|
Grex > Glb > #37: gay bashers in the news again (long -- 163 lines) |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 404 responses total. |
senna
|
|
response 227 of 404:
|
Nov 4 01:20 UTC 1998 |
Good post, Jan. Realizing the prejudices that we *do* have, and we all have
them, is an important part of dispelling or at least dealing with them.
|
kenton
|
|
response 228 of 404:
|
Nov 4 02:42 UTC 1998 |
I would hesitate to quote Freud on a whole lot. While he unveiled new ideas,
many of his theories have found disfavor lately.
I am surprised to hear that modern, primitive cultures practice homosexuality.
It must be why they are nearly extinct. I would like to know the names of
those tribes, if you have it handy.
I suspect that the reason only the dominant wolves of a pack breed, is because
the others are last years pups. Packs seldom get large.
Pigeons, geese and some other birds mate for life and both share rearing
duties. Foxes both share the care of the young.
I asked for reasons why homosexuality benefited ... etc. I got one good
reason. Population control. The idea of a homosexual being creative has
nothing to do with homosexuality. There were also a few questionable "facts".
Re: M. I. I only use tact when it is to my advantage. I expect to change
no ones mind in this conference. Apparently, I have stepped on your toes.
If you are a homosexual, say so. Don't be ashamed. I'll still like you, but I
will not like what you do. I trust I haven't left anyone guessing about the
way I feel about things. But some others haven't been so forth right.
Perhaps, I should have earlier said that I am unaware of knowing any
homosexuals." However, I do know a guy who had his testicles removed and
began taking hormones. Hey, what ever turns him on.
|
danr
|
|
response 229 of 404:
|
Nov 4 03:11 UTC 1998 |
You're unaware of them, I'd bet, because you've obviously closed yourself off
from them, Kenton. Only the most militant would bother to debate this with you.
|
eieio
|
|
response 230 of 404:
|
Nov 4 04:14 UTC 1998 |
To agree with JanC towards the end, yes, I think everyone should have the same
rights to show affection.
Being a straight guy, I can put a picture of my sweetheart on my desk at work,
talk to my boss about the movie "we" went to, hold hands at a company picnic,
and kiss each other goodbye at the airport.
Could I do any of those things if I was in love with a guy? My gut tells me
that I probably could, and nearly everybody I'd encounter would be basically
okay with it. But our society is such that the potential negative reaction,
even if there's a slim chance of it happening, is so severe that most people
in the situation would tend to keep their feelings hidden, or at least held
back somewhat around strangers. And that's a shame.
But.
That said.
I'm COMPLETELY EFFING SICK of Anne Heche and Ellen Degeneres. Every time I've
seen them making a public appearance, they're SO in your face about clinging
to each other. When I see straight couples being that deliberate and
ostentatious about displaying themselves, usually it has been a sign of
trouble in the relationship. In other words, the couple is insecure about
their situation with each other, and so maybe if they convince someone else
that everything's fine with them, then perhaps they can convince themselves.
So they don't miss the opportunity to trumpet themselves to a single passerby.
|
mdw
|
|
response 231 of 404:
|
Nov 4 06:25 UTC 1998 |
"Modern primitive" societies by definition haven't developed
agriculture, and don't have much resistance to rock and roll music.
It's as simple as that, and has little to do with their views on
sexuality or anything else.
In a wolf pack, chances are most of the members of the pack are more or
less closely related to each other. A "gay uncle" or "maiden aunt" can
still help propagate her genes by helping to raise his or her nephews
and nieces. I don't know about wolf packs in particular, but in many
species (I believe walruses and monkeys fall into this class), the alpha
male doesn't last very long. He is, after all, leading a high stress
life with a lot of challenges, and tends to burn out pretty fast. His
successor will almost certainly be a "younger male", and in some
species, that means he'll also have had plenty of homosexual experiences
as he advanced through the social ladder to gain the experience to
successfully overthrow the old alpha male.
With domesticated animals, particularly animals in zoos, we often create
social situations that are not much like what the animals would
experience in the wild. It is not uncommon, in these situations, to
have "breeding" problems. Either the mother doesn't know how to raise
young (never having seen it done), or in some cases, the male literally
does not know how to have sex. I wonder how many of these mating
problems arise through the successful efforts of zoo keepers to keep
their animals from protraying "undesirable" sexual behavior, such as
homosexuality, or masturbation?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 232 of 404:
|
Nov 4 06:38 UTC 1998 |
I think the evolutionary aspects of homosexuality are quite simple - it
doesn't matter much, so there is little selection. What evolutionary
pressure would there be? The species propagates just fine. Having some
members that don't doesn't matter. There are many species that have
neuter members - the colonial inspect workers, for example. With all
of the complexity of sexual differentiation, I am not at all surprised
by a variety of outcomes.
|
katie
|
|
response 233 of 404:
|
Nov 4 06:56 UTC 1998 |
kenton, how can you posiibly know what any individual gay person does?
