in the future parents may be tested for it, and, who knows, they may be able to "choose" for their child-to-be NOT to be anything other than heterosexual. Science Fiction? Perhaps now...but so were a lot of things only 100 years ago. A tragic possibility.

4. Finally, my esteemed buddy who is trying to learn (and I say that with respect, because you took the time to post) I didn't choose to be homosexual. And it's easy to prove. Did you choose to be heterosexual? I find attractive women attractive, as you find handsome men attractive. The point here is, "attractive is as attractive does."

Again, thank you, agreenster, for contributing and asking questions worthy of discussion. I appreciate it, but in keeping with the overall "lighthearted" aspect of the original post, I'll stop commenting about the more "serious" side of human sexuality publicly, but will be more than happy to continue spirited debate or discussion in private e-mails, if so asked.

So kids...rock on!:D

[robodweeb]

You chose to be gay. Stand up for that--dont blame genes or biology like other groups in our neo-science society where everything has a reason [/B]

You're close, because choice is involved. It's not a choice to be gay or not, but a choice to accept your gayness in the face of social sanctions and sometimes harsh penalties. I don't disparage those who choose not to accept it, but I don't understand it either.

I grew up in a very homophobic culture (central Kentucky) where all the social cues were to orient me towards girls. I have vivid memories of messing around with other boys in elementary school. I messed around with girls in my teens because they were more accessible than guys, but I know what I was thinking about while doing it and it always involved a Y chromosome.

I don't claim to speak for others, but I know that I have always been gay and I can't think of anything about my "nurturing" to account for this fundamental aspect of my being. I have to conclude that, for me at least, the "nature" component is all that remains ... whether you attribute it to genes or something in the water or whatever. And I certainly don't blame anyone or anything ...

Believe as you wish, but allow that, for some at least, the choice is to ACCEPT, not to BE ...

cheerz!

[cleo]

This may be an unpopular stance, but I am quite wary of the "gay gene" movement and hope like hell such a thing is never found. Perhaps it's because I've read Brave New World one too many times, or bc as a person with a congenital disability I'm acutely aware of the ever-lurking dangers of eugenics, but I think the identification of a gene that governs sexual preference would quickly lead to further stigmatization for us gay folks. I recognize the seduction of the "I'm hard-wired this way, it's not my fault" argument, but it seems to me that we should be pressing more for a "It doesn't matter *why* - I am just as much as a human being as you are, even though I love differently."

Just my $.02.

[danishboy]

Originally posted by cleo
This may be an unpopular stance, but I am quite wary of the "gay gene" movement and hope like hell such a thing is never found. Perhaps it's because I've read Brave New World one too many times, or bc as a person with a congenital disability I'm acutely aware of the ever-lurking dangers of eugenics, but I think the identification of a gene that governs sexual preference would quickly lead to further stigmatization for us gay folks. I recognize the seduction of the "I'm hard-wired this way, it's not my fault" argument, but it seems to me that we should be pressing more for a "It doesn't matter *why* - I am just as much as a human being as you are, even though I love differently."

Just my $.02.

Yay Ms. Cleo!! (sorry, but I couldn't help say that with a horridly impersonated Jamaican accent - I must be watching too much late night television!)

I think we have a new ad campaign starting for Apple here: Love Differently...could be a spin on the "Think Different" campaign. Anyone got a beau or belle to smooch for a commercial?

Speaking of gay jeans (bad punny thought coming)...but if we gay people are ahead of our time in fashion, style and culture (ergo we know that Z. Cavariccis are OUT) and we were wearing Banana before it was famous...maybe the rest of the world will take our cue and start buying Macs!

That's my $0.04AUS

[agreenster]

Thanks for the replies --and Im sorry for turning this thread serious. Im just a very curious person interested in social culture. Its just hard to find people who talk about this, so thanks for talking with me about it

[rainman::|:|]

cleo-- i agree, i think we're closer to selective abortions than we like to think. i don't want an unborn homosexual holocaust on our hands. but i do want people to acknowledge the evidence that it is a genetic/physical trait: EEGs of homosexuals are different than non-homos (thanks southpark hehe) as different parts of the brain are more and less active; there have been a handful of differences in the brain found. Also, lesbians have a radically different structure of their inner ear, very easy to tell that way...

plus gay men have traits, like spikey blonde hair and nice clothes... ;)

pnw

[danishboy]

spikey blond hair...
...check

nice clothes...
(looking in 8x4 pseudo walk-in closet, filled and of course in color order)
...check

highly active EEG...
...check

gym membership...
...check

enough shoes for a different pair each day for a month...
...check

cute rainbow sticker in car window...
...check

Gee, I must be gay :D

[monkeydo_jb]

My hand is down, but I couldn't resist.


-jeff

http://www.sveltegeek.com/spideygay.gif

[uhlawboi80]

hey paul, ever see twighlight of the golds? ;)
oh, and i presented a paper on the topic of gay physiology...and its not jsut that the EEG is different, two lobes of most gay mens brains interact similar to womens as opposed to most str8 men...though its a long explanation.

and im right there with you danish boy! though my rainbow sticker is an old apple rainbow sticker my sister got me

oh, and i agree with you Cleo. Its best to push acceptance not expanations.

[iAlan]

I am gay, nothing to do with biology, I just luv cute guys in tight pants!!:D

[dMac2k3]

Originally posted by iAlan
I am gay, nothing to do with biology, I just luv cute guys in tight pants!!:D

Isn't that the God's honest truth?? ;)

ROCK ON!!!!

[ColoJohnBoy]

Originally posted by scem0
Ill just throw a discussion out here:

Am I the only person who is annoyed by the incorrect use of the
word 'gay'. Like when someone is talking about a large homework
assignment they might say 'problems 26-50 were gay' or something
like that. I must admit, I have done this from time to time, but I
try my hardest not to. ;)

I'm not annoyed by it. I'm a homo, and I still call random crap 'gay', As in a professor assigning us a ten page essay two days before it's due ("Dude, that's so gay!"). Nothing derogatory meant by it, and I use it with the full knowledge of the proper meaning of the word.

Getting back to the purpose of this thread. I'm gay, 19, and own a PowerBook 800, 60 GB, 1 GB RAM, and have named him Orson (As in Welles). The gayest Macs I can think of are the flavored iMacs. The Lime, Tangerine, and Raspberry (Or whatever the hell it's called) were and are the most flaming computers I've ever seen.

BTW, I'm single ;)

http://bluepudding.1hwy.com

[voicegy]

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
[...]As in a professor assigning us a ten page essay two days before it's due ("Dude, that's so gay!"). Nothing derogatory meant by it, and I use it with the full knowledge of the proper meaning of the word.

Hmmmm...so if its not derogatory, then it's meant as a positive, as in "Dude, we're being assigned a ten page essay two days before it's due...that's so (great!) (cool!) (right on!)? Just tryin' to understand the use of the slang.

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
The gayest Macs I can think of are the flavored iMacs. The Lime, Tangerine, and Raspberry (Or whatever the hell it's called) were and are the most flaming computers I've ever seen.

Uh, I think the FlowerPower edition machine beats those any day!:D

By the way, WELCOME to MacRumors!

[uhlawboi80]

look, more sub 25 gay powerbook owners :p

im not sure...the flower power edition was gay, but the flavored iBooks...with the handles!! they were like very expensive gay purses :D never owned one myself, but i always thought that.

i will just stick with my TiBook...more stylish

[vniow]

Originally posted by uhlawboi80
but the flavored iBooks...with the handles!! they were like very expensive gay purses :D never owned one myself, but i always thought that.



Hell yeah, if I had a little expansion bay or something in my blueberry, I could get rid of my purse entirely!http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=258478

[mactastic]

Originally posted by vniow
Hell yeah, if I had a little expansion bay or something in my blueberry, I could get rid of my purse entirely!http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=258478

Hahaha! this thread is great, you all have a good sense of humor. This is just one of the posts that made me laugh out loud in this thread. And just for the record, I sure don't remember choosing to be straight... it's just the way I've always been. Don't hate me for it! j/k Besides, I've know plenty of people who are gay, and wouldn't/couldn't admit it for a long time... and would have changed it if they could have just to avoid the loads of crap society hands out to those who are percieved as different. Somehow I think choice is not a factor here. People are people no matter what flavor they come in.

[ja0912]

*raises hand*

Although I never post, I'm here several times a day. Completely addicted. :(

[Groovsonic]

This whole thing has been very interesting.

Here are some random thoughts.

I am not gay, but many people (including family members) have thought I am.

I can understand why. I have really good taste in clothes, I have a really good eye for design and color, and I like to shop. I can fit in just as well (if not better) with a group of girls as with a group of guys. I can cook and sew. I am not a big sports fan. I can appreciate a handsome guy. And yes, I do have a gym membership.

I know none of those things make me gay. Most of those things are products of my enviroment, and a I really like that I am not like evryone else, but really being gay comes down to certian activities, none of which I participate in. I am attracted to women.

I think gay men are a blast to hang out with. (stereotypically) They are funny, sharp, and like to talk. I can't understand people who want to attack them. I have had some great gay friends.

I am a born-again Christian. I think homosexual sex - or any sex outside of marrige is wrong. I will add that I think that homosexuality is not a choice, but an enviromental reaction. Please don't think I am attacking homosexuals, or making a homophobic or prejudiced statement. I just, through some personal and relational experience, think that to be true.

Has anyone thought that mabye people might be straight by default, but some people may be perdisposed to be gay, and possibly when they are young some event causes a "switch" to be flipped in the mind, and changes the way people respond sexually? Kind of like some people like to be tied up, and some people like to be dipped in pudding and some people like sex with people of the same gender. I hate to reduce homosexuality to a fetish, but has anyone ever thought that might be a possibility? I would especailly interested to hear what gay and lesbians think about this...

I mean no offense by this post, and hope no one takes any...

[voicegy]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
...possibly when they are young some event causes a "switch" to be flipped in the mind, and changes the way people respond sexually? Kind of like some people like to be tied up, and some people like to be dipped in pudding and some people like sex with people of the same gender. I hate to reduce homosexuality to a fetish, but has anyone ever thought that might be a possibility?

As long as Western society keeps straining for some kind of "answer" to homosexual behaviour, the very action of looking for that answer always speaks to the same thing...that there's something "wrong" with it. Sexual orientation is about as hard wired as something can get...FETISHISMS, on the other hand, are causations from early sexual experience, and cross hetero and homosexual lines. If, say, vanilla pudding were somehow involved in my first sexual experience that resulted in orgasm, you can bet your sweet bippie that that experience created a "groove" in my mind for which I would continue to seek out. Psychology has long established that the simple "first experience", heterosexual or homsexual, is not an indicator of long term fixed orientation...if so, then argumentatively, heterosexuality could be defined as a fetish.

Originally posted by Groovsonic
I mean no offense by this post, and hope no one takes any...

Oh, Lord no, none taken! Lots of people have posted here, and some, like yourself, inspire discourse and insightful conversation, which is ALWAYS welcome.

But now you've caused me to begin to seek the truth in myself...I hate to cook, I don't sew, I don't go to a gym, I prefer the company of heterosexual men, and tend to dress rather simply. Can it be, that at this stage in my life, I am questioning my own Gay Card membership?:confused:

;)

[Danger! Will]

Raises hand...but only halfway

gtzdudex aolim

[vniow]

Originally posted by Groovsonic

I am a born-again Christian. I think homosexual sex - or any sex outside of marrige is wrong.

Have you ever masturbated?

And if we could get married, would it still be wrong?


I will add that I think that homosexuality is not a choice, but an enviromental reaction.


Is being straight an environmental reaction?

Has anyone thought that mabye people might be straight by default, but some people may be perdisposed to be gay, and possibly when they are young some event causes a "switch" to be flipped in the mind, and changes the way people respond sexually?


I believe that people are born bisexual to a certain degree and as they grow up and learn more about themselves and their own sexuality then they tend to lean one way or the other, I lean more towards the middle since I've found myself attracted to guys every once in awhile, but to each their own...

Kind of like some people like to be tied up, and some people like to be dipped in pudding and some people like sex with people of the same gender. I hate to reduce homosexuality to a fetish, but has anyone ever thought that might be a possibility? I would especailly interested to hear what gay and lesbians think about this...



Is being straight a fetish?

[vniow]

Originally posted by voicegy
If, say, vanilla pudding were somehow involved in my first sexual experience that resulted in orgasm, you can bet your sweet bippie that that experience created a "groove" in my mind for which I would continue to seek out.

Wow, you too?

[voicegy]

Originally posted by vniow
Wow, you too?

What better way to celebrate my 500th post than to reply to the woman I adore?
:p
Thanks for the excuse, vniow. Now, where's that pudding....:D

[MrMacMan]

Why do we need 2 'gay threads' again?

I fail to re-call a reason...

[Danger! Will]

Yup cuz it's "gay"

[MrMacMan]

I'm glad your having a gay time.

(original meaning)

[voicegy]

Originally posted by MrMacman
Why do we need 2 'gay threads' again?

I fail to re-call a reason...

Well, THIS thread was started back in February, the 11th I believe, by paulwhannel, so I consider it the only one to post to, Gay-wise.

That other one is an imposter.

[mactastic]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
I will add that I think that homosexuality is not a choice, but an enviromental reaction.



You mean you can catch being gay?? Like from a toilet seat, or from being exposed to "gay" at a vulnerable time? Hmmmm
And maybe gay is normal and all us str8 people are consumed with our breeding fetish! Silly, I know but it just illustrates how hard it is to think out of our own cultural boxes. As someone else already said, just the idea that one is normal and the other isn't shows a value judgement already being made. People are people, no matter what kind of backless leather chaps they wear!

[Groovsonic]

Hope this helps you see where I am coming from:

Originally posted by vniow
Have you ever masturbated?



