Gay activists to set up Stockyards kissing booth

[Asher]

Patty has backed himself into a corner with his stupidity and now he's just amping up the rhetoric so he can play the "hahah I was trolled you card" and try to get out of this. ****ing pathetic.

The calling me a bigot stuff was just the first round of that.

Patty's been demolished, nothing more to see here.

[MRT144]

You really ought to go back to school and figure out what the word "universally" means. They obviously didn't teach you that.

But he clarified later that only gay pride parades that are universally inclusive to the audience backfire. The ones that involve gays parading around the gay ghetto in front of other gays while in drag are fine by him.

[Patroklos]

How the **** am I being a bigot?

This has already been made abundantly clear to you, with quotes. I am not responsible for helping you overcome your mental handicaps.

You're moving the goalposts now. Your beef is with selective coverage from journalists, not the events themselves.

You can't call someone intellectually dishonest when you're moving the ****ing goalposts in a discussion.

I did no such thing. All I said is that flamboyant displays were self defeating in the cause of advancing gay rights. I made no distiction between people who are unsuspectingly becoming party to such events (the point of the OP event) or people who see selected images on TV. The point stands regardless of how such displays are communicated.

However, the point of the OP event is to stage it in a percieved hostile area to force exposure in the cause of acceptance. It has nothing to do with people voluntarily attending it as far as the stated purpose of the event.

The only position I have in this thread, and it has been flawlessly communicated as such for all except those with a motivation to be combative like you, is that such events are not going to accomplish the stated goal and may even hinder it while the methods I suggested instead are far more condusive to achieving the stated goal; Acceptance of and thus the achievement of equal gay rights.

Get the **** out of here. It's not a strawman, it's a direct implication of what you said.

No, its what you took from it because you are a disengenuous ass hole. I said "The best way to change perceptions of people's minds is for any oppressed minority to live their life as everyone else does/they want."

The actual position Asher, which is blindingly obvious and you actual undertand but are too chicken **** to admit it (which is normal for you when wrong), is that most gay people are just like anyone else for all intents and purposes. This is in fact a major theme of the gay rights movements. In fact there are billboards all over my city with this theme. And its true. In general you would never know a person is gay simply by hanging out with them.

In addition to that, live your life the way you (they, as in the gay person) wants to as well. Again, most homosexuals are indistiguishable from heterosexuals people in every relevant way. They want to live that way. In other words you don't have to be a drag queen to be gay. And thats not a lesson for gays, that is a lesson for straight people and its one they will not learn if their only exposure to gays is via flamboyant displays intentionally thrust upon them whether it be the actions of gay groups themselves (the OP) or wherever else they see it (news, movies, whatever).

You just said the best way to "change perceptions of people's minds" (what a mind**** of a statement that is, by the way) is to "live their life as everyone else does". How is this NOT saying that black people "accomplished integration" by living as white people do?

Its not saying that, because its not saying that. Unless by "living like white people" you mean going to whatever store you want, riding in whatever seat on the bus you like, living in whatever neighborhood you like, or attending school and doing it all as a normal function of your existance as opposed to some special event. White people do in fact do all those things, but only an idiot like yourself would call those things "living like white people."

I just did. Look above.

No, you didn't. Nothing you have quoted even remotely approches saying what you ascribe to it.

You sure as hell did. If you weren't monumentally ****ing stupid, you'd have been able to read the text above what you wrote here. It showed you making the statement that people are judging those in the parades. In fact, it's a fundamental tenet of your argument for why you think the parades are "backfiring" -- that people see these parades and judge people. So to claim you didn't allude to such people is ridiculous.

Sorry Asher, I never once said "people who go to gay pride" parades are anything. In fact I never once mentioned that group of people. The group of people I have mentioned are those who are exposed to them without intent on their part, which is the whole point of the OP event.

[Asher]

I'm not going to bother reading your post because there are only two possibilities:

1) You have suddenly and inexplicably become insanely stupid
2) You ****ed up and have dug a hole and are now employing the make-the-argument-as-ridiculous-as-possible-and-pass-it-off-as-a-troll technique.

Either way: FAIL.

[Patroklos]

You really ought to go back to school and figure out what the word "universally" means. They obviously didn't teach you that.

I normally don't have to converse with morons who deliberatly divorce themselves from context. Its actually hard to see how you accomplished that given the context of the thread is mandated by the OP, but then again nobody should be surprised by the mental gymnasitcs you are willing to perform to make yourself look like an idiot.

Patty has backed himself into a corner with his stupidity and now he's just amping up the rhetoric so he can play the "hahah I was trolled you card" and try to get out of this. ****ing pathetic.

Trolled? Asher, the pathetic posts that constitute your participation in this thread don't even constitute that. You have yet to produce a coherent position which is unsurprising given your track record in that regard in general and that you are laboring under so many false assumptions and imagined insults.

The calling me a bigot stuff was just the first round of that.

Quoted and proved, which is more than we can say about any of your accusations.

So, we are still waiting, which one of my positions is obsolete again?

Patty's been demolished, nothing more to see here.

Never really a hard rule, but given the quote above nobody could possibly be confused as to who has a solid position in this thread.

But he clarified later that only gay pride parades that are universally inclusive to the audience backfire. The ones that involve gays parading around the gay ghetto in front of other gays while in drag are fine by him.

