Gay events, lack of logic IMO. Mr.fun explain this to me.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Velociryx
just because someone wants equal treatment under the law, doesnt mean they dont have a seperate subculture, and want to hang out together.

And they are just as free to do so as I am free to feel that it is an absurdity. No skin off my nose, and I'm not gonna lose ANY sleep over it if someone feels I'm being "bigoted" or "hypocritical" for thinking that they're a) wasting their time, and b) not helping their cause for equality.

i doubt that a gay olympics does much for OR against "the cause of equality" nor does a gay choir or gay church. Just as Jewish social organizations dont do much for or against Jewish equality, and the Highland Games dont do much for or against Celtic equality. Thats not really what theyre about. Theres more to life than politics, and more to being gay or Jewish, or black, or even celtic, than struggling for equality.

[Pekka]

That's a great way to break it to your dad that you're gay.

DAD! I'm going to the olympics!
Hmm, where did you get the tickets?
Nono, I mean I'm competing!
REALLY?! HOW?! WOW!! GREAT, WAY TO GO SON!
Yeah it's the... gay olympics..
WHAT?
Yeah... but hey, it's still olympics.. yaay me?
Uhmrhmh...

[Velociryx]

i doubt that a gay olympics does much for OR against "the cause of equality" nor does a gay choir or gay church. Just as Jewish social organizations dont do much for or against Jewish equality, and the Highland Games dont do much for or against Celtic equality. Thats not really what theyre about. Theres more to life than politics, and more to being gay or Jewish, or black, or even celtic, than struggling for equality.

I doubt it as well, but for every "cause-neutral" example we can find (such as those you named), I'll bet we could find an equal number of examples that sit at cross purposes with the group's stated goals, which brings us nicely back to the first post in the thread, the Gay Pride Parade, which DOES stand at cross purposes to the whole "struggle for equality" gig, since one of its major effects (if not one of its major purposes) is to highlight the differences of the group in question.

And, as a parade, it's not really an example of "socialization" either. True?

-=Vel=-

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Velociryx
i doubt that a gay olympics does much for OR against "the cause of equality" nor does a gay choir or gay church. Just as Jewish social organizations dont do much for or against Jewish equality, and the Highland Games dont do much for or against Celtic equality. Thats not really what theyre about. Theres more to life than politics, and more to being gay or Jewish, or black, or even celtic, than struggling for equality.

I doubt it as well, but for every "cause-neutral" example we can find (such as those you named), I'll bet we could find an equal number of examples that sit at cross purposes with the group's stated goals, which brings us nicely back to the first post in the thread, the Gay Pride Parade, which DOES stand at cross purposes to the whole "struggle for equality" gig, since one of its major effects (if not one of its major purposes) is to highlight the differences of the group in question.

And, as a parade, it's not really an example of "socialization" either. True?

-=Vel=-

Never having attended the gay pride parade I wouldnt know. Perhaps you can tell me, Vel

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Spec

That's where the ''Mr.Fun, explain this to me''. comes in. I bet if I were gay I'd know and I wouldn't have to ask. That's why we invented questions.


Spec.

White minority ethnic groups such as Irish immigrants in United States for example, have had their share of discrimination and suffering. But guess what? Their white complexion allowed them to achieve a greater extent of assimilation into American society and culture compared to other races such as Chinese or African-Americans. Non-white minority group members have a history of more dehumanization and degradation than any white ethnic group. Irish-descent Americans in several major cities ended up attaining great power through political-boss systems, for example. (this more in response to Vel's posts)


Secondly, I have already tried answering your questions but your insensitivity continues to prevent you from even trying to understand the explanations I have already provided. But let me try again.

One example of the dehumanization of homosexuals that continues to this day, is the denial that they are entitled to the same basic human right of association, intimate life, and moral identity. We have other historical examples that are parallel to this; for example, with enslaved blacks in the South, before the Civil War. Black slaves were dehumanized to the extent that they were denied the basic human right of association, intimate life, and moral identity when parents were forcibly separated frmo their children, and when spouses were forcibly separated from one another. They were dehumanized to the level of chattel -- to be brought together for breeding, but to be deprived of sustaining a stable family network and environment.

Homosexuals have never been enslaved but to this day, along similar lines, homosexuals are dehumanized to the level of chattel or beasts -- homosexuals are not to be recognized for their human nature, insofar as their wish to have a loving, romantic relationship with another person of the same gender and sex orientation. Just as black slaves in antebellum United States could suffer from having their families torn apart at the whim of whites through unjust laws, homosexuals in United States can have their relationships and families torn apart at the whim of homophobes through unjust laws.