Yes, but that dosen't mean that its a really good thing to do.
Although I enjoy it occasionally, that dosen't make it ok. Sometimes I get lazy and surf the net at work for long periods of time. Sometimes I lie. I am not perfect, but that dosen't mean I should just give up and ignore my conscience and do whatever I want, no matter what the damage. To keep trying to do right is most of the battle. I know that for me to go have sex would be wrong for me right now, but if I did, that wouldn't mean it would be ok for me to keep on doing it, just becasue I did it once. Just because I want to do something dosent make it ok. Just because I have done something dosen't make it ok.


And if we could get married, would it still be wrong?



A man and a man, or a woman and a woman getting married would be changing the meaning of "marrige". Since (according to my beliefs) marrige is between a man and a woman, for a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be married would be impossible. To say that people of the same gender could get married and change the meaning of that word would work like me changing the name of a Dell PC and calling it a mac. You can call it a mac, but it isn't one. I am sorry if my views offend you, this is just what I think.



Is being straight an environmental reaction?


Mabye. I just tend to think that that is what we are hard wired for, and it takes some sort of intervention or enviromental situation to cause a change to that. Once again, just what I think.


I believe that people are born bisexual to a certain degree and as they grow up and learn more about themselves and their own sexuality then they tend to lean one way or the other, I lean more towards the middle since I've found myself attracted to guys every once in awhile, but to each their own...



Mabye, but how do we become "ourselves"? In a large part, by observing and reacting to people around us when we are young.

Is being straight a fetish?

No, I think not. Is being gay being straight? They aren't the same.
Also, I didn't say that being gay was a fetish. I said that mabye homosexual desires develop in a similar way. Thats all.

I try to see things from both sides, and to have an understanding attitude. I try to live in tolerance and peace with everyone, but that dosen't change the way I feel about things. I get frustrated with the idea that I am a homophobe biggot in some peoples minds if I happen to not agree with the idea that people are born gay and that homosexuality is an equivalent alternative lifestyle. I don't think it is an equivalent. Like I said above, I am sorry if this offends you, but I want to be honest. I am not a homophobe, as I am not afraid of gay people or homosexuality. I am not a biggot by any means. I don't want you to even think I am passing judgement on you or anyone else. I have no business judging anyone. Just saying what I think/feel/believe.

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by mactastic
You mean you can catch being gay?? Like from a toilet seat, or from being exposed to "gay" at a vulnerable time? Hmmmm


Now, did I say that? Is that even what you think I implied? If you did, I am sorry that you think I am so stupid.
Do you not think that what we are or are not exposed to as a child has an effect on our sexual development? I am not saying that children "exposed" to gay people "catch" gay. If that was true, then children rasied by gay parents would all become gay.
All I was saying that I don't think that homosexuality is a genetic or physical thing, nor do I think it is a choice. I think it is a product of enviroment, just like many other behaviors.


And maybe gay is normal and all us str8 people are consumed with our breeding fetish! Silly, I know but it just illustrates how hard it is to think out of our own cultural boxes. As someone else already said, just the idea that one is normal and the other isn't shows a value judgement already being made. People are people, no matter what kind of backless leather chaps they wear!

I agree that people are people. I just don't see homosexual behavior and hetrosexual behavior as being equivalent. I wouldn't judge people for being gay or acting on homosexual desires, and I certianly am tolerant, but that dosent mean I agree with the idea that homosexual is = to hetrosexual. You can think whatever you want about me becasue of that.

I am saying these things not to stir up peoples anger, but to express a point of view. I love everyone, and don't want people to think I am a "gay-basher", because I am not.

[mactastic]

Hey I'm sorry Groovsonic, I wasn't implying any stupiduty; sarcasm never comes across well in the forums. I should have learned that by now.
Out of curiosity though, what kind of environmental factors do you think contribute to making people prone to being gay? I mean gay parents would be the most likely right?

[DakotaGuy]

I plead the 5th

[sillymacgirl]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
All I was saying that I don't think that homosexuality is a genetic or physical thing, nor do I think it is a choice. I think it is a product of enviroment, just like many other behaviors.


Ok...here's a couple of examples for you. My aunt who is a homosexual with two children, born during a 20 year marriage to a man, says she's always been a homosexual, she just didn't acknowlege it out of fear of rejection by family and friends(which turned out NOT to be a problem she needed to worry over).

The second is a friend of mine, actually my friend's mother. She too was married for many years and had two children during the marriage, but is now with another woman. She will openly tell you that she decided to date women thanks to the abuse she'd suffered from her father and husband, not because she'd always had an underlying attraction to women.

So now you tell me, can it be proven that homosexuality is either a genetic trait or something that is 'picked up on' along the way when I've given you two examples that would give both theories something to stand on?

[vniow]

Originally posted by Groovsonic

A man and a man, or a woman and a woman getting married would be changing the meaning of "marrige". Since (according to my beliefs) marrige is between a man and a woman, for a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be married would be impossible.

But why does it have to be that way?

I've been dreaming about marriage since I was a little girl and when I found out I was gay, I also discovered that I can't become bonded to someone I love like I would very much want to, it really hurts when I see members of my family walk down the aisle and knowing that I may never be able to do that in this country in my lifetime because I love differently than other people.


To say that people of the same gender could get married and change the meaning of that word would work like me changing the name of a Dell PC and calling it a mac. You can call it a mac, but it isn't one. I am sorry if my views offend you, this is just what I think.

Why would same-sex marriages change the meaning of marriage??

Its still two concenting adults who want to share a lifelong bond, its no different than people of opposite sex wanting to get married, the love is still there and its the same kind of love men have for women and vice versa, there's no difference here.

Mabye, but how do we become "ourselves"? In a large part, by observing and reacting to people around us when we are young.

And we are also born with certain predispositions that come from ourselves and ourselves alone.

I was born in a small Midwestern state to an average family in an average home, didn't have a whole lot of money but wasn't poor.
My parents have been happliy married for over 20 years now.
I have never been abused in any form by either of them or anyone else in my family nor by people in elementary for any reason whatsoever.
I got good grades, didn't skip school, had a few friends, got into a few fights, nothing rally out of the ordinary.
The only other gay person in my family is an uncle (he's bi actually) that I've hardly spoken with.

And I turned out gay.

I've thought about this too and looked back on my childhood and whatnot and I can't find anything that indicates that it would somehow steer me towards homosexuality, to be honest, I don't really care either why I am, all that matters to me is that I am and if I'm going to accept it or not.

No, I think not. Is being gay being straight? They aren't the same.
Also, I didn't say that being gay was a fetish. I said that mabye homosexual desires develop in a similar way. Thats all.

No they are not the same, just as poodles are of a different breed of dog than labs but they're both equivilent in the fact that they are both dogs.

I get frustrated with the idea that I am a homophobe biggot in some peoples minds if I happen to not agree with the idea that people are born gay and that homosexuality is an equivalent alternative lifestyle. I don't think it is an equivalent. Like I said above, I am sorry if this offends you, but I want to be honest. I am not a homophobe, as I am not afraid of gay people or homosexuality. I am not a biggot by any means. I don't want you to even think I am passing judgement on you or anyone else. I have no business judging anyone. Just saying what I think/feel/believe.

I don't think you're a homophobe.

I don't believe its a lifestyle either, in fact that's one of my biggest pet peeves as a homosexual, people calling how we live our lives an alternative lifestyle, we do the same damn things that straight people do, the only difference is we love differently, that love is no less valid or less human or less natural than the genuine love that women have for men or men have for women, as long as there have been two genders, there's been homosexuality, you can see it in every animal where there are two gendersm its perfectly natural and I don't see a good reason why I should discriminated against or denied the right to marriage just because some people seem to disagree with the naturality of homosexuality.

I agree that people are people. I just don't see homosexual behavior and hetrosexual behavior as being equivalent. I wouldn't judge people for being gay or acting on homosexual desires, and I certianly am tolerant, but that dosent mean I agree with the idea that homosexual is = to hetrosexual. You can think whatever you want about me becasue of that.

Substitute homosexual for another minority group and look at that statement.

Heterosexual may mot be the same as homosexual but it it by no means less or greater than.

[vniow]

Originally posted by sillymacgirl


Both of those are quite common actually, I guess I would be one of the former even though I've never liked men in the first place..http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251202

[Ugg]

I have never like the term gay marriage. Mainly because marriage implies procreation and until science finds a way around that issue, two men can't make babies. I think the term civil union while incredibly bland is much more appropriate.

So, with that, and the fact that I'm gay, why is it that straight people have such a problem with two men or two women or two transsexuals wanting to enter into a legally binding contract?

It just seems so stupid and so religiously biased. I would never consider my union with my boyfriend to be marriage (and I hate all that husband/wife bulll**** amongst gays/lesbians) but the fact remains that we allow all sorts of freaky religious practices, circumcision is one of them. What a sick practice. So why do civil unions create such a furor?

Remember, this has nothing to do with religion. A marriage in this country is a legally binding contract that may or may not be concluded in a religious institution. As a matter of fact religion from a legal standpoint has nothing to do with marriage.

Two friends of mine recently "committed" to one another and were forced to go through this incredibly long, expensive and frustrating legal process. The point is is that it is already happening and states are beginning to recognize the legality of the situation. Most hospitals allow same sex partners to visit. Most Fortune 500 companies have realized that it costs them little or nothing to offer domestic benefit packages. Most of Europe has in some way, shape or form given its blessing to same sex civil unions. Why oh why is the US so adamantly opposed to a practice that would only strengthen society with little cost to society?

I swear, it's like we live in 12th century Europe.

By the way, homosexuality has existed since time immemorial. We have the Greeks to thank for their illustrious descriptions. Therefore, the whole nurture/nature debate seems to be a little bit of a moot point. For some reason or another, nature has decided that it makes sense to have a certain percentage of humans to be gay. There has been some speculation that it may be passed on maternally. Why? Who knows? Does it really matter?

Rather than spend so much time suppressing something that is and always has been a normal part of human existence, why doesn't christian america show some of that compassion and love that they are so renowned for.

my2cents

[ibookin']

Originally posted by Ugg
So, with that, and the fact that I'm gay, why is it that straight people have such a problem with two men or two women or two transsexuals wanting to enter into a legally binding contract?

I'm straight, and I have no problem with two men or two women entering into a legally binding contract such as or similar to marriage, and definately do not have a problem with gay people. I'm not sure if you meant to make a blanket generalization there, but I and others would be somewhat offended by such a generalization.

I think the problem with states not passing same-sex marriage (I'm going to use this term here because it is what such laws are reffered to as in society, even though you do not approve of the term) laws is that they fear that passing such laws would cause gay couples to flock to the state to get married.

Although in more conservative states it might be due to a different idea of a legal union (read: marriage should be between a man and a woman), I think that it is more of an economic and (maybe) population issue in most states.

[Ugg]

Originally posted by ibookin'
I'm straight, and I have no problem with two men or two women entering into a legally binding contract such as or similar to marriage, and definately do not have a problem with gay people. I'm not sure if you meant to make a blanket generalization there, but I and others would be somewhat offended by such a generalization.

I think the problem with states not passing same-sex marriage (I'm going to use this term here because it is what such laws are reffered to as in society, even though you do not approve of the term) laws is that they fear that passing such laws would cause gay couples to flock to the state to get married.

Although in more conservative states it might be due to a different idea of a legal union (read: marriage should be between a man and a woman), I think that it is more of an economic and (maybe) population issue in most states.

No offense meant, just frustration on my part.

Well, if California or New York were to pass civil union laws, then I could see that happening. But if Nebraska were to pass such a law I doubt that it would appeal to a majority of the gay world. I've never been to NE and am not putting the state down, it is just a generalization. Let's face it, even though we Americans are transient in nature, most of us aren't going to uproot just to get a piece of paper that is not recognized in any other state.

There is always fear of the unknown and that is not necessarily a bad thing. I think a lot of the negativity right now hinges around the word marriage. Also, the fact the Bush is prez doesn't help matters along with the increasingly rightwing slant of the popular press. Like any other social issue it is how it is presented to the public that matters most.

Howard Dean supported the issue and won. It didn't harm him nor did it harm Vermont. Now that he's making a bid for the White House, maybe the issue will come up again and be given the proper attention it deserves.

[ibookin']

Originally posted by Ugg
No offense meant, just frustration on my part.

Well, if California or New York were to pass civil union laws, then I could see that happening. But if Nebraska were to pass such a law I doubt that it would appeal to a majority of the gay world. I've never been to NE and am not putting the state down, it is just a generalization. Let's face it, even though we Americans are transient in nature, most of us aren't going to uproot just to get a piece of paper that is not recognized in any other state.

There is always fear of the unknown and that is not necessarily a bad thing. I think a lot of the negativity right now hinges around the word marriage. Also, the fact the Bush is prez doesn't help matters along with the increasingly rightwing slant of the popular press. Like any other social issue it is how it is presented to the public that matters most.

Howard Dean supported the issue and won. It didn't harm him nor did it harm Vermont. Now that he's making a bid for the White House, maybe the issue will come up again and be given the proper attention it deserves.

I agree. I don't think that passing gay marriage laws would hurt the states any more than abortion laws do.

Like you said, there is also a problem with using the word "marriage". Were it called something different, there probably would not be as much of a problem as there would be a basic distinction between gay and straight unions, even though they would be legally the same.

On the uprooting for a piece of paper issue, I have heard of gay couples wanting that little piece of paper really badly. There was actually a TV series on Bravo about this. I only saw one episode, but the people in the series went to great lengths to have the perfect wedding. For them, being married was very important. I guess it all depends on the individual.

The page for the series (now over) has apparently been taken off of http://www.bravotv.com , but I found this link to an MSNBC article on the show. http://www.msnbc.com/news/797708.asp

[Zaid]

Hmm, havent noticed this thread before,

*raises hand*,

can i join ?

[voicegy]

Originally posted by Zaid
Hmm, havent noticed this thread before,

*raises hand*,

can i join ?

You just did, mate. It's fair game.:)

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by Ugg
I have never like the term gay marriage. Mainly because marriage implies procreation and until science finds a way around that issue, two men can't make babies. I think the term civil union while incredibly bland is much more appropriate.