Whether they are fine by me is irrelevant, the important question is whether they accomplish their intended goal. Gay events specifically held to create movement solidarity or whatever are of course only judged by the reaction of the participants. Events specifically held to promote awarness and acceptance should of course only be judged by the reaction of the intended audience (in the OPs case, not voluntary attendees).

Though I have no doubt the OP event very well may have very positive effects for the the participants, that isn't why it is being held where it is.

[Patroklos]

I'm not going to bother reading your post because there are only two possibilities:

1) You have suddenly and inexplicably become insanely stupid
2) You ****ed up and have dug a hole and are now employing the make-the-argument-as-ridiculous-as-possible-and-pass-it-off-as-a-troll technique.

Either way: FAIL.

Or in other words having once again been confronted by a perfectly logical position which you made a knee jerk reaction to which was wholly inappropriate and founded on nothing more but your bigotry and generally hateful personality, you run away with your tail between your legs not once having presented anything that even remotely approaches a logically consistant position.

In fact, anyone reading this thread has to wonder what the hell you were ever talking about, it is just a string of disjointed incoherent nonsense. Buisness as usual and not at all surprising coming from you, though. I hope your ego isn't too bruised :sad:

[Asher]

Did you not read what I said?
I'm not reading what you said.

Pro tip: Context doesn't matter when you use universal qualifiers. Look it up. If I say that universally, all Navy men take it up the ass and have their wives use strap-ons, it doesn't matter if the context of the thread is about Navy men who post on Apolyton only.

[MrFun]

It would be beneficial if you would respond to what I say as opposed to whatever figment of your imagination you invent in place of what I say so you can feign indignation.

Nothing about flamboyant is directly related to homosexuality except in your own mind. Birhter/Tea Party/Anarchist/Truthers/Code Pink are all equally flamboyant in their demostrations at times are in each instance that asshatery is usually self defeating to their cause.

Right - because in this thread about gays and gay pride events, the word "flamboyant" in our discussion has nothing to do with gays and gay pride events? That is what we're talking about here after all - not Tea Party, anarchists, or what have you - but about gays and gay pride events.

Anyone understands that the word "flamboyant" can mean different things and apply to different things - it depends on what people are discussing. And here, we are discussing gays and gay pride events and the different perceptions that people have about them.

And as for your snide remark that I "feign" indignation - that's simply not true.

[Asher]

Don't bother MrFun, Patty is in his own little world. He's probably genuinely thinking he was being logical and sane in this thread. I have no words.

[Lorizael]

Wow, this is one of the most reasonable points I've ever seen Patroklos attempt to make, and people are still going ape**** on him. Let's calm things down, folks.

[Asher]

Wow, this is one of the most reasonable points I've ever seen Patroklos attempt to make, and people are still going ape**** on him. Let's calm things down, folks.

You think this is a reasonable point:

And you wonder why gay pride parades universally backfire

Or how about his characterization of gay pride parade participants:

flamboyant drag queens exhibitionists

or how about this comment?

The best way to change perceptions of people's minds is for any oppressed minority to live their life as everyone else does.

Which if we go back to the 1960s is directly akin to saying the best way to change the perceptions of people's minds is for black people to live their life as "everyone else" (read: white people) do.

You're on record that all of these are reasonable?

[Lorizael]

As happens a lot with you, Asher, you're misinterpreting what he's saying because you're too emotionally invested in the issue. It's pretty clear that Patroklos isn't bigoted against gays, that he doesn't want to repress them, and that he's perfectly fine with them living their lives as they choose. He simply believes that there are better ways to gain acceptance than through flamboyant public displays.

[Imran Siddiqui]

He DID say that gay pride parades universally backfire though. It wasn't Asher who made such a blanket statement.

[Patroklos]

Right - because in this thread about gays and gay pride events, the word "flamboyant" in our discussion has nothing to do with gays and gay pride events? That is what we're talking about here after all - not Tea Party, anarchists, or what have you - but about gays and gay pride events.

When did I say it could not be used to describe to describe gay pride events? What you are missing is the very next sentance where I make it evident that I am talking about just flamboyant gay pride events (ie not all gay pride events are flamboyant) and specifically flamboyant events with the goal of that expressed in the OP.

You are the one assuming I some how extrapolated it to all gay pride events despit laguage specifically selected to make such an interpretation impossible once MRT made it clear to me I would have to qualify.

This is very simply Mr. Fun. Events that are flamboyant or exhibitionist in general usually don’t help a cause (see the examples I mentioned). The event in the OP is such an event, and it is probably going to backfire in its intention “to get the message across” that gays deserve the same rights as straights.

Anyone understands that the word "flamboyant" can mean different things and apply to different things - it depends on what people are discussing. And here, we are discussing gays and gay pride events and the different perceptions that people have about them.

Exactly, and given the way I was using WTF is your problem with it?

And as for your snide remark that I "feign" indignation - that's simply not true.

You could just be innocently dim I suppose, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.

[Patroklos]

He DID say that gay pride parades universally backfire though. It wasn't Asher who made such a blanket statement.

I did it in the context of discussing gay pride events that are used to gain acceptance and advance the cause of gay rights, which is of course what the OP is about, which requires the convincing of voters. When MRT pointed out that the context could be lost for dim readers, I made a very clear post as to what exactly I was saying.

This, BTW, all transpired before Asher got his panties in a wod. So in other words, all his outrage is manufactured for his own perverse consumption.