It's a vicious, cruel circle -- homophobes berate and denigrate homosexuals for seemingly not wanting to embrace so-called family values, yet homophobic laws prevent homosexuals from even enjoying the basic right to establish their own relationships and families. The only way homosexuals can do so, is to enter into such relationships with someone of the opposite gender who is straight. This is grossly unjust and inhumane, in that it attempts to force homosexuals to strip themselves of their own sense of who they are, in order to enjoy any artificial semblance of basic rights to association and intimate life. In other words: "You can have your own legally-protected relationship and establish your own family but you must choose between your right to your own conscience or your right association or intimate life."

[Velociryx]

Never having attended the gay pride parade I wouldnt know. Perhaps you can tell me, Vel



THAT was beautiful.

Walked into it perfectly. *shakes head*

-=Vel=-

[MrFun]

It's also ridiculous to claim that we all have to behave like unthinking clones in order to be entitled to equal rights. As I have said before, diversity and equal rights ought to go hand-in-hand.

[Velociryx]

Question for Mr. Fun:

If all of the things you are saying are true, then how is it that some of the greatest artists (of any medium) in HISTORY were well known, well documented homosexuals?

Does this not stand in direct contention with your claims of the homosexual as almost universally reviled, and further, does it not beg the question how these remarkable individuals were able to accomplish such a feat?

I'm asking the question out of genuine curiosity, by the way....not as an attempt to bait you.

Just so you know.



-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

It's also ridiculous to claim that we all have to behave like unthinking clones in order to be entitled to equal rights. As I have said before, diversity and equal rights ought to go hand-in-hand.

Where did I make that claim? Please....quote me. I'm anxious to see.

And in the meantime, read above re: artists and such, who were well respected and even revered, and yes, homosexual.

Without a parade, even.



-=Vel=-

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Question for Mr. Fun:

If all of the things you are saying are true, then how is it that some of the greatest artists (of any medium) in HISTORY were well known, well documented homosexuals?

Does this not stand in direct contention with your claims of the homosexual as almost universally reviled, and further, does it not beg the question how these remarkable individuals were able to accomplish such a feat?

I'm asking the question out of genuine curiosity, by the way....not as an attempt to bait you.

Just so you know.



-=Vel=-

In case you haven't noticed, Hollywood is a much more liberal, and different subculture from that of other sectors of American society.

Film awards and actor awards that have rewarded gay-oriented films does not necessarily reflect broader social acceptance of homosexuals in United States.

And while I have used an example to point out how homosexuals have been, and continue to be, dehumanized, I did not claim this is absolutely universal.

But you made a nice attempt to dodge the more profound questions of basic right to association, intimate life, and moral identity.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Velociryx
It's also ridiculous to claim that we all have to behave like unthinking clones in order to be entitled to equal rights. As I have said before, diversity and equal rights ought to go hand-in-hand.

Where did I make that claim? Please....quote me. I'm anxious to see.

Spec is making the claim more so than you in that we should all be alike in order to enjoy equal rights.

[Velociryx]

In case you haven't noticed, Hollywood is a much more liberal, and different subculture from that of other sectors of American society.

Film awards and actor awards that have rewarded gay-oriented films does not necessarily reflect broader social acceptance of homosexuals in United States.

And while I have used an example to point out how homosexuals have been, and continue to be, dehumanized, I did not claim this is absolutely universal.

But you made a nice attempt to dodge the more profound questions of basic right to association, intimate life, and moral identity.

Okay, first....stop being so defensive. ESPECIALLY around me. I'm hardly your enemy, and nothing I've said in this thread should make you think so. You want to march in a Gay Pride Parade...hey man, that's cool. I think it works against your organization's stated goals, but if you feel the need, go for it!

Second, yes, being that I am neither blind nor mentally deficient, I am aware that Hollywood is a good bit more liberal than many, if not most places, but I'm talking about way back, before there even WAS a Hollywood.

In its absense, and given your position that homosexuals are, were, and have been widely reviled, how do you explain the fact that pre-hollywood, a remarkable number of our most cherished authors, poets, painters, thinkers and dreamers were well documented (or at the very least, strongly suspected of being) homosexual? - I would imagine that if the fact of their homosexuality was as big an obstacle as you have presented it to be (in the larger public eye) that their work would have been ridiculed, but this is not what occured.

It's not a dodge, it's a fair question, and one that I gather you have not given much thought to, based on the defensive nature of your reply.

-=Vel=-

[Spec]

Originally posted by MrFun



Spec is making the claim more so than you in that we should all be alike in order to enjoy equal rights.

That's false. I'm making the claim that we should all ACT alike in order to enjoy equal rights. Acting different or creating special events for people only increases the difference between us all.

Spec.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spec


That's false. I'm making the claim that we should all ACT alike in order to enjoy equal rights. Acting different or creating special events for people only increases the difference between us all.

Spec.

well at least we dont have to clean for Passover, then.


Vive la difference!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Velociryx
- I would imagine that if the fact of their homosexuality was as big an obstacle as you have presented it to be (in the larger public eye) that their work would have been ridiculed, but this is not what occured.
-=Vel=-

Youve never actually read a bio of Walt Whitman, have you?