I agree. I really don't have much of a problem with the idea of a "civil union", because it implies something diffrent than marrige.



So, with that, and the fact that I'm gay, why is it that straight people have such a problem with two men or two women or two transsexuals wanting to enter into a legally binding contract?

It just seems so stupid and so religiously biased. I would never consider my union with my boyfriend to be marriage (and I hate all that husband/wife bulll**** amongst gays/lesbians) but the fact remains that we allow all sorts of freaky religious practices, circumcision is one of them. What a sick practice. So why do civil unions create such a furor?


Although I disagree about circumcision, I agree with most of what you said.


Remember, this has nothing to do with religion. A marriage in this country is a legally binding contract that may or may not be concluded in a religious institution. As a matter of fact religion from a legal standpoint has nothing to do with marriage.


While from a purely legal standpoint, marrige has nothing to do with religon, but, you must ask, where does the modern idea of marrige come from? What is the point of marrige? Most of the things that you do when you get married can be done as a commited couple. You can change your name, you can move in with each other, you can buy property jointly, you can do leagaly almost anything. Why would you want to get married? In many/most peoples minds, marrige is a commitment before "God and these witnesses". You can have a ceremony, you can wear a dress, you can invite your family, you can do whatever you want. Why do you care if it is offically called "marrige" by the government?


Two friends of mine recently "committed" to one another and were forced to go through this incredibly long, expensive and frustrating legal process. The point is is that it is already happening and states are beginning to recognize the legality of the situation. Most hospitals allow same sex partners to visit. Most Fortune 500 companies have realized that it costs them little or nothing to offer domestic benefit packages. Most of Europe has in some way, shape or form given its blessing to same sex civil unions. Why oh why is the US so adamantly opposed to a practice that would only strengthen society with little cost to society?

I swear, it's like we live in 12th century Europe.

You make two conflicting points. First you say that jobs and hospitals and states are beginning to recognize a "civil union". Then you say that its like 12th century europe. Things are getting easier for homosexual couples. I'm sure they will continue to get easier.


By the way, homosexuality has existed since time immemorial. We have the Greeks to thank for their illustrious descriptions. Therefore, the whole nurture/nature debate seems to be a little bit of a moot point. For some reason or another, nature has decided that it makes sense to have a certain percentage of humans to be gay. There has been some speculation that it may be passed on maternally. Why? Who knows? Does it really matter?

Rather than spend so much time suppressing something that is and always has been a normal part of human existence, why doesn't christian america show some of that compassion and love that they are so renowned for.

my2cents

Once again, since something has existed for a long time makes it ok?

Who in "chrisitan america" is supressing you? If Christians were advocating violence and hate toward homosexuals, then I would agree with you. I can tell you, that hateing someone is not a part of Christianity. People calling themselves christians and preaching hate toward anyone really should go home and read their Bible. The Bible says you can't love God and hate your brother, and your brother is everyone around you. So, please don't pin this on "christian america".

On the other hand, that dosent mean that Christians in america should just roll over and play dead when some people are trying to cause a social change that many/most christians don't agree with.

Just my thoughts :)

[mactastic]

If marriage is about procreating, why aren't we given sterility tests before we allow anyone to get married? And why do we tolerate childless (man and wife) couples?

[Zaid]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
I agree. I really don't have much of a problem with the idea of a "civil union", because it implies something diffrent than marrige.


Though if they so wish there is no reason for gay people not to be married just as there should be no reason for straight people not to enter into a 'civil union'. Otherwise it smacks of the whole seperate but equal idea, which generally has a lot more seperate than equal.


While from a purely legal standpoint, marrige has nothing to do with religon, but, you must ask, where does the modern idea of marrige come from? What is the point of marrige?

From a purely legal perspective, religion has no place in the making of laws. Just because the majority may have a particular view, that does not mean that those views should be legally enforced on a minority. (bar of course situations where such actions limit the rights of others)

Irrespective of the origins of Marriage, (which predates any of the modern world religions) we have to ask what does marriage mean now. It is a legal contract, with a great amount of social significance, (witnessed before God, or not as in the case of a civil ceremony) that is recognised by the state, and which affords the participants certain legal responsibilities and privlages (such as tax credits etc); and if you want it can have a religious signifficance too.)

By not allowing g&l citizens the full rights of marriage, the state is effectively discriminating against them. It is curtailing the rights of a minority (the right to equal treatment before the law) in order to satisfy the religious and otherwise objections of the majority. One may sugar coat this any way you want, but still leaves a bitter taste. Democracy is not just about majority rule, it is doing so while maintaining the rights of the minority.


Why do you care if it is offically called "marrige" by the government?

Many do because of the social significance of marriage. Turning the question around why do people care that it is officially called marriage. How does two gay people getting married in any way diminsh the value of marriage between two straight people.


You make two conflicting points. First you say that jobs and hospitals and states are beginning to recognize a "civil union". Then you say that its like 12th century europe. Things are getting easier for homosexual couples. I'm sure they will continue to get easier.


His points are not conflicting, just because things are getting better, does not mean that are no longer bad or deplorable. If I live in a third world slum say and the government installs a tap for every two houses, it improves my life, it doesnt necc make it good.


Once again, since something has existed for a long time makes it ok?

Agreed, being around for a long time doesnt make it right. Lots of bad things have existed for a long time. Homophobia for instance, sexism, racism, have all existed for a long time. I have however yet to see a convincing argument as to why homosexuality is wrong.

It is however important to recognise that it has existed for a long time and that there have been many gay people that have made great contributions to humanity. If for no other reason than that it reassures a scared gay kid that (s)he is not alone, and gives that kid positive self image about their sexuality.


On the other hand, that dosent mean that Christians in america should just roll over and play dead when some people are trying to cause a social change that many/most christians don't agree with.

It also does not mean that they have the right to impose their belief system on people who don't share that belief system. Majority rule without protecting the rights of all, including minorities, is not democracy, its the rule of the mob.

Just my thoughts :)

[andrewlandry]

i hate to jump in here, but here goes:

i am a straight male non-religious person. a while back there was a Christian thread. i think Christianity is a big load of crap, but i didn't go busting into the thread to start a debate. it wouldn't change anyone's mind and it would just upset people who were trying to bond or whatever.

groovesonic, show the same respect please. i know you probably think god is giving you points for enlightening everyone in this thread, but it's really not useful. if you have such a problem with homosexuality, then you might want to avoid a thread called 'the gay thread'. just a thought.

also, i think it's really funny that people still feel guilty about masturbating. especially when all guys do it on a regular basis. i'm just imagining people being like, "oh man, i really have to stop doing this someday" every day or two for years.

[sillymacgirl]

Originally posted by vniow
Both of those are quite common actually, I guess I would be one of the former even though I've never liked men in the first place..http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251202

Well, my aunt never liked men in the first place either...but she got married about 30 years ago. She thought she'd never be accepted if she didn't do what was expected of a young woman her age, and that was to marry a man. I was just trying to show to everyone that you can't say that homosexuality is strictly genetic, just as you can't say that it's strictly a choice for someone to be a homosexual either.

And as far as people uprooting their lives to get married, I know quite a few people who have done just that. Although they realize that their marriage will not be legal in all states, they have gone and some are still planning on going, elsewhere to get married. And men marrying men and women marrying women no more 'destroys' the sanctity of marriage then when a Justice of the Peace marries people rather then a priest or minister.

[celaurie]

Originally posted by paulwhannel
we haven't had this thread since last spring i think, so here it is for all the newer gay users...

it's the official coming out thread :)

i'll start.

*raises hand*

i know a handful of others out there, but i'll leave that to them...

:)
pnw

*pink waves from Scotland*

[MorganX]

Originally posted by sillymacgirl
I was just trying to show to everyone that you can't say that homosexuality is strictly genetic, just as you can't say that it's strictly a choice for someone to be a homosexual either.

I think it's 70/30 genetic to choice for men and 50/50 for women.

I DJ'd for a year in gay clubs and dated a lesbian (who by definition is bisexual) for a year. While her experiences with men before me would make any female go lesbian, she has so much muscle and testosterone she would have evenutally become lesbian, IMO, without the negative experiences with men.

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by Zaid
Though if they so wish there is no reason for gay people not to be married just as there should be no reason for straight people not to enter into a 'civil union'. Otherwise it smacks of the whole seperate but equal idea, which generally has a lot more seperate than equal.


From a purely legal perspective, religion has no place in the making of laws. Just because the majority may have a particular view, that does not mean that those views should be legally enforced on a minority. (bar of course situations where such actions limit the rights of others)
By not allowing g&l citizens the full rights of marriage, the state is effectively discriminating against them. It is curtailing the rights of a minority (the right to equal treatment before the law) in order to satisfy the religious and otherwise objections of the majority. One may sugar coat this any way you want, but still leaves a bitter taste. Democracy is not just about majority rule, it is doing so while maintaining the rights of the minority.


Agreed, being around for a long time doesnt make it right. Lots of bad things have existed for a long time. Homophobia for instance, sexism, racism, have all existed for a long time. I have however yet to see a convincing argument as to why homosexuality is wrong.


It also does not mean that they have the right to impose their belief system on people who don't share that belief system. Majority rule without protecting the rights of all, including minorities, is not democracy, its the rule of the mob.

Just my thoughts :)


You make some great points.

{hypothetical}
But what about the rights of others? What if I wanted to marry two women? What If I wanted to marry my father? What If I wanted to marry my sister? What if I wanted to marry my son/daughter? If we want to do it, and were are adults, then how dare you discriminate against me!
I love my sister and want to spend the rest of my life with her, and want to be married to her. I also want to marry my grandfather. I am in love with him and I want the same legal protection and benefits afforded to everyone else.
{/hypothetical}

Marrige is a union between a man and a woman.

The above statement might be offensive to some of you because you would say "how dare you equate incest with homosexuality!"
You should ask someone involved with incest. They fell that their feelings are real and wonderful and can't understand why anyone would want to stop them from getting married.

I know this is an unpopular and un pc thing to say, but I have said it.

By the way, this country is based on the majority imposing their will on the minority. What do you think voting is?

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
You make some great points.

{hypothetical}
But what about the rights of others? What if I wanted to marry two women? What If I wanted to marry my father? What If I wanted to marry my sister? What if I wanted to marry my son/daughter? {/hypothetical}


This argument does not support your position. Whether or not you are straight or day, bigomy is still bigomy, your father is still your father, your sister is still your sister, and your son/daughter is still your son daughter. Society will not accept these scenarios whether or not you are gay, for the same reasons they will not accept them if you are straight.

I suggest you try something different to make your point, whatever that is. If I were gay, I would respond with the fact that most people who marry two spouses and commit incest are straight.

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by andrewlandry
i hate to jump in here, but here goes:

i am a straight male non-religious person. a while back there was a Christian thread. i think Christianity is a big load of crap, but i didn't go busting into the thread to start a debate. it wouldn't change anyone's mind and it would just upset people who were trying to bond or whatever.

groovesonic, show the same respect please. i know you probably think god is giving you points for enlightening everyone in this thread, but it's really not useful. if you have such a problem with homosexuality, then you might want to avoid a thread called 'the gay thread'. just a thought.


I agree. I just chimed in about myself, and made a little statement, and someone said that this kind of disussion was interesting, and so I responded to someone elses post, and my response got responded to, and so on, and so on...

I don't think God is giving me points or anything like that. I just was having a discussion. I am sorry if I got on anyones nerves.

I really like these kind of threads. I find it fascinating to read other peoples point of views and life experiences. I thought the religion threads were awesome for the same reason. Hearing what other peoples thoughts are and responding to them is a blast. Thats all I was doing here. Not trying to upset anyone.


also, i think it's really funny that people still feel guilty about masturbating. especially when all guys do it on a regular basis. i'm just imagining people being like, "oh man, i really have to stop doing this someday" every day or two for years.

Well, you shouldn't feel guilty about it, because you don't see anything wrong with it.
I shouldn't do it, becuase it is wrong for me to do. When I do things that I shouldn't do, I generally feel guilty. Thats a function of a funtioning conscience.
You wouldn't want me imposing my morals on you, nor would I want you to impose yours on me.
Just because "all guys do it on a regular basis" dosen't make it right for ME to do.

[Ugg]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
You make some great points.

{hypothetical}
But what about the rights of others? What if I wanted to marry two women? What If I wanted to marry my father? What If I wanted to marry my sister? What if I wanted to marry my son/daughter? If we want to do it, and were are adults, then how dare you discriminate against me!
I love my sister and want to spend the rest of my life with her, and want to be married to her. I also want to marry my grandfather. I am in love with him and I want the same legal protection and benefits afforded to everyone else.
{/hypothetical}

Marrige is a union between a man and a woman.

The above statement might be offensive to some of you because you would say "how dare you equate incest with homosexuality!"
You should ask someone involved with incest. They fell that their feelings are real and wonderful and can't understand why anyone would want to stop them from getting married.

I know this is an unpopular and un pc thing to say, but I have said it.

By the way, this country is based on the majority imposing their will on the minority. What do you think voting is?

The rights and responsibilities of the citizens of any society are in a constant state of flux. It was once believed that women were lesser creatures than men, that slavery was mandated by god, that an 80 hour work week kept people on the straight and narrow.

The reason for a ban on incestuous relationships is genetic in origin. If one of the members of an incestuous relationship were to be sterilized, would you still consder it wrong? I don't really know how I feel about this issue, there really hasn't been a lot of debate about it. But, if someone were to make a strong case, I would certainly be open to hearing their arguments.

I agree with you that "marriage" is a union between a man and a woman because it "implies" procreation. It doesn't demand it, procreation is not something in this day and age that can be forced on people. It also has the taint of religion. While some same sex couples would welcome the presence of religion in their union others would not. Just like opposite sex unions. However, what about civil unions? Why would you deny two people to enter into a legally binding contract? It makes no sense whatsoever.

You have failed to provide any compelling reason for the refusal of the govt. to allow same sex, civil unions. What is that reason?

[Moxiemike]

Originally posted by eyelikeart
I'm not gay...I know I've been confused with being so on a few occasions because of my lifestyle decisions...