You said you'd still like someone if you found out he/she was gay, but
wouldn't like what he/she does. NOt all gay people do things you would
find disagreeable, and many straight couples do things that you would.
|
lumen
|
|
response 234 of 404:
|
Nov 4 07:13 UTC 1998 |
the struggle continues..
|
rcurl
|
|
response 235 of 404:
|
Nov 4 07:17 UTC 1998 |
Better not tell kenton what men and women do with each other......he'd
become a heterophobe as well as a homophobe.
|
senna
|
|
response 236 of 404:
|
Nov 4 13:54 UTC 1998 |
Now now, let's just let Kenton deconstruct himself here.
|
brighn
|
|
response 237 of 404:
|
Nov 4 23:12 UTC 1998 |
On evolution and sexuality:
There are two possible hypotheses. One is that biology strongly determines
sexuality. The other is that it doesn't. My discussion of evolution was meant
to illustrate the problem with the first hypothesis. Rane and the other person
support my view that the first hypothesis is flawed while causing me to infer
that they think I support it.
Rane was the one who said that sexuality was biologically determined, not me.
In re the question of why alpha maleness doesn't cause non-alpha-male traits
to evolve out, there's a simple answer:
Look at the Middle East. Look at Ireland. Look at Yugoslavia. Look at China.
Look at Australia. Look at Capitol Hill.
Then tell me that aggression *isn't* selected. We are the most intelligent
species; it could be said that we are the most evolved. We are also, by far,
the most aggressive.
|
lumen
|
|
response 238 of 404:
|
Nov 5 01:34 UTC 1998 |
re #237: as a species, aren't we one of the largest in number, if not the
largest? I would suppose, therefore, that aggression is therefore selected
biologically to keep numbers down.
or maybe I'm not understanding this.
|
kenton
|
|
response 239 of 404:
|
Nov 5 04:41 UTC 1998 |
Re #233 Katie, what I know about homosexuals is based on what I have read.
And I read a lot, about many things, and from a variety of sources. The main
thing I don't like (associated with homosexuals) are the sex acts. I
find the thoughts of them disgusting. The idea of sucking a penis which has
just been removed from an anus, makes me want to vomit. Yet some here, would
castigate me for my strong minded aversion to these practices. I figure that
some of these practices are not conducive to good health. I am aware that not
all homosexuals get so extreme in their "loving".
I have asked some valid questions about what causes a person to have homosexual
tendencies. Congratulations to those who are truly considering those
questions. I would tend to be more understanding of homosexuality if I was
sure that it was not some perverted action. In other words, if the aberrant
behavior was influenced by social setting or heredity was the cause.
I have found that some of the people who claim to be the most open minded are
really just the opposite. And I am curious about some of you.
In my line of work I meet about 2 to 3 people a week, with whom I manage to
establish a working relationship. I have yet to meet an open and
practicing homosexual. Perhaps there are more of them in Michigan.
Rane, If I want to know about women, I'll contact you the expert. Don't worry
about overloading my systems, M. I. will reconstruct me.
|
brighn
|
|
response 240 of 404:
|
Nov 5 05:37 UTC 1998 |
Not all homosexuals suck penises immediately after they're removed from an
naus. Few, I imagine, do.
You may wish to sit down for the next revelation, Kenton:
Some heterosexual women suck penises after they've been removed from an anus.
Few, I imagine, do.
This revelation will, quite possibly, hit you even harder, so try to take it
slowly:
There is *nothing* that a homosexual man does in homosexual sex that at lest
some heterosexual women don't do. Anal, fellatio, rimming, fisting, you name
itt, and some women will do it... some will even enjoy it.
In fact, short of mutual acts (such as fellating while being fellated), there
is nothing that homosexual men do that heterosexual couples don't do.
Oho! But gays do them *more*, and are more *extreme* and more *blatant*...
Pishposh, you're being naive. I could direct you to some very extreme
depictions on the web involving heterosexual acts. For the sake of our beloved
audience, I won't get graphic with the details. Suffice to say, homosexuals
hardly have the market cornered on unhealthy, unhygeinic sex (and nor are most
homosexuals unhealthy or unhygeinic, at least when educated).
|
senna
|
|
response 241 of 404:
|
Nov 5 08:27 UTC 1998 |
*What?!?* I thought all heterosexuals did missionary 100% of the time! This
is disgusting pornography!
