Logo

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Persephone Milk

Well I kind of agree with you Jellin, but I don't think you are actually addressing the point being raised in the article. This isn't about whether society at large should accept GBLT persons, whether real or pretend. Everybody here would agree that people should be free to explore and express their sexuality, gender and orientation in any way they like. The article is addressing how the GBTL community feels about "pretenders" that engage in behaviors just for attention.

If you don't feel that pretending is happening, then you aren't paying attention to popular culture, and you don't have a teen aged daughter in high-school.

Now, if the GBLT community is bothered by this type of behavior, I think maybe I can understand how they feel. I am certainly not going to tell them their feelings are invalid. The GBLT community has fought hard, and endured much, to get to where they are today - which is not yet a position of equal rights, respect or acceptance. So I think I can understand why they might be hurt by people pretending, as if sexual orientation is something that can be changed with the latest fashion craze.

Oh, it's tres chic to pretend you are gay today - now that it's in vogue for a season - and you haven't had to endure any of the pain and heartache of discrimination, rejection and outright ridicule.

Of course, on the other hand ..

If enough people experiment with bisexuality, maybe the whole ingrained prejudicial stigma against gays will lessen.

I mean after all, how can someone who had 3 sexual same-sex relationships in college but lives "straight" now be against something like gay marriage.

Also if the stigma is reduced, then the whole "shame" cycle of being different/ something wrong with you that gays have to endure is potentially reduced.

Asher Bertrand · 10-13-2008, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

I mean after all, how can someone who had 3 sexual same-sex relationships in college but lives "straight" now be against something like gay marriage.

You'd be surprised.

And adding... the stigma that is possibly being reduced is not being reduced for all. I don't see how this would help young gay men at all, whose sexuality hasn't become trendy as of yet.

Serenity · 10-13-2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

I mean after all, how can someone who had 3 sexual same-sex relationships in college but lives "straight" now be against something like gay marriage.

Oh I got this one:

Gay: Why can't I marry my same sex partner? You had gay relationships in college!
Currently Straight Person: Yeah, and I out grew them. Why don't you quit your "Experimenting" (said with the finger quotes for added insult) and get on with a real relationship?

And I'm not saying that is RIGHT at all. Far from. I'm just saying what could easily become the standard response from the small minded.

Serenity

Persephone Milk · 10-13-2008, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

If enough people experiment with bisexuality, maybe the whole ingrained prejudicial stigma against gays will lessen.

Perhaps. But I don't really think that the persons experimenting are really against it anyway. But again, for me, this isn't about whether experimenting or even pretending is acceptable. I think it's all wonderful, and I don't believe society should be imposing any limits on sexual freedom or expression. I just feel it's wrong to discount the feelings of the GBLT community who have suffered long and paid much in blood and tears to get us where we are today.

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serenity

Gay: Why can't I marry my same sex partner? You had gay relationships in college!
Currently Straight Person: Yeah, and I out grew them. Why don't you quit your "Experimenting" (said with the finger quotes for added insult) and get on with a real relationship?

This is ridiculous. The "Currently Straight Person" in your example would be hypocrite.

Ben Hoark · 10-13-2008, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

This is ridiculous. The "Currently Straight Person" in your example would be hypocrite.

Isn't that precisely the point?

Asher Bertrand · 10-13-2008, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

This is ridiculous. The "Currently Straight Person" in your example would be hypocrite.

*laugh*

But Colette, there are millions of hypocrites.

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Persephone Milk

Perhaps. But I don't really think that the persons experimenting are really against it anyway. But again, for me, this isn't about whether experimenting or even pretending is acceptable. I think it's all wonderful, and I don't believe society should be imposing any limits on sexual freedom or expression. I just feel it's wrong to discount the feelings of the GBLT community who have suffered long and paid much in blood and tears to get us where we are today.

If society is going to actually change to the point where being Gay is largely accepted - then all those people who are between gay and straight need to be accepted as well.

Persephone Milk · 10-13-2008, 02:53 PM

Collette, how many gay republican congressmen do I need to name that vote against gay interests each and every time they get a chance, to show you how many hypocrites there are?

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Hoark

Isn't that precisely the point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asher Bertrand

*laugh*

But Colette, there are millions of hypocrites.

But once a person has been proven to be a hypocrite on an issue you can just dismiss what they think.

Persephone Milk · 10-13-2008, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

But once a person has been proven to be a hypocrite on an issue you can just dismiss what they think.

Unless you are actually gay, and that person votes against your rights.

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 02:57 PM

I'm going back to the Jellin opinion.

We have no business telling people who they are allowed to fuck.

Or why.

Asher Bertrand · 10-13-2008, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

But once a person has been proven to be a hypocrite on an issue you can just dismiss what they think.

Sure, you can dismiss what they think. They still get as many votes as you do when gay marriage appears on the ballot.

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Persephone Milk

Unless you are actually gay, and that person votes against your rights.

Why the hell should someone's rights as a Gay person be subject to a vote?

Asher Bertrand · 10-13-2008, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

Why the hell should someone's rights as a Gay person be subject to a vote?

That's an academic question. The fact is, they are.

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asher Bertrand

Sure, you can dismiss what they think. They still get as many votes as you do when gay marriage appears on the ballot.

Gay marriage bans are unconstitutional already. The supreme court is prejudiced already. None of them experimented with same-sex relationships in their past.