I exercise regularly, eat healthy usually, an into the arts, drink wine, usually am fashionable, am in touch with my emotions...

I once had a guy swear I was gay but just didn't realize yet because I dressed nice, was into art & was drinking wine...heh...

It doesn't bother me one bit. I figure, I know where I wanna be if I'm gonna have anyone in my bed, and that's fine for me. I do have a problem with the ones who aren't comfortable with their sexuality, who feel the need to overcompensate for that lack of what they feel to be masculinity. It's kinda sad actually, I know a guy who's dating one of my best friends who's a total homophoeb.

I have gay friends, mostly women though, but I feel it's just the way it goes. To say I don't care would sound harsh, so maybe to say I feel secure enough with myself that I can be around and joke a lot...? ;)

But...But... what about all the flirting? I'm so disappointed. ;)

No seriously. I guess I feel like ya in some repsects. I dress well. I'm an artist. I mostly hang out with my guy friends.... unfortunately,Pittsburgh isn't that good for dating. (http://www.forbes.com/static_html/singles/2002.html). Add to that, I'm VERY picky about what kind of girls i'll date (my worst fear is dating yet another sociopath.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: ) and I can see why people might get the impression. There's just NOT ENOUGH quality women here. I like my girls to have brains and style and most of the girls here are trashy and stupid. Then add in that two of my best friends are lesbians, and I'm comfortable enough to use a pink lighter (yes, a 7-11 worker actually made a comment about me buying a pink lighter. it was the last one. she asked if "i wanted some matches instead, until i could get a better color. Pennnnnnsyltucky! I love ya!). But it doesn't make me gay. But out here in Pennsyltucky, well, I might as well be Queer #1.

It's amazing how many times, for no apparent reason, my boy Doug and I have been called names. Just because our style is influenced by Europeans. And, i can hear it now in the Pigsburgh accent "Doze europeeeeeans n'nat are awl bisexshules".

And it's always the same people-- the college boys with the baseball caps on backwards, khaki pants, and shirt that says "cocks" on it. They're AWESOME. :rolleyes:

We just really don't care. Unfortunately for Pittsburgh, Doug and I take on many projects where we work together (dj'ing, organizing art events, going on photo shoots, etc)

But we definitely aren't gay. Maybe we're the college boys fantasies... I dunno.

But whatev. Doesn't bother me. It's funny more than anything. The best was this girl who thought Doug and I were involved. She works the door at this club that we frequent. Well, I went in there with this girl i'm digging on who is, IMHO, SMOKIN'. We walked in, being VERY flirty (perhaps because we're attracted? maybe that should be a whole new thread-- is this girl giving me the signs???? Should I make a move????).

The door chick just kinda looked at me. I winked and went on my way to find a table.

Brilliant. But yea. again, s'what.

I will say that some of the best times we've had in P-town have been on the odd night where a big possé of us goes to a gay bar called NY NY. They have piano bar karaoke. And it's always fun to hang out there. Cheap, strong drinks, and the people are generally more friendly than anywhere else. Pittsburgh is a town where you can't go into a bar by yourself and meet some new folk. They look at you like you're a friendless alcoholic. Which may be true.. but from my experiences, other towns (Ny, Chicago) have a more open bar scene, where you can make idle convo with anyone and maybe make a new friend. Not so in Pittsburgh. You get your beer, look down at the bar or up at the TV, grunt to your buddies from time to time and then drink up. And its odd to even make eye contact with the bar tender. Ugh.

Anyway, at NYNY they could care less if I wanted to make out with my girlfriend (i was dating this girl for two years when we used to go there. She had a bunch of gay friends, male and female) It was great. Made me really rethink this town... but i keep hoping things will get better here for everyone. Ah well. Pipedreams?

[vniow]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
Who in "chrisitan america" is supressing you? If Christians were advocating violence and hate toward homosexuals, then I would agree with you.

Well from my experience, everyone I've met (and I do mean everyone) that has shown bigotry and contempt for my sexuality has been...

You guessed it.

Christian.

I know that not all bigots are Christian and not all Christians are bigots but its really hard not to think that when personal experience shows you otherwise...

On the other hand, that dosent mean that Christians in america should just roll over and play dead when some people are trying to cause a social change that many/most christians don't agree with.

Just my thoughts :) So you would deny my right to marriage just because a certain group of the population disagrees with it?

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
<snip>
Just because "all guys do it on a regular basis" dosen't make it right for ME to do.

What happened to your "majority rules" argument? ;)

[vniow]

Originally posted by MorganX
While her experiences with men before me would make any female go lesbian, she has so much muscle and testosterone she would have evenutally become lesbian, IMO, without the negative experiences with men.

Great, any woman that shows a little bit of muscle is going to turn gay now right?http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251202

I'm fem, BTW.

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by MorganX
This argument does not support your position. Whether or not you are straight or day, bigomy is still bigomy, your father is still your father, your sister is still your sister, and your son/daughter is still your son daughter. Society will not accept these scenarios whether or not you are gay, for the same reasons they will not accept them if you are straight.



Umm... But in my scenario, who are you, or anyone else, to say these things are wrong? I still want equal rights, and I should be able to get married to my sister and grandfather.

That society will not accept it is not a valid argument, either. Who cares? Society used to not accept gay people. In some areas of the world it is still socially unacceptable to be gay. Does that make being gay wrong in those parts of the world? Just because society dosen't accept my physical attraction and love for my sister and grandfather dosen't make it wrong.

You see what I am saying here?

I am not trying to make anyone angry, I am just trying to explain my position on the issue. I will stop posting in this thread, because I am afraid that people here already think I am an arrogant, closed-minded jerk. I don't want to further that idea!

Love.

[vniow]

Short somewhat curly hair:
Check.

Closet full of dull looking t-shirts and blue jeans:
Check.

Couple pairs of leather boots just to wear around the house:
Check.

Drives a dirty looking Chevy pickup:
Check.

Gee, I must be gay.

http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251202

[MorganX]

Originally posted by vniow
Great, any woman that shows a little bit of muscle is going to turn gay now right?http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=251202

I'm fem, BTW.

That's not what I said, I said so much muscle and testosterone. Excess testosterone will emascualate males, females, and everything in between.

Women can only maintain excessive muscle if they have high (for emale) levels of testosterone. That's just a biological fact.

Do I think women with excessively high levels of testosterone are predisposed to being attracted to females, yes. Do I think a great many lesbians have larger than normal amounts of testosterone and muscle. Yes. Of course many does not mean all. After all, it's what is going on in the brain that counts.

[Ugg]

Originally posted by Moxiemike

It's amazing how many times, for no apparent reason, my boy Doug and I have been called names. Just because our style is influenced by Europeans. And, i can hear it now in the Pigsburgh accent "Doze europeeeeeans n'nat are awl bisexshules".


But we definitely aren't gay. Maybe we're the college boys fantasies... I dunno.



It is so cool to hear from guys like you who aren't threatened by the fact that someone thinks you are gay. Sorry you got stuck in Pittsburg!

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
What happened to your "majority rules" argument? ;)

I said it would not be right FOR ME. I don't care what the majority does. FOR ME, at this time in my life, it is wrong.

And yes, in a democracy/representative republic, the majority does rule. But I highly doubt they will make a law involving manditory masturbation!:D :D :D

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
I said it would not be right FOR ME. I don't care what the majority does. FOR ME, at this time in my life, it is wrong.


Exactly. So who are you to say what gay people should and should not be able to do?

You've canceled your own argument, from a personal choice standpoint.

[Moxiemike]

Originally posted by Ugg
It is so cool to hear from guys like you who aren't threatened by the fact that someone thinks you are gay. Sorry you got stuck in Pittsburg!

Yea. this place is wearing thin. But its cheap to live here and i'm hoping to save up enough cash to retire to my roots-- southern italy. :D

Hopefully when I'm married to some cute girl and i'm around 35. That's the ambitious plan. :D

But yea. AFAIC, Pittsburgh can think i'm gay, stupid, lame, socialist (they might have something there....) whatev. This city is just helping me pave my way. :D

[Ugg]

Originally posted by Groovsonic

You see what I am saying here?

I am not trying to make anyone angry, I am just trying to explain my position on the issue. I will stop posting in this thread, because I am afraid that people here already think I am an arrogant, closed-minded jerk. I don't want to further that idea!

Love.

I don't think you are a jerk at all. I think you have certain opinions and you are expressing them very well without inciting a flame war, IMO. Discussion is an integral part of any issue and there's nothing worse than preaching to the choir.

But, I don't see what you're trying to get at. You are equating same sex civil unions with a host of other issues and saying that by allowing one, you open up the door to allowing all the others to happen. This is a one issue topic. Same sex unions provide no opportunity for bigamy or incest. Period. It is about 2 people who want to share their lives and have a legally binding contract between themselves.

How would one lead to another?

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Groovsonic

You see what I am saying here?

I am not trying to make anyone angry, I am just trying to explain my position on the issue. I will stop posting in this thread, because I am afraid that people here already think I am an arrogant, closed-minded jerk. I don't want to further that idea!

Love.

I think society says the relationships you were comparing homosexuality to are unacceptable in a civilized society because they tend to produce defective children. In additon, they tend to lead to child abuse.

Homosexuality does not produce children and has no more tendency to lead to child abuse than heterosexuality. I don't believe homosexuality is analagous to the relationships you compared them to.

My question is, why does society have to accept you? Why do you need their acceptance? I don't need anyone accepting my sexual preferences or anything else. What you do is your business? Why must the world watch and approve?

edit: I wouldn't stop posting unless someone expresses a wish for you to do so. If they didn't want to discuss it or be seen discussing it this thread wouldn't exist.

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Exactly. So who are you to say what gay people should and should not be able to do?

You've canceled your own argument, from a personal choice standpoint.
Not exactly, because I am not saying what gay people can and cannot do, I just don't think they should have special rights.

Using your personal choice statement, I assume you are ok with people getting married to their mother?

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by MorganX


My question is, why does society have to accept you? Why do you need their acceptance? I don't need anyone accepting my sexual preferences or anything else. What you do is your business? Why must the world watch and approve?

edit: I wouldn't stop posting unless someone expresses a wish for you to do so. If they didn't want to discuss it or be seen discussing it this thread wouldn't exist.

Ok, I'll keep posting.

Hehe.

You have pretty much made my point. Why do you need society accepting you? Why must the world aprove? Why do you need the government ginivg you a certificate saying you are married?

[MorganX]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
I just don't think they should have special rights.

I would agree with that with one exception, violence based on their sexuality should be considered a hate crime. But that's as far as "I" would take it.

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
Not exactly, because I am not saying what gay people can and cannot do, I just don't think they should have special rights.

Using your personal choice statement, I assume you are ok with people getting married to their mother?

Why should anybody have "special rights"? All men are created equal, so why should any have rights that others do not?

See discussion above regarding incest.

[Moxiemike]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Why should anybody have "special rights"? All men are created equal, so why should any have rights that others do not?

See discussion above regarding incest.

The very intriguing distinction here is that, yes, all men are created equal but are they TREATED equal?

The answer is a big NO

[Groovsonic]

Another hypothetical point:

What makes incest wrong? Becasue there is a slightly higher risk of birth defects? So what? I want to marry my uncle, dangit. Who are you to impose your standards or right and wrong on me? I love him and want to spend the rest of my life with him. Who are you to say its wrong?

/crazy talk

[vniow]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
Not exactly, because I am not saying what gay people can and cannot do, I just don't think they should have special rights.


I don't want special rights, I want the same damn rights that straight people have!!!

I don't want a civil union, I want a ******** marriage, I want to be able to walk down the aisle with the woman I love just like you can walk down the aisle with the woman you love but I can't because we're both women.

That's discrimination and you know it.

[MorganX]

>>Why do you need society accepting you? Why must the world aprove?<<

I have a short answer for that but it's only for family or very close friends of the family :D

Depends on the acceptance. There's no reason homosexuals shouldn't be able to walk downtown window shopping and hold my lovers hand, or kiss them without feeling like a leper.

Originally posted by Groovsonic [/i]
Why do you need the government ginivg you a certificate saying you are married? [/QUOTE]

Because our society has made that the standard for two people in love commiting themselves to each other. The fact that gay marriage may not be legally recognized.... I have no position on that. It shouldn't stop anyone from living and being happy.

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
Ok, I'll keep posting.

Hehe.

You have pretty much made my point. Why do you need society accepting you? Why must the world aprove? Why do you need the government ginivg you a certificate saying you are married?

Tell ya what-- you be in love with a person for 2, 5, 20 years, spend your lives together... then they get in a car accident, and the hospital denies you the right to come into the ICU ward to be with them... say goodbye, as you have no right to decide whether or not to continue life support. Then, you have no right to any of the posessions you owned together that was in their name. All bank accounts and posessions will be withheld from you unless they wrote a very detailed and updated will.

i agree with vniow, i don't want a civil union, or any other foolish thing. I want a marriage, with all rights and responsibilities therein. I call my partner my husband most of the time, which raises eyebrows, but screw it.

and if the law does not accept you, society has an excuse to single you out... legal justification to bigotry.

i'm not going to get in to the religious aspect of this...

pnw

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by MorganX
>>Why do you need society accepting you? Why must the world aprove?<<

Depends on the acceptance. There's no reason homosexuals shouldn't be able to walk downtown window shopping and hold my lovers hand, or kiss them without feeling like a leper.

Originally posted by Groovsonic [/i]
[B]Why do you need the government ginivg you a certificate saying you are married?
Because our society has made that the standard for two people in love commiting themselves to each other. The fact that gay marriage may not be legally recognized.... I have no position on that. It shouldn't stop anyone from living and being happy.