Note the sarcasm dripping all over that statement.
|
scott
|
|
response 242 of 404:
|
Nov 5 11:56 UTC 1998 |
(Brighn just said what I was going to say, only much better)
|
i
|
|
response 243 of 404:
|
Nov 5 13:58 UTC 1998 |
If finding another person's private actions disgusting is a reasonable
criteria for declaring anything illegal, immoral, etc. (vs. not-to-be-
done-in-public), then how many new laws do we need against how many things
that someone, somewhere might do? And if you black-list groups based on
what a few members might do, you've pretty much outlawed human life.
|
johnnie
|
|
response 244 of 404:
|
Nov 5 14:53 UTC 1998 |
Kenton sez: "In my line of work I meet about 2 to 3 people a week, with
whom I manage to establish a working relationship. I have yet to meet
an open and practicing homosexual."
I'm wondering what kenton is expecting. That instead of shaking his
hand they're gonna grab his ass? That they'll be dressed in pink suits
and carry a purse instead of a briefcase?
Lord knows I rarely introduce myself by saying, "Hi, my name is
John--and I'm heterosexual." And the subject rarely comes up during
subsequent business conversations, especially if I realize or suspect
that the person with whom I'm conducting business has deep disgust for
my desires for and relationships with the opposite sex.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 245 of 404:
|
Nov 5 15:56 UTC 1998 |
I think that kenton's remark that he has "yet to meet an open and
practicing homosexual" says it all. He has met dozens I bet, but there is no
way to tell, besides the fact that it is none of his business.
|
cyklone
|
|
response 246 of 404:
|
Nov 5 21:12 UTC 1998 |
Not having met Kenton in person, I cannot say this for certain, but he may
also project an attitude that causes normally "open" gays to become
somewhat less so. I suspect that gays, much like other minorities, develop
a pretty good second sense of who is "cool" and who isn't . . . .
|
brighn
|
|
response 247 of 404:
|
Nov 5 22:29 UTC 1998 |
I know, as a bisexual Pagan polyamorous Dom, having a sense of who can and
will try to use my alternative lifestyles against me is a simple matter of
survival. The wrong word to the wrong person, and I could wind up ostracized,
harassed, or worse.
So yes, I'd say so, Cyklone.
|
lumen
|
|
response 248 of 404:
|
Nov 6 00:59 UTC 1998 |
I imagine that Kenton is still holding fast to a preconceived notion of how
homosexuals act, dress, have sex, etc., etc. The misconception must be so
strong that maybe he has indeed witnessed some exceptions, but may have turned
a blind eye to it.
If Paul doesn't mind, I think bisexuals can be included in this case as far
as man-to-man sex is concerned. For the sake of reason, there are some things
that people won't do.
Not all homosexuals have anal intercourse, or at least from articles I've
read. Bisexuals can be choosy, too. One of my friends told me man-to-man
anal sex and kissing didn't interest him, but fellatio and cuddling did.
Of course, I'm sure *all* men and women insist on having a penis washed before
it is stuck anywhere else-- well, most of them. Some aren't so clean. Some
only have anal intercourse in certain situations. Some men like women to
penetrate them anally with a strap-on (forgive me if I offend some readers,)
and I don't think they are necessarily bisexual.
I've heard it explained that many hets are uncomfortable with the idea of
homosexual sex because they have to imagine themselves doing it to a degree,
consciously or unconsciously, and that is definitely uncomfortable to them.
But many of them forget that bis and homosexuals do many of the same things
heterosexual couples do-- cuddle, kiss, say kind and loving words, caress,
fondle, hug, massage, smile, laugh, cry, moan (when making love), argue,
delegate, share, help, desire children, etc., etc.
This brings me back to my point that not all homosexuals and bis fit the
stereotypes. There are exceptions to the broad generalizations, although
there are often still factors that make so-called gaydar and bidar work-- yes,
I do believe that there are some observable differences between hets, bis and
gays, even when they're not having sex (although I think bis can be tricky).
But that doesn't necessarily describe it all-- all it means is that our
society still espouses the concept of gender-- that social roles must be
assigned according to sex. Bis and homosexuals cross the barriers of those
roles, be they in a very few or many ways.
But part of that is for identification purposes. We may dress, act, talk,
walk in various and intricate ways, but that is so we can recognize each
other. I'm sure that the complexity grew out of some security from those who
would harm us-- things were coded to avoid scrutiny-- but some don't make an
effort to especially express themselves. You wouldn't really guess they were
bi or gay unless you really got to know them, or if they told you.
Myself-- I'm sure I look fairly straight. My clothes don't say much, although
if you really knew me, you might notice I'm happy when I'm fairly well-dressed
and color-coordinated. I'm extremely artistic, but so are some very straight
people.