So how much "worse" are open experimental same-sex relationships going to make things?

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asher Bertrand

That's an academic question. The fact is, they are.

Yep. And thats the problem.

Not whether Lindsey Lohan wants to get naughty and naked with her female friend for whatever reason.

Serenity · 10-13-2008, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asher Bertrand

*laugh*

But Colette, there are millions of hypocrites.

Actually... and just to be a little contrary but it might not be hypocritical.

Let's say that I played around with my roommate in college when we were in the dorms. Then I graduate, get married, start a family all the way "you're supposed to". I find myself happy in suburbia with the yard, the 2 kids, the family cat, and a nice cozy 6% mortgage.

Why is it hypocritical to assume that someone else can't do the same thing? I played, I decided it wasn't for me, I did the "Normal thing".

I'm not saying it's fair, or logical (the assumption that what works for me doesn't mean it works for all) but it's not nessecarily hypocritical (ie holding others to different standards than I followed myself). Maybe I'm just arguing semantics to argue them.....

Serenity

Asher Bertrand · 10-13-2008, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

So how much "worse" are open experimental same-sex relationships going to make things?

I don't believe anyone here has argued against that.

Asher Bertrand · 10-13-2008, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serenity

Actually... and just to be a little contrary but it might not be hypocritical.

Let's say that I played around with my roommate in college when we were in the dorms. Then I graduate, get married, start a family all the way "you're supposed to". I find myself happy in suburbia with the yard, the 2 kids, the family cat, and a nice cozy 6% mortgage.

Why is it hypocritical to assume that someone else can't do the same thing? I played, I decided it wasn't for me, I did the "Normal thing".

I'm not saying it's fair, or logical (the assumption that what works for me doesn't mean it works for all) but it's not nessecarily hypocritical (ie holding others to different standards than I followed myself). Maybe I'm just arguing semantics to argue them.....

Serenity

Hypocritical might not be 100 percent spot on, but it's the nicest of many words I can think of for a person like that.

Colette Meiji · 10-13-2008, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serenity

Actually... and just to be a little contrary but it might not be hypocritical.

Let's say that I played around with my roommate in college when we were in the dorms. Then I graduate, get married, start a family all the way "you're supposed to". I find myself happy in suburbia with the yard, the 2 kids, the family cat, and a nice cozy 6% mortgage.

Why is it hypocritical to assume that someone else can't do the same thing? I played, I decided it wasn't for me, I did the "Normal thing".

I'm not saying it's fair, or logical (the assumption that what works for me doesn't mean it works for all) but it's not nessecarily hypocritical (ie holding others to different standards than I followed myself). Maybe I'm just arguing semantics to argue them.....

Serenity

Nope. Still would be a hypocrite.

Jellin Pico · 10-13-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Persephone Milk

Well I kind of agree with you Jellin, but I don't think you are actually addressing the point being raised in the article.

This isn't about whether society at large should accept GBLT persons, whether real or pretend. Everybody here would agree that people should be free to explore and express their sexuality, gender and orientation in any way they like. The article is addressing how the GBTL community feels about "pretenders" that engage in behaviors just for attention.

My argument is with the GLTL community who construct a criteria to decide who is, and who is not, this that or the other based entirely on how they feel so-and-so should be acting.

It's none of their goddamn business who an individual is in bed with. No more than it's the business of the straight community.

And it's no ones business to speculate on WHY so-and-so is in bed with whoever. What gives the GLTL community the right to judge who is gay, lesbian and whatever t and l stand for? I think their criteria can be just as prejudiced as any straight

Jellin Pico · 10-13-2008, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colette Meiji

This is ridiculous. The "Currently Straight Person" in your example would be hypocrite.

Never never never never never never underestimate hypocrisy

Or stupidity

Jellin Pico · 10-13-2008, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serenity

Why is it hypocritical to assume that someone else can't do the same thing? I played, I decided it wasn't for me, I did the "Normal thing".

Serenity

Because it IS

Now tell us why the sky isn't blue

Lo Jacobs · 10-13-2008, 04:04 PM

I knew somebody would come up with some random reason as to why Lindsay Lohan and Sam whatsherface were being , uh, wrong.

Anyway, I think this guy is just being alarmist. And the effect on kids? Well, if anything it lets 'em know gayness is out there. When did you first learn about teh gay?

10-13-2008, 04:04 PM	#50 (permalink)
Lo Jacobs Kitten Fuzz Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 2,546 SL Join Date: May 2004 Business: Church of Luxe Blog Entries: 17 Awards: 1	I knew somebody would come up with some random reason as to why Lindsay Lohan and Sam whatsherface were being , uh, wrong. Anyway, I think this guy is just being alarmist. And the effect on kids? Well, if anything it lets 'em know gayness is out there. When did you first learn about teh gay? __________________ MY STORE//MY BLOG//FLICKR//EMAIL

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-13-2008, 02:53 PM	#34 (permalink)
Persephone Milk Musical Alchemist Mixolydian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Florida Posts: 2,869 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 1 SL Join Date: October 5, 2004 Business: Musical Alchemy	Collette, how many gay republican congressmen do I need to name that vote against gay interests each and every time they get a chance, to show you how many hypocrites there are?

10-13-2008, 02:57 PM	#37 (permalink)
Colette Meiji Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 7,590 My Mood:	I'm going back to the Jellin opinion. We have no business telling people who they are allowed to fuck. Or why.

Logo

Site Navigation