I agree. No one should stop anyone from walking downtown and holding hands and kissing.
Discrimnation is wrong. Volence and hate are bad.
Things are changing. Used to be that people of diffrent races were outcasts if they were together. Now, that is almost a non-issue. I am sure that the same trend toward tolerance does and will continue to extend into gays and lesbians.
As far as marrige goes, even that is changing. People live together all the time. People have children outside of marrige all the time.
But, I tell you what. People concerned about this issue should work the political channels and change things. If history is any indication, a very vocal minority usually gets their way. If gay people won the right to get married, it wouldn't change my view on things, and I really wouldn't still think they were married, but legally they would be, so....

[MorganX]

>>I agree. No one should stop anyone from walking downtown and holding hands and kissing.<<

Now that we can agree on the equal right to do that, I personally do not think excessive displays of public affection are appropriate. Straight or gay. Handholding, and light kissing at best.

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by vniow
I don't want special rights, I want the same damn rights that straight people have!!!

I don't want a civil union, I want a ******** marriage, I want to be able to walk down the aisle with the woman I love just like you can walk down the aisle with the woman you love but I can't because we're both women.

That's discrimination and you know it.

No one is stopping you from having a wedding ceremony. Have 10 for all I care. Enjoy it.

Why do you want to be married is my question? I understand the legal stuff, but what about a civil union would not work for that?

Heck. I don't care. Get married. I just don't believe its a real marrige (but I don't suspect you care what I think!). I will make the same suggestion I made before. Get politically active and try to change things. Or move to vermont. Or do whatever. Be happy.:D :D :D

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by MorganX
>>I agree. No one should stop anyone from walking downtown and holding hands and kissing.<<

Now that we can agree on the equal right to do that, I personally do not think excessive displays of public affection are appropriate. Straight or gay. Handholding, and light kissing at best.

Hehe. Yah, I don't want ANYONE getting jiggy on a park bench...Unless they are really hot! :D

[vniow]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
Why do you want to be married is my question? I understand the legal stuff, but what about a civil union would not work for that?



Its a spiritual issue for me, marriage (for me at least) is one part spiritual, one part emotional and one part love, a civil union has all but the first and in my mind, I wouldn't feel as complete with my partner if all we could get is a civil union.

[Ugg]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
No one is stopping you from having a wedding ceremony. Have 10 for all I care. Enjoy it.

Why do you want to be married is my question? I understand the legal stuff, but what about a civil union would not work for that?

Heck. I don't care. Get married. I just don't believe its a real marrige (but I don't suspect you care what I think!). I will make the same suggestion I made before. Get politically active and try to change things. Or move to vermont. Or do whatever. Be happy.:D :D :D

Some people believe that religion should play a part in their union. Some people don't. It seems that in Europe where in many countries civil unions are legal, many same sex couples tie the knot in a church. But many don't. Of these though a significant number don tradtional wedding clothes. Some unions are private with family and friends. Marriage in all its forms is a very multi-faceted event.

I agree with you that it is a matter of getting politically involved. Too many people rant and rave about how they are not allowed this or that but then don't take the necessary steps to achieve what they want. The political process, as messy and horrible as it is, is what we have.

Once again, you can call it whatever you want, but the term marriage turns a lot of straight people off. Civil unions all the way, baby!

Marriage as an institution has undergone a lot of changes over the centuries. It wasn't that long ago that women were unable to own property in their own name. Like every other social institution, marriage is not static. It evolves.

[mactastic]

Originally posted by vniow
the same damn rights that straight people have!!!


Amen to that. This is the crux of the problem. Even the term "gay marriage" is predjudicial. LGBT's just want to live their lives like the rest of us do. It takes such incredible bravery for a g/l couple to walk down the street holding hands. Or to kiss each other in public. You risk insults at best by doing so. This is quite simply shameful, but unfortunately goes on all the time.
The diference I see between the issue of gay marriage and incest/polygamy arguement is that most incest or polygamy is committed on children, or someone who is powerless in the relationship. What happens between 2 consenting adults is a different matter. Polygamy is illegal because the largest practitioners of it in this country (mormons) tended to be marrying old men to young girls (like 13 and 14). Personally I wouldn't be offended too much if a person was able to find and convince 2 other people to marry them as long as there is no coersion involved and they are both adults. I think there are people and situations where multiple partners may be a legitimate relationship. Unfortunately the history of polygamy is one of subjugation of women. Women wern't given a choice in the matter, the husband would often simply bring home a new young wife when he tired of the older one.
And now, incest. Another member of your family has a certain connection to you that has the potential for abuse, for the same reason companies (and the military too) prohibit dating between those who may have power over another individual. Even if you "love" your mom, or dad, or any other adult member of your family, they should be the adults and put their foot down whatever their "feelings" were. (Makes me shiver just typing that.)
Funny how this tread turned from a "who's gay?" to a debate on gay marriage. I sure do love these forums, they have a life of their own!

[Zaid]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
You make some great points.

{hypothetical} ... {/hypothetical}

I agree that this is sometimes a grey area with regards to exactly where you draw the line. Obviusly with regard to children, you don not have consenting adults. Also it can be argued that incest is an abuse of the parental position and it would be in societies best interests not to allow it. The arguments around bigamy are much weaker, i can't reasonably come up with a good reason why bigamy should not be allowed, even though i myself don't find the idea attractive.


Marrige is a union between a man and a woman.
Why? (Besides the fact that it is the law of the land) In the Netherlands for instance, it isn't. Marriage is a union between two people.

What you believe marrriage should be is, quite frankly, irrellavent to my argument. I argued that limiting marriage in this way robs gay people of their rights (equality before the law). As such it should not be allowed. For instance : John believes that he has the right to own members of ethnic group X. So do a large proportion of the population. So is it OK for them to do so, Of course not as this violates X's right to freedom of person.


I know this is an unpopular and un pc thing to say, but I have said it.

PC or not, at least you've said what you feel. So everyone knows where they stand.


By the way, this country is based on the majority imposing their will on the minority. What do you think voting is?

Actually, No your country is not based on the majority imposing their will on the minority. It is based on the will of the majority while protecting the inalienable rights of all as defined in your constitution.

The political philosophy upon which your constitution is based basically says that iberty consists in the freedom to do anything that does not impinge upon the liberty of others; hence the exercise one's liberty has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law. The law may only prohibit such actions as are harmful to society, or which if performed, would deprive other members of society of their natural rights.

Furthermore, the seperation of church and state was to ensure that that the beliefs of the majority (or most influential group etc) are not forced upon the rest of the population and they are free to do as their conscience dictates, provided that these actions are not prohibited in law (See above)

Democracy after all is not merely implementing the will of the majority. It is doing so while protecting the rights of the minority. Otherwise all you have is a dictatorship of the majority.

For instance, if the majority of the population for whatever reason felt that it was acceptable to enslave certain portions of the population, it would be fine under your system of majority rule. Also what if the majority of the population was atheist, under your system its fine for them to ban worship of God.

Protection of rights is as important as the will of the majority, if not more so.

Edit: Appologies for the length, i didn't realise till after i'd posted.

[voicegy]

Originally posted by Zaid
Edit: Appologies for the length, i didn't realise till after i'd posted.

Actually, it wasn't long enough. Comparitively speaking, it was one of the better ones in this thread.

How embarrassed I am, and how proud I feel, that an Englishman understands certain basic tenents of our Constitution and spelled them out so well in regards to this post better than I, an American, could.:)

This post has tetter-tottered slightly towards possible flame-out at times, but happily I see it always regains its balance. Most facinating, and refreshing. I tip my hat to those heterosexual brothers out there who support and at least attempt to understand various homosexual issues and concerns.

[Zaid]

Originally posted by voicegy
Actually, it wasn't long enough. Comparitively speaking, it was one of the better ones in this thread.

Cheers


I tip my hat to those heterosexual brothers out there who support and at least attempt to understand various homosexual issues and concerns.
So do I, tho i'm not one of them :)

[Groovsonic]

Originally posted by Zaid
Actually, No your country is not based on the majority imposing their will on the minority. It is based on the will of the majority while protecting the inalienable rights of all as defined in your constitution.

The political philosophy upon which your constitution is based basically says that iberty consists in the freedom to do anything that does not impinge upon the liberty of others; hence the exercise one's liberty has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law. The law may only prohibit such actions as are harmful to society, or which if performed, would deprive other members of society of their natural rights.
Protection of rights is as important as the will of the majority, if not more so.

Edit: Appologies for the length, i didn't realise till after i'd posted.

I think you are somwhat incorrect. I know this is completely off topic, but mabye thats what the framers of our constitution had in mind, but it certianly doesn't play out that way anymore. Otherwise, the graduated tax system under which we live would not exist. By taxing people that make more money a higher percentage than those who make less, you are treating people differently. You could say that taking more of my money than someone elses impinges on my right to keep and spend my money.
Also, the tax system which benefits marrieds more than singles, or parents more than people with no children would then also be in violation of those principles.
Also, in the USA, the people are the government. If enough people want something to happen or not happen, it will or wont. We can modify our constitutuion, elect favorable officials, protest and lobby. That, indirectly or directly, is majority rule. If enough people want gay marrige leagalized, it will happen.

By the way, the longer the post, the better, IMO!!!

[Ugg]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
I think you are somwhat incorrect. I know this is completely off topic, but mabye thats what the framers of our constitution had in mind, but it certianly doesn't play out that way anymore. Otherwise, the graduated tax system under which we live would not exist. By taxing people that make more money a higher percentage than those who make less, you are treating people differently. You could say that taking more of my money than someone elses impinges on my right to keep and spend my money.
Also, the tax system which benefits marrieds more than singles, or parents more than people with no children would then also be in violation of those principles.



That is very untrue. One of the main tenets of early American government was the inheritance tax. It was instituted so that a moneyed class would not be created. They greatly feared a system like England's where the wealthy, no mattter their ability, were the rulers.

Remember, we don't live in a democracy, we live in a mostly democratic republic.

Why is it that everyone so easily forgets that along with rights come responsibilities.

[Zaid]

Lowering the tone of conversation considerably here:

Just noticed the babelicious wallpaper thread, and thought maybe we should post hunkalicious wallpapers :) or any gay themed wallpapers. :)

Cant post any yet, coz, i'm still at work. :(

but post away guys and gals :)

[celaurie]

Originally posted by Zaid
Lowering the tone of conversation considerably here:

Just noticed the babelicious wallpaper thread, and thought maybe we should post hunkalicious wallpapers :) or any gay themed wallpapers. :)

Cant post any yet, coz, i'm still at work. :(

but post away guys and gals :)

I suggested this a while ago, but never quite got around to it... Let me see.

[celaurie]

Announcing: Stud-licoius Wallpaper (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=349954)! :D

[Zaid]

Originally posted by celaurie
Announcing: Stud-licoius Wallpaper (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=349954)! :D

Yay !! i'll be posting a few when i get home :)


On another note adding some humour to the marriage debate


Gay people should be allowed to get married. Just because somebody's gay doesn't mean he shouldn't suffer like the rest of us.
-- Jeff Shaw

[celaurie]

Well, the first pic I posted in thread was pulled... take what you will from that.

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by celaurie
Well, the first pic I posted in thread was pulled... take what you will from that.

Removal of the pic was not an attempt to prevent pics from posting. The pic you chose showed too much, period. A little editing and it would have made the image acceptable.

D

[jelloshotsrule]

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
Removal of the pic was not an attempt to prevent pics from posting. The pic you chose showed too much, period. A little editing and it would have made the image acceptable.


again, while i agree the pic needed to be pulled/edited... i have to say the same about many of the ones in other threads, of women. and that's where i see the problem. "too much" is subjective, and it seems like with all the straight guys, showing what might actually be "too much" to many, is fine and dandy, so long as it's something they want to see (ie, girls)

[Zaid]

Uh... what happended to the thread? :confused:

Got home wanted to post a few pics and its gone.

I'm gonna start a new one if thats ok with all ye mods

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by Zaid
Uh... what happended to the thread? :confused:

Got home wanted to post a few pics and its gone.

I'm gonna start a new one if thats ok with all ye mods

We've had to close down a couple of threads now, due to questionable content. At this point it's safer not to images post directly, so if you really want to you can post links.

There will probably be a new policy soon regarding images in the Forums.

[Zaid]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
We've had to close down a couple of threads now, due to questionable content. At this point it's safer not to images post directly, so if you really want to you can post links.

There will probably be a new policy soon regarding images in the Forums.

Well i hope u ous sort this one out soon coz i had a few pg rated pics that i wanted to post

[vniow]

Wha?

There was a thread with a bunch of hot guys in it and I missed all the fun?http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=252654

[Zaid]

Originally posted by vniow
Wha?

There was a thread with a bunch of hot guys in it and I missed all the fun?http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=252654

Seems like we all did :(

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by Zaid
Seems like we all did :(

no, not really - it was just one image and that was enough to send everything south...

D

[celaurie]

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
no, not really - it was just one image and that was enough to send everything south...

D

Jeez... For what it's worth I didn't mean to start a war... Seems the mods are having a flame now.

I'm off to work, maybe when I come home in 12 hours I'll be banned and we can all live happily ever after...

[Zaid]

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
no, not really - it was just one image and that was enough to send everything south...

D

Didnt realise that was the only pic, the thread couldnt have been around for very long then

i saw it b4 the thread was pulled.

Should it have been removed, maybe.
It may have benefited from like a 2mm crop at the bottom. Though I thought there was nothing wrong with it.

Should the whole thread have been pulled because of it, i certainly dont think so; but thats my opinion.

Guess we'll all miss out on what the thread could have been.


Edit : Grammar

[eyelikeart]

Originally posted by celaurie
I'm off to work, maybe when I come home in 12 hours I'll be banned and we can all live happily ever after...

hey...no one was blaming u for anything...

relax and quit trying to bring attention to yourself... :rolleyes:

[celaurie]

Originally posted by eyelikeart
hey...no one was blaming u for anything...

relax and quit trying to bring attention to yourself... :rolleyes:

No attention needed. Not when you look as good as I do. Heh, maybe we need a member pics forum...

[Zaid]

Originally posted by celaurie
No attentione needed. Not when you look as good as I do.