I don't follow any particular trends in anything, so it's hard to be pegged
with a certain sexuality. Sure, I like listening to British New Romantic
bands, and I have the long bangs some of the old school cake boys used to
sport, but I'll bet some straights followed some of those trends, too.
Yeah, I like to street/disco/club dance, and I'm a maniac on the floor,
but..so..? Sometimes I have a beard, and sometimes I don't-- and the beard
has been full, a goatee, a Don Juan, George Michael-style-- and I'll bet that
throws a lot of people. Some of the music I listen to is not just by gay
artists-- some are bi-- but does that necessarily say anything?
Hey, I used to be uncomfortable around the g/l/b community. The gays were
sometimes flighty, the lesbians all seemed very leery of me, and I had no idea
who the bisexuals were. But I still managed to make a few friends-- and boy,
was I surprised when I found out their sexuality as well as mine! I used to
think that gays were either femmy or macho in a funky sort of way, that
lesbians were men-haters, and bisexuals were folks I hadn't figured out yet.
(Well gee, that's funny-- I am bisexual.) My preconceived ideas started
crumbling when I met some warm, caring folks in the community who seemed
rather comfy with themselves, even when I met other g/l/b's who were obviously
a little neurotic.
The first woman to wipe away my tears was a lesbian. Not even my mother had
done that for me until much later, I think. Alder tried to act tough, but
she just melted when she saw me crying huddled up in a dark room. After that,
she always checked up on me to make sure I was ok. I appreciated that,
because I am manic-depressive and my mood swings hadn't been stabilized yet.
My sister has had a lot of ups and downs-- probably a 5 on a six-point Kinsey
scale who called herself lesbian for a while. We used to fight a lot, but
she still trusted me enough to share some of her problems-- including the day
she met a man she could not only stand, but liked.
Strangely enough, most of the folks I came out to were in a similar
situation-- even if a few didn't admit it at the time. The more people I met,
the more I realized the g/l/b community was just like the population at
large-- but the orientations of attraction were different.
I'm not really practicing, although I've had a few experiences. Julie and
I joke about 'window shopping,' and we still make comments on sexy bodies or
either sex-- which gives others in same-sex relations pause sometimes.
Really, it's kind of weird-- some folks think that because we're Mormon and
getting married, we're kinda supposed to disappear, or at least put on
blinders and then attach them to each other. We were watching 'Celluloid in
the Closet' with our G.A.L.A. group, and the video showed a number of clips
of homosexuals in the movies. One had a scene of a man taking his shirt off,
and I said, "Check out that six-pack!" to which Julie and I then chorused a
lustful "Ummm-hmmm." Immediately, one of the girls said, "Hey-- you guys are
supposed to be getting married!" Hmmm. Well, we won't think sexual
thoughts-- we're pretty religious-- but it doesn't stop us from noticing.
Julie tells folks, "You can look, but don't touch the goods."
So do I fit Kenton's notions or no?
|
md
|
|
response 249 of 404:
|
Nov 6 03:08 UTC 1998 |
Well, they *do* all like Judy Garland. You can't deny that.
|
senna
|
|
response 250 of 404:
|
Nov 6 05:42 UTC 1998 |
There are wavelengths to all personal associations, and I'd imagine (having
no factual basis for this) that a homosexual person would act differently
around people they felt weren't as accepting. It's just how things work.
Some people that I know tend to be a bit raunchier, and I'm cool with that.
Some are fairly uptight, and I adapt. Granted, with me my standard reaction
to all social situations is to shut up and sit in the corner, but there are
variations of that I use :)
|
anderyn
|
|
response 251 of 404:
|
Nov 7 01:20 UTC 1998 |
I was very disappointed this week because some one I respect decided to
break off our friendship because (we're in the same writing group) I had
decided that my bi polyamourous character would not commit to one person,
but would like to have at least two partners. (Which -- as I kept saying
-- was for cuddling and the like, rather than for sex, per se.) Apparently,
even in fiction, and fiction with a decidedly fantastic flavour, this
person can't deal with that particular worldview. She said it wasn't logical
for a bi person to want one person of each gender in a poly relationship,
and that I was weird for even thinking about such things. (Since I happen
to be a straight het vanilla monogamous person, I find that a little
strange...) And yet she writes a very het and macho character who, although
married and supposedly very much in love with the wife, still bonks
anything in skirts. Including other married folks. Which is something
which I find immoral since I have always figured that onece you've made
a promise, then you have to keep it, and if you're married traditionally,
then you don't fool around. Sigh. I'm just really bummed about this,
since I had gotten really excited about exploring those areas with my
co-writers, and was looking forward in particular to writing that kind
of relationship in a positive light.
|