What exactly is a "gay-friedly"

[Snotty]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Yep, but the purposeful production of culture within said group, along as the purposeful separation from the rest of society is something I condemn, because it leads people to say "I'm gay" before "I'm French" or "I'm human".

Surely the nationalistic desire to say 'Im French' is simply communitarization writ large?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by MrFun
So you're appalled that homosexuals are more comfortable in gay communities??

No, I'm appaled some active gays are building a lore for their own separate community, for less active gays to follow.

Let's take an example. I, Spiffor, am a member of the Apolyton community. I normally post several hours a day here. But I don't feel my belonging to Apolyton separates me from the rest of society in any way. I don't fell different from non-Apolytoners in the real world, and I'm keeping my Human and my French identity, that Apolyton is enriching.

Now, if I felt so comfortable on 'Poly that I avoided social relationships in the real world, if I pictured myself as an Apolytoner first, and if I wore Apolyton culture in my everyday (such as wearing Apolytonware; saying "you provide no source, you provide NOTHING !" to my teachers; or dancing the DL dance at parties), I'd think the Apolyton community would be a bad thing for it would be dividing the society.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Snotty
Surely the nationalistic desire to say 'Im French' is simply communitarization writ large?

It is. My beef is not exactly with existing communities (such as a country), my beef is with communities being built, and being purposefully separating from the rest of society.

And as to myself: I hope I'm seen as a human being before being seen as a Frenchman

[Buck Birdseed]

Identity groups exist whether you like them or not, Spiffor. In a modern society we have to acknowledge the fact that there are groups that have radically different experiences from each other and have different things to pluralistically contribute to the society we hold in common. We need to build a society where the ideal is not to be "normal", but to be yourself and acknowledge and celebrate all your identities, whatever they may be, not drive yourself to conform for the sake of some misplaced liberalism or socialism.

We need to recognise that what we percieve as normal may simply be society's dominant groups imposing their standards on other people because they have the power, and that a denial of differences may in fact be the general acceptance of one norm dictated by one identity group. What is to say "normal" society is not in fact heterosexual society, or male society, or culturally western society, denying the subordinate groups their participation and expression?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
Identity groups exist whether you like them or not, Spiffor. In a modern society we have to acknowledge the fact that there are groups that have radically different experiences from each other and have different things to pluralistically contribute to the society we hold in common. We need to build a society where the ideal is not to be "normal", but to be yourself and acknowledge and celebrate all your identities, whatever they may be, not drive yourself to conform for the sake of some misplaced liberalism or socialism.

I don't think this is true. These things don't really exist, they are just an illusion. Of course various bunches of people have convergent interests and shared experiences, but it's nothing more than that.

There certainly isn't a "gay viewpoint" only the vewpoints of individual gay people, which may or may not converge on some issues.

Identity politics is an illusion because identity is a personal and not a communal phenomenon.

[Buck Birdseed]

Originally posted by Agathon
Identity politics is an illusion because identity is a personal and not a communal phenomenon.

Wow. So there's nothing Gays have in common that Straight people lack? I could give you a clue if you like.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MrFun
Heterosexism is based on the belief that heterosexuality is superior to homosexuality.

It's more than that. Heterosexist ideologies say that men and women have certain defined roles, and that people who act outside those roles should be punished, supressed, ostracized, etc. Saying that women can't be combat soldiers is an example of heterosexism. Saynig that homosexuality is immoral is an example of heterosexism. Saying boys can't cry is an example of heterosexism.

The reason I think the word is superior to homophobia is a) people aren't afraid of gays and lesbians, and two, it ties the repression of homosexuality into sexism and the whole notion of what "proper" roles are for men and women. Homophobia isn't seperate from sexism, but is an aspect of it.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel

Similar I guess, to a chauvinistic, sexist man married to a woman.

I am hetrosexist, according to your definition. However I don't think that gay people are worse than straight people. This are two different things/

I don't think so. He means superior in the way white supremists think they are superior to everyone else.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Spiffor

It is. My beef is not exactly with existing communities (such as a country), my beef is with communities being built, and being purposefully separating from the rest of society.

Groups that seperate themselves typically were seperaqted out unwillingly beforehand. If no one had ever oppressed gays, there would be no gay culture, no gay seperatism, no Castro Street, South Beach, etc. Seperation is an act of self-defense in the face of a large social entity that tells you you're evil.

And as to myself: I hope I'm seen as a human being before being seen as a Frenchman

Depends on where you are. In the U.S. you'd likely not be to welcome right now, because you're a Frenchman.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Agathon
Identity politics is an illusion because identity is a personal and not a communal phenomenon.

Comrade Marx would disagree with you most strongly.

[Japher]

I think saying that your gay-friendly is like saying "I'm not a racist"... I just tell everyone I'm a racist and a homophobe that way I can get away with my crass sense of humor.

Communial Separation will always occur, and IMO it is the downfall of society... Oh, well.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Comrade Marx would disagree with you most strongly.

Indeed he would, which is why I'm not an orthodox commie. I'm generally opposed to Hegelianism and its offshoots.

On the other hand, class consciousness is a sort of illusion no matter which way you look at it.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Groups that seperate themselves typically were seperaqted out unwillingly beforehand. If no one had ever oppressed gays, there would be no gay culture, no gay seperatism, no Castro Street, South Beach, etc. Seperation is an act of self-defense in the face of a large social entity that tells you you're evil.

I wasn't born at the time where the society was really shunning gays (I don't think the gay marriage issue of today is any close from the situation of 30 years ago, when straight people could go chase and humiliate some gays for the heck of it, and get away with it).
But as far as I understand, the gay culture has begun really being built once it became possible to publicly announce one's gayness. Today, the gays are among the best accepted minority in western countries, yet it is the moment they choose to have "gay-only" conventions (see some Blackice's thread), where gay flags are clearly displayed in the streets etc.

I personally think this doesn't come from oppression, but from a need of feeling elite. Yet again, the university work I just finished today was about the creation of such kind of identities

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Spiffor

No, I'm appaled some active gays are building a lore for their own separate community, for less active gays to follow.

Let's take an example. I, Spiffor, am a member of the Apolyton community. I normally post several hours a day here. But I don't feel my belonging to Apolyton separates me from the rest of society in any way. I don't fell different from non-Apolytoners in the real world, and I'm keeping my Human and my French identity, that Apolyton is enriching.

Now, if I felt so comfortable on 'Poly that I avoided social relationships in the real world, if I pictured myself as an Apolytoner first, and if I wore Apolyton culture in my everyday (such as wearing Apolytonware; saying "you provide no source, you provide NOTHING !" to my teachers; or dancing the DL dance at parties), I'd think the Apolyton community would be a bad thing for it would be dividing the society.

I make, and have friends, regardless of sexual orientation.

Yet, at the same time, I support distinctive, residential gay communities in metropolises as a place of positive affirmation, and support networks.

[Japher]

Gay-friendly = putting up with MrFun