Hmmmmm me thinks proof is required :p

Put yourself up on amihotornot.com and let the voting public decide! :)

[jelloshotsrule]

Originally posted by eyelikeart
hey...no one was blaming u for anything...

relax and quit trying to bring attention to yourself... :rolleyes:

the post about "that was enough to send everything south" seems to point the attention clearly on the one pic, and therefore on the poster of said pic...

[maxvamp]

I know in the GLBT community in and around Denver, this is a huge issue.
I feel that I would be doing this community a dis-service if I neglected to mention that there is a weekly community news program ( the longest running in the US ) that is all about the GLBT community. If anyone is in or from the Denver area, you may remember it as the Lambda report, but for the last several years, it has been known as ColoradoOUTspoken. If you want to keep up on what laws are changing to make marriage, and other civil liberties, possible, or, you want to see what is going on in the Denver community, check it out Sunday nights on channel 12 around 10:30 ( I think the time is right ).

Max.

P.S. sorry of this seemed like a cheap plug, but I was the original WebMaster of their current site ( http://www.coloradooutspoken.org ), and still have a strong attachment to this program. People are forgetting how wrong Amendment 2 was, or that it even existed, and I feel that without a good GLBT news source of such events, this could happen again.

Max.

[deryk]

Okay, so I'm a few months off--I'm gay. :eek:

[vniow]

Originally posted by maxvamp


Wow, thanx for the info Max, is this just a Colorado thing or is it all across country?

[Mr. Anderson]

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
the post about "that was enough to send everything south" seems to point the attention clearly on the one pic, and therefore on the poster of said pic...

You know, this type of snip isn't very productive - the issue has been resolved yet you just had to get one more in...you're making assumptions and this just further causes problems.

Until this all got out of hand, there was nothing wrong with posting pics in general. The one in question was way too racy, that's it. People took exception to the editing, thinking it was done for the wrong reasons - so it escalated to the point where both -licious threads got closed. There were no personal attacks and no one was singled out. I could have cared less who posted the image.

Lets just drop this and move on.

D

[Zaid]

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson


Until this all got out of hand, there was nothing wrong with posting pics in general. The one in question was way too racy, that's it. People took exception to the editing, thinking it was done for the wrong reasons - so it escalated to the point where both -licious threads got closed. There were no personal attacks and no one was singled out. I could have cared less who posted the image.

Lets just drop this and move on.

D

As one of the few people who seems to have seen the pic, i have to say that it wasn't way too racy. Assuming that the same std of raciness was being applied to both threads.

What i think people took exception to was the perceived double std. I'm not saying that there was a conscious double std, it just felt that way.

[maxvamp]

Wow, thanx for the info Max, is this just a Colorado thing or is it all across country?

This show is by a non-profit organization in and for Denver. I know that other communities have tried to run such a show, and you may find one in your area.

All I can say, if you do, is make sure that you support them financially and volunteer your time. These shows usually are in desparate need of both resources. I know the Colorado show is always looking for volunteers to make the show happen. You will often find them on a PBS, or community access channel, but they, most often, recieve no support from these venues.

Perhaps one day, if the government goes ultra conservative, more of these shows will pop up, and we can band together into a nation ( world?) wide GLBT network.. A video version of GNN ?

Thanks for your interest...

Max.

[Zaid]

Question to all you guys and gals still in Uni:

I got an email from the gblt society that i was on the comitee of while at uni, saying that they had put some posters i had done on their website

If any of you are involved in gblt groups or societies, you may want to have a look at these posters.

Link (http://uk.geocities.com/rainbowuct2001/posters.htm)

I made them as part of an awareness campaign to raise the profile of the society and to create awareness on campus. And it worked. (even got in the uni newspaper :) )

If anyone is interested i should have the cdr (corel draw) files lying around somewhere if you want to use them.

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by Zaid
Question to all you guys and gals still in Uni:

I got an email from the gblt society that i was on the comitee of while at uni, saying that they had put some posters i had done on their website

If any of you are involved in gblt groups or societies, you may want to have a look at these posters.

Link (http://uk.geocities.com/rainbowuct2001/posters.htm)

I made them as part of an awareness campaign to raise the profile of the society and to create awareness on campus. And it worked. (even got in the uni newspaper :) )

If anyone is interested i should have the cdr (corel draw) files lying around somewhere if you want to use them.

i love those :) i used to do a great deal of volunteer work with/as a group that doesn't exist anymore, so I definitely know how *not* to run a group--

i love that you guys can get away with this in London. Over here, if you put those things up, they'd all get ripped down, and someone would track you down and beat the **** out of you.

:)

aren't we wonderful, benevolent people? :rolleyes:

BTW love the dennis rodman quote-- might put that up at work...

pnw

[D*I*S_Frontman]

This whole thread has been an interesting read, and has not become the all-out flame war it could have become. So I'll add some comments and see how they are received.

I am a heterosexual male evangelical Christian and some of these issues disturb me greatly, although perhaps not in the way you might expect.

It is my firm belief that the Bible unequivically condemns the practice of homosexuality in both the Torah and the New Covenant. I have no idea why Jehovah was so adamant about this particular practice, but the severity of the language is undeniable.

The question really is this: what does this have to do with the way our State and federal governments treat homosexuals? This is what I struggle with, because it is the unobtrusiveness of government upon the liberty of the governed that makes the US what it is.

Last time I checked, gays and lesbians pay taxes. In fact, the demographics are skewed a bit, being that most unions involve working partners with no children, which means they make a good living without having to spend it on kids and without getting the sweet tax breaks that come from child credits. Thus a gay couple probably ends up paying slightly MORE per capita than a heterosexual couple. Doesn't this make sodomy laws and laws against gay marriages smell a bit like taxation with poor representation?

The argument that granting gay couples married status for insurance or other legal purposes will harm heterosexual couples is interesting, but not particularly compelling--the healthcare system in this nation is so slanted against the consumer (or, in my case, the "non-group" entrepeneur) that the "harm" that could come from allowing gay couples in is incredibly small. The idea that a gay man might die alone because his companion won't be allowed admittance into an emergency ward is a heart-wrenching anecdote.

As far as Christianity is concerned, you can be assured that Jesus would be visiting gay bars if he were bodily here today. He visited social outsiders and those people who lived in absolute defienace to the Law of Moses. He loved them. He considered them friends. But he never condoned adultery, prostitution, tax collection graft, or any of the other offenses they were guilty of. His goal was to see lives changed through repentance. I don't recall ANY account in the New Testament of early Christians trying to change Roman law to make their worldview the "law of the land."

Our country, however, has often strayed down the path of legislating Christian doctrine and thereby limiting liberty for those who do not believe. That scares me a bit, because if the "tolerance" PC crowd ever fully gets the reins of government, then I know MY rights are next on the chopping block.

In religious matters, the curent practice we have that Christian nonprofit organizations are permitted to prohibit practicing homosexuals from employment is acceptable, because the prohibition of homosexual behavior is a sincerely-held religious conviction. The same would be true of a new lesbian-only cult if you like. Or even a racist religious group. There is a built-in check and balance on this--nonprofits die if contributions die.

But aside from religious nonprofits, sexual orientation should not ever be considered by an employer for any reason--hiring, promotion, termination, anything. Don't ask, don't tell. None of your business. Period. I would hire a gay employee who was dedicated, talented, and hard-working--I'd be an idiot not to. But I don't want to be told that I am "homophobic" because I am not "accepting." I don't have to accept anything. The PC police can stay out of my head. I may hold whatever personal view I wish.

To address the orientation issue, I would contend that most homosexuals cite an attraction to the same sex that predates any supposed "tragic incident" from their childhood that "triggered" the response. I have no argument with that. I am a boyish-faced, high tenored, sensitive man who some might mistake for "gay," and there were certainly enough exposure to pornography and other such typical sources of blame which could have "changed" me. But I know that when a gorgeous woman with the exact geometry my brain was wired for comes along, my respiration locks up. That type of reaction, whether hetero or homo, is hard-wired. That being said, it does not follow that this in and of itself justifies the practice, at least from a Judeo-Christian perspective. There are a number of "sinful" impulses I have to battle on a day-to-day basis to keep my faith as I should. To claim that one is a slave to one's carnal appetitites is to reduce a person to a mere animal incapable of free will.

My answer is that I would rather convince you of the love and transformational power of God in Christ Jesus and see your life changed from within than allow something as unsavory as human government coerce Christian-like behavior from you. You can tell me to get bent if you like. I my tell you the same when you try to win lifestyle "acceptance" from me. But in any case you should be absolutely free to pursue your life as you see fit, without undue interference from the government, and those rights should be protected. After all, protecting you protects me in the long run...

[jelloshotsrule]

very interesting thoughts. thanks for the post DIS.

[rainman::|:|]

Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman
The question really is this: what does this have to do with the way our State and federal governments treat homosexuals? This is what I struggle with, because it is the unobtrusiveness of government upon the liberty of the governed that makes the US what it is.

Last time I checked, gays and lesbians pay taxes. In fact, the demographics are skewed a bit, being that most unions involve working partners with no children, which means they make a good living without having to spend it on kids and without getting the sweet tax breaks that come from child credits. Thus a gay couple probably ends up paying slightly MORE per capita than a heterosexual couple. Doesn't this make sodomy laws and laws against gay marriages smell a bit like taxation with poor representation?


thank you! you hit it exactly. there's no reason for a moral majority to interfere with another group of people in the USA-- that's the whole *point* of the USA. America is our government and country too, and it doesn't just serve those of us who are heterosexual.

I find your religious beliefs very interesting-- and i was prepared to stay completely out of that area... but... it's wonderful to see someone that understands some perspective here.

Of interest and note, a man much smarter than I in this, a baptist minister i know. He's spent decades researching the bible in this area, and has some interesting points--

His site:
www.truluck.com

Points:
http://www.truluck.com/html/the_bible_and_homosexuality.html

:)
pnw

[Ugg]

Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman

In religious matters, the curent practice we have that Christian nonprofit organizations are permitted to prohibit practicing homosexuals from employment is acceptable, because the prohibition of homosexual behavior is a sincerely-held religious conviction. The same would be true of a new lesbian-only cult if you like. Or even a racist religious group. There is a built-in check and balance on this--nonprofits die if contributions die.



Bravo, it is great to hear from someone of religious faith who can approach this issue rationally.

I greatly disagree with you though on the above. There are a great many religions in this country and they vary greatly as to what is acceptable. The possiblitity exists for any religion to receive federal funds and discriminate legally based on those beliefs. Once again we enter into the realm of, at first they... then they... until they .... to me.

The current system works fine. If you receive federal dollars then you have to abide by the rules. If you don't want to receive the money. Great, nobody is forcing you to take it.

The current policy of many homeless shelters of forcing their clients to listen to religious messages regardless of their faith smacks of the utmost in religious intolerance. Our forefathers believed firmly in the separation of church and state for good reason.

It is said that without religious groups providing assistance, many would go without. I agree, however, assistance to the poor should be without strings.

Either that or everytime a tax cut is given to anyone making over 1,000,000 per year they should be force to sit and listen to a sermon on charity and that Bush's plan for destroying the welfare state depends upon their generosity. :)

[tazo]

Originally posted by Ugg


The current policy of many homeless shelters of forcing their clients to listen to religious messages regardless of their faith smacks of the utmost in religious intolerance. Our forefathers believed firmly in the separation of church and state for good reason.


umm, dont homeless shelters rely solely on private donation for that very reason??

[D*I*S_Frontman]

For the record, I am VERY suspicious of federal tax dollars going to religious non-profits. Heck, even Pat Robertson of the 700 Club doesn't agree with the practice. Dumb idea. I don't think those overtaxed gays I mentioned in my first post want their tax receipts to fund a conservative evangelical Christian organization any more than I want mine to fund a Nation of Islam soup kitchen, Church of Satan crisis pregnancy center, or Aryan Race homeless shelter.

Part of the deal, to be fair, is that those nonprofits who take the money must agree to a very stringent set of limitations on their prostelyzation (sp?) practices, and adherance to a doctrine cannot be a requirement for aid. The temptation is very appealing because these religious nonprofits can provide much more aid per dollar than a government bureaucacy can, especially since they usually have armies of volunteers to help keep costs down. More hungry people fed per dollar of tax revenue vs. public funding of religion. Tough argument either way. Pragmatism vs. principle.

[voicegy]

Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman
[...] My answer is that I would rather convince you of the love and transformational power of God in Christ Jesus and see your life changed from within than allow something as unsavory as human government coerce Christian-like behavior from you. You can tell me to get bent if you like.

Amen, bro!:)

I would most certainly NOT tell the author of such an eloquent post to get bent. Rational Christians do exist (I consider myself one) but I'm also homosexual. Nice breath of fresh air from a heterosexual brother...thanks, D*I*S

[Tequila Grandma]

Wowza, that was 9 pages worth of all sorts of interesting stuff. Time to resurrect this thread!

I enjoy kissing boys quite a bit, but haven't done so for 10 months since all the gay guys I know around my age are fat and/or ugly, in additon to being half-witted.

Honestly, I'm not really too into all the activism. I think many years ago, it had a very important purpose, but now it seems quite pointless to me. I feel that in most places homosexuality is pretty openly accepted. I feel perfectly "safe" or whatever just about anywhere I go. Beyond that, any activism is just plain silly. I've always thought that many activists, not just homosexual activists, but activists for anything, will try and find the smallest most insignificant things to complain about when there's nothing truly important to do, simply because their lives have been based around activism.

The concept of homosexual marriage is ridiculous because marriage is based around having children. Marriage between a man and a woman who don't plan on having children is equally ridiculous. I can be in complete love with a guy, live with him, do everything a married couple would do (Although to be honest I don't think I'll ever want to), and even have a ceremony -- that's married enough for me.

The kind of gay activism I support is activism to find me a smart, incredibly cute guy with a twisted sense of humor and good taste in music
:D

Arigato,
Brook

[Ugg]

TG, I don't intend to insult you because of your age, but at 19 you're a little bit on the naive side ;)

Those stupid, silly ole drag queens who started the Stonewall riots are part of the reason you have the rights, as a gay person, that you do today. Those activists of the early 80s like Act up, Queer Nation, etc are responsible for a hell of a lot of them too.

I'm sure that a lot of activists do live an "activist" lifestyle but please remember that activists aren't just a bunch of disgruntled lefties. The the christian right and rush limbaugh are activists. If you don't know what they stand for I suggest that you find out because they would like to see you and me dead.


Your beliefs are exactly that, but by reading the thread you can surely tell that many people don't feel the same way that you do.

Denver is known for its liberalness but there are many areas of this country where being gay is the kiss of death. Surely you aren't too young not to remember what happened to Matt up in Wyoming?!?!?

Such blatant intolerance of gay activists is unbelievable in this day and age.

[uhlawboi80]

many years ago?? hardly. If i recall my constitutional law (and i DO) it took the supreme court in 1996 to stop the a$$ho!es in your very own state from passing a state constitutional amendment that PREVENTED cities and towns from passing any kind of legislation that prevented homosexuals from being discriminated against.

yes thats right, your state wanted to actively make it illegal to protect gays from discrimination.

thank god we dont need activists and discrimination is dead :rolleyes:

( Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620.)

[tazo]

Originally posted by Ugg
Surely you aren't too young not to remember what happened to Matt up in Wyoming?!?!?


I got banned from a teen-only website for my opinion on that.
Without making the thread off topic, PM if you wanna know what I thought about it, not anti-gay, but a real world perspective on the situation (and trust me I do not support what was done to him)....

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by tazo
I got banned from a teen-only website for my opinion on that.
Without making the thread off topic, PM if you wanna know what I thought about it, not anti-gay, but a real world perspective on the situation (and trust me I do not support what was done to him)....

This thread has one of the broadest ranging topics of all of them.

Everyone has a perspective.

[tazo]

I really don't want to offend anyone, as my comment was construed by a gay member on that website as extremely homophobic .

[celaurie]

Originally posted by Zaid
Hmmmmm me thinks proof is required :p

Put yourself up on amihotornot.com and let the voting public decide! :)

I would hate to make you bathe in my magnificence! ;)

[celaurie]

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
the post about "that was enough to send everything south" seems to point the attention clearly on the one pic, and therefore on the poster of said pic...

What he said!

[Zaid]

Originally posted by celaurie
I would hate to make you bathe in my magnificence! ;)

Bathe on brother, Bathe on :p

[Zeke]

I'm not gay but I remember this from a psychology class that I took. Whenever someone homophobic is being obnoxious just refer them to one of these studies. Here is an example I found in 1 try on google.

http://www.apa.org/releases/homophob.html

I always found this to be fun to tell homophobic people.

[tazo]

Originally posted by Zeke
I'm not gay but I remember this from a psychology class that I took. Whenever someone homophobic is being obnoxious just refer them to one of these studies. Here is an example I found in 1 try on google.

http://www.apa.org/releases/homophob.html

I always found this to be fun to tell homophobic people.

Zeke, define homophobia. Don't give me the dictionary definition, give me what you think it is.

Because apparently the majority of people think homophobia occurs when someone, not gay, does not say that he is perfectly ok with the gay lifestyle, or with gay people in and of themselves. Any sort of comment in which gay people should not be given awards for being gay are called homophobes. If you cannot see where I am going with this I have been accused of being a homophobe recently, I said "thats gay", in response to a teacher's request for me to move to a different part of the class. The teacher replied, "no thats homophobic". I said that I was not afraid of gays, and that 'gay' is a synonym for stupid in our society in this day and age, and that if he were to walk into the library he would hear it being said over and over again. I was called a homophobe, for society's indifference. What has occurred is a travesty Zeke, the majority can no longer live without becoming subject to the influence of the minority; as Michael Savage once said, "..everyone now has to watch out for the thought police...", in which he refers to how people have to be overtly politically correct, because anyone can become offended over anything.

I am offended by this and you should be too if you do not look forward to a day when you must judge the consequences of wearing a 'black' shirt, or don't want to drive over a 'personhole cover' in the street, or watch david letterperson on late night. Its rediculous and its an outrage. And I am tired of it.

-tazo

[Zeke]

Originally posted by tazo
Zeke, define homophobia. Don't give me the dictionary definition, give me what you think it is.

Because apparently the majority of people think homophobia occurs when someone, not gay, does not say that he is perfectly ok with the gay lifestyle, or with gay people in and of themselves. Any sort of comment in which gay people should not be given awards for being gay are called homophobes. If you cannot see where I am going with this I have been accused of being a homophobe recently, I said "thats gay", in response to a teacher's request for me to move to a different part of the class. The teacher replied, "no thats homophobic". I said that I was not afraid of gays, and that 'gay' is a synonym for stupid in our society in this day and age, and that if he were to walk into the library he would hear it being said over and over again. I was called a homophobe, for society's indifference.

I personally think saying something is gay has nothing to do with being homophobic. It is generally regarded as being uncomfortable with homosexuals and judges them for their sexual lifestyle. I can understand why gay people could be offended by something derogatorily (is this a word) called gay but it is a figure of speech. It's similar to sayings like "This sucks." where I think we all agree oral sex is good, or "This bites." Eating is good I think. So I agree that this crap with political correctness is a bunch of crap that needs to just die a painful death. I think it's good to a point as some people can be offensive in things they say without knowing it but getting offended over something trivial is out of hand. So, by your comments I would say I don't think you're homophobic because if you were then everyone who says "This is gay" would be (including some of the gay people who said they say that as well).

[Zaid]

Originally posted by tazo


Because apparently the majority of people think homophobia occurs when someone, not gay, does not say that he is perfectly ok with the gay lifestyle, or with gay people in and of themselves. Any sort of comment in which gay people should not be given awards for being gay are called homophobes.

Ok, lets clear up what you mean by the gay lifestyle. Just as there is no such thing as a straight lifestyle, there is no such thing as a gay lifestyle. It's one of those phrases, just like the 'gay agenda' that just get branded about.

Homophobia is, IMHO at its simplest level, having a problem with someone for no other reason than that they are gay. In the same way that racism is taking issue with someone for no other reason than that they do not have the same skin colour as you. It is in effect just another prejudice.

Making remarks that demean gay people for being gay, violence towards gay people for being gay, discrimination against gay people for being gay are the manifestations of that homophobia. In the same way as racial slurs, racial discrimination and racial violence are manifestations of racism.

Now personally if someone has a problem with me being gay, as long as they don't discriminate against me in any way, verbally abuse me, kick the **** out of me or try to 'cure'me and force his/her morals down my throught, then i really don't care what they think.

I said "thats gay", in response to a teacher's request for me to move to a different part of the class. The teacher replied, "no thats homophobic". I said that I was not afraid of gays, and that 'gay' is a synonym for stupid in our society in this day and age,
So your comment implicitly equates being gay with stupidity. I'm sorry mate but i find that offensive. Whether or not you meant it as such (or even gave thought to the statements implications), saying something is gay to mean that it is sad, or uncool, or stupid perpetuates the homophobic sterotype that gay people are social miscreants and deviants, are sad, stupid and worthless. And its one very short step from that to lets get rid of those fags, or lets kick the **** out of them.

Now i'm not calling you a homophobe tazo, all i'm saying is that unitentionally or otherwise your statement could easily be interpreted as being homophobic. And it does foster a negative and hateful environment for gay students in your class. Would you have been supprised if people took exception to saying, "oh thats so black", or "oh thats so female". Same thing.

Zeke, saying something is gay is not equivalent to saying it sucks or it bites. I too agree that Political correctness is often taken to a ridiculous extreme, however i don't believe that being against saying 'thats so gay' is one of those cases.

Here's the reason why i feel that saying 'thats gay' is different and not acceptable. Consider, that there may very well be a closeted (or openly) gay kid in tazo's class. 'figures of speach' like that only serve to create and reinforce a negative hateful environment. I'm sure you're aware of the damage that constant exposure to such an environment can have. It can quite easily create and reinforce a powerful negative self image with all its attendent problems. I've been out for a while now and yet i stll cringe when i hear comments like this.

Ultimately, however, any adult has the right to say what they want, including saying that they are against homosexuality, saying ****** or fag etc, as long as they dont insite violence, they have protected free speech. However people tend to react better towards you and listen to what you have to say more readily when you don't offend them. Its an implicit social contract as to what constitutes reasonable behaviour.



and that if he were to walk into the library he would hear it being said over and over again.


That doesnt make it acceptable.


I was called a homophobe, for society's indifference.

No you were called a homophobe because you made a homophobic comment.


What has occurred is a travesty Zeke, the majority can no longer live without becoming subject to the influence of the minority;
If by influence you mean forcing the majority to respect the inalienable rights of that minority and treating them as equals, then yes this is true, and a good thing.


define homophobia. Don't give me the dictionary definition, give me what you think it is.

Why dont you give us your definition of homophobia tazo. I'd be quite interested in hearing what you consider to be homophobia.

[deryk]

Thank you Zaid. I think you've stated the points I was dwelling on well and eloquently.

I'm interested to see the response to your posting.

Deryk

[Zeke]

I also think what you said was very eloquent and while I had not really thought that calling something gay could really be taken offensively I've never been in the position to be offended by it. Equating it to "That's so black" was a very good point though. I also agree that it is the responsibility of the public, or government to protect the rights of the minorities. I don't think that this can sink to enforcing political correctness though since freedom of speech is very important. In school, however, your freedom of speech (at least in this form) is obviously squelched if it is seen as offensive by others. Technically this is true in any situation since there are laws against profanity, enforcing this however seems like it may get increasingly difficult with the political correctness tide as people will get increasingly offended by previously inoffensive remarks.

Maybe Mac users can qualify as a minority so PC users can't persecute us.

[tazo]

Originally posted by Zaid


Why dont you give us your definition of homophobia tazo. I'd be quite interested in hearing what you consider to be homophobia.

My definition of homophobia, after real world experience and the alike:

Not agreeing with everything that homosexuals engage in.

[uhlawboi80]

sorry for the brief post, but i have dinner plans:

tazo, your "definition" of homophobia reflects your inherent bigotedeness towards gays. i dont think most people, and certainly not most homosexuals, would agree that your "definition" of homophobia is accurate or held by the majority.

[tazo]

One, the word is bigotry, what ironicism,

two:
I am not afraid of gay people, nor do I intentionally harass people simply for being gay, a keep requirement of homophobia. So if a dictionary says I am not a homophobe, who is saying so? :o

[Ugg]

Ok, tazo, your two line responses have failed to declare why you are considered a bigot by others and why you think that "that's so gay" is perfectly acceptable. Why don't you spend a little time and truly state your case. I think I see where you're coming from and where you are headed but if you really want to discuss the issue you need to do so in depth.

[rainman::|:|]

*warning, political incorrectness follows*

i don't care if a person means it when they call something gay, i don't care if they thought of gay people or meant it as a genuine insult, or didnt. Quite simply, no matter how you use it, it's a phrase that's bigoted. You can't just redefine these kind of words... I could rename my TV "nigg*r" and tell people at work "i'm gonna go home tonight and watch the nigg*r", it's perfectly reasonable to assume black people would take offense, tho i meant nothing to do with black people at all.

are you happy? you made me use the 'n' word. i'll probably get warned for this one... :)

what it comes down to, is if you're not homophobic and do not wish to be considered homophobic, don't use a homophobic phrase.

pnw

[deryk]

Originally posted by tazo
One, the word is bigotry, what ironicism,

two:
I am not afraid of gay people, nor do I intentionally harass people simply for being gay, a keep requirement of homophobia. So if a dictionary says I am not a homophobe, who is saying so? :o

Tazo, homophobia is not limited to the fear of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people. One piece of homophobia, or racism, or sexism, or any other phobia or ism is that someone speaking from a privilleged place, ie, a heterosexual, and cannot or refuses to see the place of the other (in this instance homosexuals). However, that dominant place may not be viewed as correct from someone such as myself, a gay man.

I am glad we live in a place where you can express your point of view and I can wholeheartedly disagree. I would like to challenge you to think differently about this. The golden rule, due unto others as you would have them do unto you, would encompass your point fo view.

There is a different idealogy that I call the platinum rule and that is due unto others as they would have you do unto them. In this new system using phrases such as "that's gay" as a means to indicate the worthlessness of a product, action, or statement need to be honored as offensive. Many people on this thread are coming from this point of view. We're asking for your respect and using language in a way that is non-offensive to us.

Not doing so gives me and probably many others on here the sense that you really don't hear for our request and therefore are homophobic.

Deryk

[voicegy]

Originally posted by tazo
My definition of homophobia, [...]

Not agreeing with everything that homosexuals engage in.

Well, there are some things that I don't agree on that heterosexuals engage in (unchecked and irresponsible procreation, installing car alarms, engaging in wars) but I don't consider myself heterophobic...some of my best friends are heterosexual.:)

Now, those who have read my posts on this board over the past year and a half know that I tend to be middle of the road, conciliatory and ambassadorial in my posts, so, as Triumph the Insult Dog would say, "I KID! I KID!" (with tongue planted firmly in cheek)

Homophobia is certainly more than "not agreeing with everything that homosexuals engage in." People can always have their quiet opinions, but still have an open minded and non-hostile outward attitude. It beats a completely hostile attitude, which can include physical violence along with a complete disgust and disregard for the sub-culture being discussed.

From tazo's comment "I am not afraid of gay people, nor do I intentionally harass people simply for being gay, a keep [sic] requirement of homophobia." Well, in my book, that's enough for me to shake his hand and say "Thanks for that."

The reason all this came about needs to be revisited: the recent unfortunate rise in the use of the adopted term "gay" (that the homosexual community adopted and still "owns", culturally speaking) by the younger generation to denote something that is "a bummer", "uncool", or simply "that sucks." (talk about ironic)

I must support tazo's position in that he was using a term that has woven itself into youth society in its newly accepted vernacular. To tazo, he DID use the term appropriately, as his generation commonly does, now to mean "that's stupid." However, I also support the teacher in responding negatively to the use of the term, although the teachers' equating the term with the much more weighty "that's homophobic" remark was, in my opinion, over the top, and clearly shows the gap between the generations' acceptable and non-acceptable use of terms as they change meaning and fall in and out of favor as time marches on.

The teacher is rightly defending the abuse of a term that has, for a long time, been equated with a much maligned sub-culture. It took us a long time to get here, and now "our" word is now being equated with all things "stupid", and the sting is quite real.

Tazo rightly attempted to "correct" the teacher to how the term is being favored these days by youth at large, and if I were the teacher, I would have performed the following:

Teacher:
"Thank you for explaining that, tazo. I didn't realize that the term had a newer meaning that has so quickly gained acceptance as a new meaning. However, the homosexual sub-culture has used this term for many years as an identifier, and such use of "gay" may be misconstrued, and even hurtful, to gays on campus. Would you consider yourself homophobic for using that term in such a manner?"

<Discussion follows, tazo demonstrates he has nothing against homosexuals, doesn't beat them up, to each his own, etc.; he's even a member of the Gay/Straight Alliance at school...well, maybe not, but we get the message here.:) >

Teacher:
"Thank you. I appreciate your candor. I certainly don't accuse you of homophobia, but perhaps in future, you could set an example for your fellow classmates, and others in your life, in light of what I explained to you, to refrain, whenever possible, from using "gay" for "stupid."
I'm asking you this to reduce the possibility of a misconstrued use of the term and to perform a small favor to the gay population at large, and until and unless the homosexual sub-culture adopts another term for themselves, the next time I ask you to move to another part of the class, feel free to respond back with:

"That's SO stupid!"

(no, onto the REAL issue...why were you asked to move to another part of the class, hmmmm....?);)

[tazo]

Ok, here ya go, slightly more than 2 sentences:

At my school I was suspended for saying 'that’s gay'. At my school I was suspended for making a comment on the former war with Iraq, there was an Iraqi girl in the class at the time.
I made a joke about affirmative action, I was vehemently warned. So what am i dealing with? An overly sensitive school, or a school anxious to silent the person who thinks different, who dares to put out there what is being thought but not said? I prefer to think the second.

I am not afraid of homosexuals. I am not against homosexuals, or them as individuals, or homosexuals in and of themselves. I am not a 'hater' of homosexuals, I don't go around making jokes of them with frequency, something becoming more and more popular in todays society, a fact that I do not approve of.

I will put this out in the open: I don't feel comfortable with the entire lifestyle. Apparently that is gay bashing, apparently that makes me afraid of gay people, apparently I am a discriminator.

Ironically however, we must know how discrimination the majority, i.e. heterosexual Caucasians, face on a daily basis. If you do not understand what I mean you should think about this a bit longer, and look at daily tv, movies, pop culture and fashion in and of itself.

I am afraid of a world where people cannot express themselves without first thinking of the "thought police" (Michael Savage). I am afraid of the day I am a 'personager of a bank, opening up an individualhole cover in the street, eating a fresh persongo from the store, watching David Letterindividual.

The bottom line is my biggest pet peeve is with the political correctness. With the more tolerance we try and create, ironically the less tolerance of others who believe otherwise is created. Think about how the world is diversifying: Dividing people into social classes, with labels, with affirmative action, with mass media.

Its not fair, and I will be damned if I am going to sit idly while it occurs around me daily.

Agree? Disagree? I say, 'quienquiera'.

-Tazo

[tazo]

Originally posted by voicegy


I must support tazo's position in that he was using a term that has woven itself into youth society in its newly accepted vernacular. To tazo, he DID use the term appropriately, as his generation commonly does, now to mean "that's stupid." However, I also support the teacher in responding negatively to the use of the term, although the teachers' equating the term with the much more weighty "that's homophobic" remark was, in my opinion, over the top, and clearly shows the gap between the generations' acceptable and non-acceptable use of terms as they change meaning and fall in and out of favor as time marches on.

The teacher is rightly defending the abuse of a term that has, for a long time, been equated with a much maligned sub-culture. It took us a long time to get here, and now "our" word is now being equated with all things "stupid", and the sting is quite real.

Tazo rightly attempted to "correct" the teacher to how the term is being favored these days by youth at large, and if I were the teacher, I would have performed the following:

Teacher:
"Thank you for explaining that, tazo. I didn't realize that the term had a newer meaning that has so quickly gained acceptance as a new meaning. However, the homosexual sub-culture has used this term for many years as an identifier, and such use of "gay" may be misconstrued, and even hurtful, to gays on campus. Would you consider yourself homophobic for the using that term in such a manner?"

<Discussion follows, tazo demonstrates he has nothing against homosexuals, doesn't beat them up, to each his own, etc.; he's even a member of the Gay/Straight Alliance at school...well, maybe not, but we get the message here.:) >

Teacher:
"Thank you. I appreciate your candor. I certainly don't accuse you of homophobia, but perhaps in future, you could set an example for your fellow classmates, and others in your life, in light of what I explained to you, to refrain, whenever possible, from using "gay" for "stupid."
I'm asking you this to reduce the possibility of a misconstrued use of the term and to perform a small favor to the gay population at large, and until and unless the homosexual sub-culture adopts another term for themselves, the next time I ask you to move to another part of the class, feel free to respond back with:

"That's SO stupid!"

(no, onto the REAL issue...why were you asked to move to another part of the class, hmmmm....?);)

In this entire thread, well the part I started about my feelings on the topic, you have made the most, logical, well thought out sense, and I respect you as a result of it. I have tried my best to revert to not using the term' gay' as a synonym for stupid, I really have.

In a sort of ironic twist of fate, I myself have been the victim of discrimination recently. And you all say to yourself, but Tazo is a presumably caucasion heterosexual, how could he be the victim of discrimination. How about you add Jewish to that mix. Last week, I was called 'a [edited] jew'. And you may all be saying, well maybe he offended someone on campus who are reacting :p, a funny situation in a sense,
however I did not. I am a freshman. They were seniors. And in an act of overt desperation they chose to insult my heritage, one I do not even myself fully believe in (I am Messianic Jew).

In conclusion, Voicegy, without the reasonable thoughts of people like you, people who take the time to write out their feelings eloquently, I don't think the same message could have been conveyed.

Oh and I was asked to move because I am a talker :)

-Tazo

[mod edit: Let's try to keep things PG around here and not circumvent the profanity filter. ;)]

[voicegy]

I'm very sorry you had to endure such a hateful slam. :mad:

I also appreciate your comments, and, as part of a highly persecuted sub-culture yourself, can grasp what I and others' here have been attempting to get across. Your discussion points on this thread engaged us all in spirited discussion, without falling into useless name calling and/or flaming. Spirited conversation without degrading into negative behaviour is what my gay sisters and brothers here do best, and what MacRumors seems to do well, overall, as well; thanks to the many talented posters, the fantastic board owner and the various fair and balanced moderators.

(however, I'd run back and clean up the "F" word on your past post..that's a MacRumors post "no-no"):(

You do, however, bring up other issues quite worthy of discussion, and I'll leave that up to others to debate/discuss as they wish...my comments were "word focused" on the term "gay", and that's all I wanted to comment on.

Again, my sincere regrets at your having to endure such a horrid, discriminatory remark.

[Ugg]

Well, tazo, to begin with you sure seem to have a knack for getting yourself in trouble!

Political correctness was a much needed adjustment to American thinking. For the most part it seems to be fading away naturally. People are realizing the difference between generalizations and individuals. PolCor. achieved something very important in our society and I hope that you recognize that fact. America 30 years ago was a pretty ugly place for anyone who wasn't white, male and protestant.

Nobody says you have to like gay people or Iraqis or affirmative action and you have every right to voice those opinions. What we so often forget is that along with those inalienable rights come responsibilities. You are responsible for your actions and if your teacher feels that you were irresponsible in expressing your opinions then she had every right to do and say what she did. Hopefully in your school there is some kind of grievance procedure and that you were able to express your thoughts to the principal or whomever. It's not just about whether you were able to do so but whether you were willing to take the responsibility to do so. That is what it means to live in a free society, taking responsibility.

The white, heterosexual male is hardly a threatened species in today's society. Never has been and never will be. What is threatened is our willingness to carry on a dialogue about our differences. Name one are of this country where they are in danger of being overwhelmed by the "others". The military, of course, is one of them with 37% being non-white, but that is hardly a product of affirmative action, more a sign of the military is one of the few options available to ambitious non-white people.

You keep saying that you don't approve of gays but you don't say why. This is a fairly open group of people and if you explain your thoughts "responsibly" I hardly think anyone is going to run you out.

Your claim that America is being divided is partly true, but not by affirmative action. It was meant to reunite the classes by reducing the barriers. I think it's being disassembled too early. Our institutions should reflect the diversity of our society and I see nothing wrong with that. Segregation and blatant discrimination are ugly things.

[MrMacMan]

Do ALL of you people have nothing better to do than have a
'your a bigot!'
'your a gay!'

contest?
All of you win, congrads!

IMO, I don't care if a person is gay, white, black, jewish, etc.

What I do care about is when it affects me.

I agree that the term 'gay' has a bad connotation (sp?) in the languages already with phrase like 'your acting gay'
What are people to replace this to?
'your acting stupid' sounds alot like a put-down to a person while the former only puts down people not in....

gah half finished post.

future edit: finish.

edit: I don't care... I'm a bigot.
if a gay person comes on to me, I call them gay and tell me to get off of me.
This was my personal experience, I was suspended for calling the person gay, which he was, and admited he was homosexual.

I'm a flaming bigot.

[vniow]

Originally posted by tazo
I am afraid of a world where people cannot express themselves without first thinking of the "thought police" (Michael Savage).

Ohhh....don't even get me started on that guy... Savage writes of "the degenerates on the left who want to sell Americans on the idea that homosexuality, bisexuality, transexuality, even sex with animals is normal." He complains that a "minority of feminist zealots" has "both feminized and homosexualized much of America." On his show he talks about immigrants from "turd world nations" and called the Million Mom March for gun control the "million dyke march."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A43013-2003Mar4&notFound=true

[tazo]

Right off the bat, I noticed how vastly different your post is from Voicegy's.

Originally posted by Ugg
Well, tazo, to begin with you sure seem to have a knack for getting yourself in trouble!

Touche.

Political correctness was a much needed adjustment to American thinking. For the most part it seems to be fading away naturally. People are realizing the difference between generalizations and individuals. PolCor. achieved something very important in our society and I hope that you recognize that fact. America 30 years ago was a pretty ugly place for anyone who wasn't white, male and protestant.

I am not denying that pol.corr. has improved America in a sense, however many things have not. I do not agree however with your comment, that pol.corr. is fading away, a baseless claim. When I cannot describe my feelings, in a public school, and am actually penalized for so, then it is a sad sad day in 'improved' america.



Nobody says you have to like gay people or Iraqis or affirmative action and you have every right to voice those opinions. What we so often forget is that along with those inalienable rights come responsibilities.
One, I never said I was against homosexuals or iraquis :roll:

You are responsible for your actions and if your teacher feels that you were irresponsible in expressing your opinions then she had every right to do and say what she did. Hopefully in your school there is some kind of grievance procedure and that you were able to express your thoughts to the principal or whomever. It's not just about whether you were able to do so but whether you were willing to take the responsibility to do so. That is what it means to live in a free society, taking responsibility.


Review your comment. You say "...then she (teacher) has the right. When did I say my teacher was female? Right there is a stereotype, all teachers are women.

I was unable to discuss how I felt what occurred was inadequately dealt with, I was soimply suspended, told that my comments were not appropriate, and that because there was an iraqi in the class, I needed to not discuss the war.

What it means to live in this alleged free society, is that you can be free if you play by the rules of the thought police. No that when you think about what you say, before you say it, because you are afraid someone to get offended, that is an example. The pol.corr. advocates have created this entire culture of America in which people who think differently, are not allowed to do so. Free? Thats ************. There is no freedom in America, there is only what people wnat you to believe.


The white, heterosexual male is hardly a threatened species in today's society. Never has been and never will be. What is threatened is our willingness to carry on a dialogue about our differences. Name one are of this country where they are in danger of being overwhelmed by the "others". The military, of course, is one of them with 37% being non-white, but that is hardly a product of affirmative action, more a sign of the military is one of the few options available to ambitious non-white people.

Are you even aware that in about a decade, caucasians will be the minority? And then, if I am run over by a black person, only then, will it not be my fault.

I have an enormous problem with people who assert that that since they are a minority, they are the only people whose ancestors have suffered injustices. they often fail to remember that 40 million jews were killed during the holocaust.


You keep saying that you don't approve of gays but you don't say why. This is a fairly open group of people and if you explain your thoughts "responsibly" I hardly think anyone is going to run you out.

I have explained my reasons. I don't approve of it. Take it or leave it, I don't give a damn.


Your claim that America is being divided is partly true, but not by affirmative action. It was meant to reunite the classes by reducing the barriers. I think it's being disassembled too early. Our institutions should reflect the diversity of our society and I see nothing wrong with that. Segregation and blatant discrimination are ugly things.

And with all of the barriers we reduce, we put a lot more up by dividing people up into labels, and sects, and defining people by their race. Martin Luther King Jr. would be turning over in his grave right about now. "I look forward to a day where my children will not be judged by the color of their skin...", how sad is it that now that applies to every race and subculture? Caucasians are stereotyped, as are every other race.

Its an outrage, and I will be damned if I am going to sit idly while it goes on around me.

-tazo

[tazo]

Originally posted by vniow
Ohhh....don't even get me started on that guy...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A43013-2003Mar4&notFound=true
I agree that what savage says at times is offensive, and that is why I do not tune into his radio show all that often, a show iin which he says what ever he wants. Such is the benefits reaped by having your own show.

Despite that, the guy still makes sense on a lot of topics, and the fact remains that there is definitely an issue at hand that is not being discussed here, I think we all know what that is.

-tazo

[Ugg]

Good luck!

[tazo]

Originally posted by Ugg
Good luck! :confused: