NationStates Jolt Archive

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/01/011806europe.htm

Well among all these threads where you see homophobes give piss poor excuses for homophobia and where they try to latch on to Gay Pride events, conveniently omitting that every day is Straight Pride day wherever you go (I can't go five minutes outside without having heterosexuality shoved down my throat, and I'll tell you it's not as pleasant as it sounds at all), I think it's nice of the European Parliament to once and for all go "Hey, there is no excuse for homophobia, so, have a cup of STFU." :)

They actually do things?

If I had a dime for every time I saw some form of "leave us gays alone" on the web, I'd buy my own island made out of platinum caddilacs.

I'm all for ending the hate against any and all minority groups but only if they please PLEASE stop doing the 'pity us since we/our ancestors are/were oppressed' thing.

I mean, I know that in places there is a lot of gay bashing, but dammit all I'm not the one doing it so why do I have to hear about it everywhere!? You guys need to take the fight to its door and bitch out the people who are actively against you, or to those who can do something about it - which is probably what happened with parliment there. Good for whoever it was who got them to do that.

Long live the Union!

If I had a dime for every time I saw some form of "leave us gays alone" on the web, I'd buy my own island made out of platinum caddilacs.

I'm all for ending the hate against any and all minority groups but only if they please PLEASE stop doing the 'pity us since we/our ancestors are/were oppressed' thing.

I mean, I know that in places there is a lot of gay bashing, but dammit all I'm not the one doing it so why do I have to hear about it everywhere!? You guys need to take the fight to its door and bitch out the people who are actively against you, or to those who can do something about it - which is probably what happened with parliment there. Good for whoever it was who got them to do that.

The reason you need to hear about it everywhere is that EVERYONE needs to hear about it. You don't have to get worked up about it, though, if it is not directed at you. I am sure you hear about other things all the time as well that do not directly impact you, but if those things were not being mentioned, we would be in much worse shape than we are. The holocaust went on for far too long because people just didn't talk about it.

This is why you hear about it everywhere, because efforts are being made to educate people on the issues to try and combat prejudice. Some of those efforts may annoy you, but they are quite necessary.

Ever considered though that keeping it constantly in the foreground could be harming the cause?

Case in point, the current Republican/Christian control of the US. Constantly rubbing in homosexuality will just get the extreme right on the defensive. Unlike myself, politicians don't have the luxory of acceptance (it could lose votes from the extreme rightist voters!)

The holocaust was killing people by the hundreds in horrible ways.
Homophobia doesn't kill near that many people in near as horrid ways (that I've seen - again, I don't watch TV)

But what it all boils down to in the end is love, right? It's about a man loving a man or a woman loving a woman.. Sexual relations that honestly don't need to leave the bedroom. If everyone just shut up about what they do on their own time, it wouldn't matter to anyone because nobody would know.

The holocaust was killing people by the hundreds in horrible ways.
Homophobia doesn't kill near that many people in near as horrid ways (that I've seen - again, I don't watch TV.

The holocaust targeted gay people as well. And, no, thank you, I will not stop being myself because it bugs you that I am myself visibly.

The holocaust targeted gay people as well. And, no, thank you, I will not stop being myself because it bugs you that I am myself visibly.
So it's part of yourself to tell everyone that you're gay?

WHY?!

I'm straight but it never comes up in conversation unless someone starts a conversation about sexuality (which most of the time is one of these kinds of threads).

I'm not saying to stop being who you are... but honestly, if you can't keep your sex life at home with your S.O., then gay or straight there's something wrong with you :P

and on the holocaust.. so you wouldnt care as much if it didn't target gays? It doesn't matter who was targeted! Gay, black, or jew! The fact is that people were dying! Weather or not they're gay doesn't make it any more wrong to kill them than anyone else who got murdered in these camps.

If I had a dime for every time I saw some form of "leave us gays alone" on the web, I'd buy my own island made out of platinum caddilacs.

And if I had a dime for every time someone tried to go all "you're too visible, back in the closet with you! - oh, but I'm not homophobic at all and I don't oppress you, I just don't want to see you" I'd be nuking that island of yours to rid the world of the ugliness that is platinum and Cadillacs.

The reason you need to hear about it everywhere is that EVERYONE needs to hear about it. You don't have to get worked up about it, though, if it is not directed at you. I am sure you hear about other things all the time as well that do not directly impact you, but if those things were not being mentioned, we would be in much worse shape than we are. The holocaust went on for far too long because people just didn't talk about it.

This is why you hear about it everywhere, because efforts are being made to educate people on the issues to try and combat prejudice. Some of those efforts may annoy you, but they are quite necessary.Emphasis is mine.

but isn't that what FASS originally complained about in his first post.

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/01/011806europe.htm

Well among all these threads where you see homophobes give piss poor excuses for homophobia and where they try to latch on to Gay Pride events, conveniently omitting that every day is Straight Pride day wherever you go (I can't go five minutes outside without having heterosexuality shoved down my throat, and I'll tell you it's not as pleasant as it sounds at all), I think it's nice of the European Parliament to once and for all go "Hey, there is no excuse for homophobia, so, have a cup of STFU." :)

You can say it, you can inform people about it, but to force it on others is wrong. Even if the message is a good one.

I have no problems with Gay or Lesbians, Bi or Transexuals. but to have anyone parade it out in the open and not expect any kind of negative feedback is rather selfish on their part also. (also I do know alot of people who don't "Parade" their sexual orientation out in the open, so this isn't a Blanket Generalization.)

I have problems with what they did. After all, they are trying to force people how to think. While it is for a good cause, imagine if you reverse it and have it said that all countries have to except Heterosexual only relationships and condemn anyone promoting Homosexual marriages.

While you may say "But that is preventing Equal Rights, this legislation allows for equallity." it is also preventing people from speaking out against what they think is wrong. if they want to change the country, then they need to change their Government and then it's the government's job to enact and enforce such laws.

in other words, This legislation is a form of Thought control and censorship.

And if I had a dime for every time someone tried to go all "you're too visible, back in the closet with you! - oh, but I'm not homophobic at all and I don't oppress you, I just don't want to see you" I'd be nuking that island of yours to rid the world of the ugliness that is platinum and Cadillacs.
so you don't mind "Craming" Homosexuality down other people's throats but object to having Heterosexuality being "Crammed" down yours?

While I will defend your rights to say what you want, I also defend the right for others to react to what you say.

So it's part of yourself to tell everyone that you're gay?

Straight people do it all the fucking time.

WHY?!

Why not?

I'm straight but it never comes up in conversation unless someone starts a conversation about sexuality (which most of the time is one of these kinds of threads).

Oh, please. You'll bring up your girlfriend, or how that girl looks nice, or how your mom and dad are and so on and so forth. The pervasion in society of straight people proclaiming their heterosexuality is so omnipresent, you don't even notice. Turn on the TV and see how many signs of heterosexuality you can see within a five minute period, and then tell me with a straight face that heterosexuals aren't screaming at the top of their lungs that they are straight.

I'm not saying to stop being who you are... but honestly, if you can't keep your sex life at home with your S.O., then gay or straight there's something wrong with you :P

There is more to sexual orientation than sex life. Why are you so obsessed with that aspect of it, when you aren't with the straight one?

Ok, Fass, if that's how it's goning to be, then i'm going to get a shirt that says "I'm straight and I'm going to be loud about it" and i'm going to go around declaring my sexuality to everyone I meet and talk about how great my heterosexual sex is and then run your ass over with my platinum caddilac island for being a reverse-bigot. You heard me. You're a bigot against anyone with a differing opinion.

Read between the bloody lines. I've got gay and bi friends, they're just not totally freaking rude about it.

In case you didn't know this, talking about sex in public is generally rude. No matter what your orientation is.

Sexuality isn't something to be proud of! Who gives two shits who or what you sleep with? If you love them and they love you, congrats! Not many people are lucky enough to find love... But oh no, that's not good enough for you, is it? Gotta spread the word to all with ears that you're here, you're queer, and you're LOUD!

Can't you just appreciate that you've got someone to hold at night and be happy with that? I mean, if LOVE isn't enough for you, you have my pity.

And if I had a dime for every time someone tried to go all "you're too visible, back in the closet with you! - oh, but I'm not homophobic at all and I don't oppress you, I just don't want to see you" I'd be nuking that island of yours to rid the world of the ugliness that is platinum and Cadillacs.
just because you're different from everyone, doesn't mean you have to parad it around, even if the majority does. i'm jewish and i used to want to kill people over christmas and easter because it got crammed down my throat, but i'm not going to go around parading my religion because everyone else does. i've learnt that you will see the things that aremost common, but that it isn't necessarily a form of opression

just because you're different from everyone, doesn't mean you have to parad it around, even if the majority does. i'm jewish and i used to want to kill people over christmas and easter because it got crammed down my throat, but i'm not going to go around parading my religion because everyone else does. i've learnt that you will see the things that aremost common, but that it isn't necessarily a form of opression

Define "parade". If you are talking about men dancing on boats inserting dildos in eachothers asses - I agree. If you are talking about two boys kissing on a bench in a park.. well, depends on how you view a boy and a girl doing the same.

so you don't mind "Craming" Homosexuality down other people's throats but object to having Heterosexuality being "Crammed" down yours?

Way to miss the entire point. Heterosexuals go around all day cramming their straightness down people's throats and nobody goes "hmm, they crammed heterosexuality down my throat!!!! omfg, how dare they!!!" but when gay people do it, all of a sudden you get to hear the incessant bitching about it.

My point is: You dish it out, you fucking take it. Unless you are bitching about all the ways our culture promotes heterosexuality and shoves that down our throats, I don't want to see you bitching about gay people doing it, expecially seeing as straight people do it so much more and to such a larger extent.

While I will defend your rights to say what you want, I also defend the right for others to react to what you say.

How utterly superfluous, since I wasn't trying to limit anyone's speech. Again, you miss the entire point.

just because you're different from everyone, doesn't mean you have to parad it around, even if the majority does. i'm jewish and i used to want to kill people over christmas and easter because it got crammed down my throat, but i'm not going to go around parading my religion because everyone else does. i've learnt that you will see the things that aremost common, but that it isn't necessarily a form of opression

But you see, whatever you do, every time you show your difference, not even during a parade, you are going to get noticed more by the others who form the norm than when they themselves express their "normal" commonality. And you will branded a "parader."

That's the whole point - one fucking day of parades somehow manages to eclipse the rest of the 364 days when straight people have their parade called "society."

Define "parade". If you are talking about men dancing on boats inserting dildos in eachothers asses - I agree. If you are talking about two boys kissing on a bench in a park.. well, depends on how you view a boy and a girl doing the same.
in respect to the kissing, it's no big deal, provided they're not doing it in a socially unnaceptable time or place, like in the middle of a conversation. and as far as my religious example goes, i think you understand what i mean by parading christmas and easter

"Straight people do it all the fucking time."

Um.. TV doesn't count. Here's some news.. Things that get put on TV like the news and such are films of real people, gasp and alarm. And the stories about the nuclear family like sitcoms and stuff are like that because for the longest time, families were just that: mommy, daddy, kids - if it were a gay family, how would there be kids? Only in recent history have states begun to let homosexuals adopt, and even then there's beeen controvercy.. because gasp and alarm the Christian right wingers are in charge and one of their policies is being anti gay. But you probably knew that.

"Why not?"

Like I said in another post. Public sex talk is rude, but then again maybe I'm just old fashioned.

"Oh, please. You'll bring up your girlfriend, or how that girl looks nice, or how your mom and dad are and so on and so forth. The pervasion in society of straight people proclaiming their heterosexuality is so omnipresent, you don't even notice. Turn on the TV and see how many signs of heterosexuality you can see within a five minute period, and then tell me with a straight face that heterosexuals aren't screaming at the top of their lungs that they are straight."

First off, I'm not a guy. And guess what else? HETEROSEXUALS ARENT ALL OUT TO GET YOU!!!

You want to complain about how there are so many straight people on TV? You think that every time a man takes a woman as his lawful wedded wife he's doing it to spite you and yours? Hell no. That's probably the last thing on his mind. He's thinking "I love this person and we're going to spend the rest of our lives together, maybe have kids, retire to a nice sunny beach, watch the grandkids play..." Or he's thinking of the honeymoon. either way, the last thing on his mind at that point is pissing off gay people.

And if you're thinking that having children by means of heterosexual copulation is anti-gay, well sorry to disappoint you but God/nature/whatever you blame for the universe wasn't thinking "I will spite homosexuals by making reproduction occur between males and females!"

"There is more to sexual orientation than sex life. Why are you so obsessed with that aspect of it, when you aren't with the straight one?"

That's my whole argument: That the gay people who have been raising my ire lately are the ones who never shut up about the sex aspect. I have gay friends and bi friends and they hug and kiss their partners out in the open. That I don't care about. They're happy, and I'm happy they're happy. And they aren't bothering anyone. They go to work, watch TV, sing, dance, eat, sleep, and feel emotions just like anyone else without having to mention "I'm gay" every few minutes.

Ok, Fass, if that's how it's goning to be, then i'm going to get a shirt that says "I'm straight and I'm going to be loud about it" and i'm going to go around declaring my sexuality to everyone I meet and talk about how great my heterosexual sex is and then run your ass over with my platinum caddilac island for being a reverse-bigot. You heard me. You're a bigot against anyone with a differing opinion.

Read between the bloody lines. I've got gay and bi friends, they're just not totally freaking rude about it.

In case you didn't know this, talking about sex in public is generally rude. No matter what your orientation is.

Sexuality isn't something to be proud of! Who gives two shits who or what you sleep with? If you love them and they love you, congrats! Not many people are lucky enough to find love... But oh no, that's not good enough for you, is it? Gotta spread the word to all with ears that you're here, you're queer, and you're LOUD!

Can't you just appreciate that you've got someone to hold at night and be happy with that? I mean, if LOVE isn't enough for you, you have my pity.

And you have my pity for, as I wrote in my OP, latching on to a parade and neglecting all the rude straight people who do that the rest of the year. The one day of a gay parade is enough for you to go all "omfg, they're such paraders!!!".

But you see, whatever you do, every time you show your difference, not even during a parade, you are going to get noticed more by the others who form the norm than when they themselves express their "normal" commonality. And you will branded a "parader."

That's the whole point - one fucking day of parades somehow manages to eclipse the rest of the 364 days when straight people have their parade called "society."
i agree that you are allowed to show your sexuality, but sometimes people go to far in their counteractions to the normal parading.
as far as parading goes in general, i disapprove of it from all people, i don't really care what anyone else thinks about my choices and i normally don't care about theirs, why do they have to shove it in my face?

Define "parade". If you are talking about men dancing on boats inserting dildos in eachothers asses - I agree. If you are talking about two boys kissing on a bench in a park.. well, depends on how you view a boy and a girl doing the same.


That basically sums up my point right there!

Straight people go about their days doing what they do without a second thought about harming the gay community.

The gay people at their parades are doing so specifically to get a reaction out of people.

I mean, what do you want, Fass? Do you want the world to be all gay so you aren't feeling so isolated anymore? Would it make you feel better if I went and licked a carpet right now? Stop taking other peoples ways of life as an affront to your sexual orientation. I don't take yours as an affront to mine until you start arguing over how horrible I am because I have a life mate of an opposing gender. :P

Um.. TV doesn't count. Here's some news.. Things that get put on TV like the news and such are films of real people, gasp and alarm. And the stories about the nuclear family like sitcoms and stuff are like that because for the longest time, families were just that: mommy, daddy, kids - if it were a gay family, how would there be kids?

Well, then if not, go out to a café. A square. A concert. Whatever. And balk at the straight parade. Open a book, open a children's book. You'll see it.

Oh, and my gayness makes me in no way sterile. If I wanted to breed, I could do so at any time.

Like I said in another post. Public sex talk is rude, but then again maybe I'm just old fashioned.

And what does sex talk have to do with people being gay? You are so blinded by the sex aspect of it, it's funny. Ask yourself why.

First off, I'm not a guy. And guess what else? HETEROSEXUALS ARENT ALL OUT TO GET YOU!!!

Neither are gay people. Oh, this is where I tell you to learn to use quote boxes. Editing your post is not my job as I attempt to answer it.

You want to complain about how there are so many straight people on TV? You think that every time a man takes a woman as his lawful wedded wife he's doing it to spite you and yours? Hell no. That's probably the last thing on his mind. He's thinking "I love this person and we're going to spend the rest of our lives together, maybe have kids, retire to a nice sunny beach, watch the grandkids play..." Or he's thinking of the honeymoon. either way, the last thing on his mind at that point is pissing off gay people.

Precisely!!!!!! And neither do gay people! But you somehow assume we do - that the parades are there to spite you, that the gay tokens on TV are there to spite you, that the gay people asking to marry are there to spite you.

And if you're thinking that having children by means of heterosexual copulation is anti-gay, well sorry to disappoint you but God/nature/whatever you blame for the universe wasn't thinking "I will spite homosexuals by making reproduction occur between males and females!"

And if you think any form of gayness which is not shoved in that closet of silence you so venerate is anti-straight, then you need to snap out of it. You're annoyed when gay people act gay? Well, then, imagine my annoyance at straight people when they act straight and then turn around to go "but all those fags talk about is sex, sex, sex, sex!!!!!"

That's my whole argument: That the gay people who have been raising my ire lately are the ones who never shut up about the sex aspect. I have gay friends and bi friends and they hug and kiss their partners out in the open. That I don't care about. They're happy, and I'm happy they're happy. And they aren't bothering anyone. They go to work, watch TV, sing, dance, eat, sleep, and feel emotions just like anyone else without having to mention "I'm gay" every few minutes.

Of course, as long as they are silent little fags and dykes that don't dare perturb your, oh, so tolerant little world by actually being and acting gay, then you're OK with them. Well, you know what? Fuck that.

Long live the Union eh Fass ;)

This does make me feel warm and fuzzy. Combining Commission action with actively supporting Gay Rights = win. And Poland is an anathema and they should know it.

i agree that you are allowed to show your sexuality, but sometimes people go to far in their counteractions to the normal parading.
as far as parading goes in general, i disapprove of it from all people, i don't really care what anyone else thinks about my choices and i normally don't care about theirs, why do they have to shove it in my face?

Start asking the same question of straight people, then come back to me.

Sorry, but I do not really get what is so "shove in my face" about parades, really...

The people demonstrating against pride parades are usually the ones that come from afar, from their often rural homes, driving into the big city with the specific purpose of taking offence to something that is happening there. It isn't the people who actually live along the route but the anti-gay organisations. So, really, it is a little pathetic in my opinion. Something like going out on the street and trying to get people to step on your toes so you can hit them in the face.

Start asking the same question of straight people, then come back to me.
the question is: should you respond to an overreaction with another? it just doesn't work like that, don't you see?

the question is: should you respond to an overreaction with another? it just doesn't work like that, don't you see?

And you don't get to only bitch about one aspect of it and turn a blind eye to the other, exponentially larger one. It just doesn't work like that, don't you see?

If this had been exclusively about the "old" EU member states. like Germany, France, Britain, etc. I think I would have sighed in exasberation.
But reading the article, the debate and the resulting resolution were targeted at the open and legalised homophobis in some of the new member states, and as such I fully support it. I hope they get he message and make an attempt at turning their legislation and society a little more tolerant, or at least a little less openly hostile against homosexuals.

Way to miss the entire point.nope, I nailed it right on the head.

Heterosexuals go around all day cramming their straightness down people's throats and nobody goes "hmm, they crammed heterosexuality down my throat!!!! omfg, how dare they!!!" how? Lets just look at the NS boards in three pages 3 possibly 4 threads supporting Homosexuality while maybe one thread to support heterosexuality. wow... yep Heterosexuality is really being crammed down our throats.

Publicly showing their affection? got no problem with two men or two women kissing in public, but I do draw the line to active fondling... even if it's between one man and one woman.

but when gay people do it, all of a sudden you get to hear to hear the incessant bitching about it.try and take in the tone of when Gay people do it. Sometimes it's polite but most of the time its condensending, hatefilled and as subtle as a brick to the head.

My point is: You dish it out, you fucking take it. take your own advice too. Unless you are bitching about all the ways our culture promotes heterosexuality and shoves that down our throats, I don't want to see you bitching about gay people doing it, expecially seeing as straight people do it so much more and to such a larger extent.Hmmm... yep, missed all those news stories about promoting Heterosexual Marriages, or all those news stories about heterosexuals being victimized.

and for the record, I don't complain about Homosexuals fighting for their rights. it's when they start spouting "I can't go five minutes outside without having heterosexuality shoved down my throat." As if they don't do the same thing to others. That's what I object to. Sure you have Gay Pride Day. but to say that Hetero day is everyday else is blatently wrong.

How utterly superfluous, since I wasn't trying to limit anyone's speech. Again, you miss the entire point.and you missed the point in my argument, I didn't say YOU were limiting others speeches but the law you're promoting does.

it allows the EU to impose sanctions against a country for the laws they passed.

if those former communist countries wanted to accept Homosexuality, then the people would elect those that would work towards those goals. Have them make the changes within by using the Democratic process. but to have an outside entity force them to change their Government's thinking is saying that their Government doesn't work without giving it a chance to work.

Hm.. yes.. NO QUOTE BOXES FOR YOU! :P

Moving right along...


"Precisely!!!!!! And neither do gay people! But you somehow assume we do - that the parades are there to spite you, that the gay tokens on TV are there to spite you, that the gay people asking to marry are there to spite you."

The parades ARE there out of spite. People are running around naked and brandishing phalluses... you think that isn't offensive? If a straight person were doing that I'd be offended.

And if you'd open your miopic little eyes and read more than just the parts that anger you you'd note the parts about how I don't care if gay people are on TV and I don't care if they get married, and I don't care if they kiss in front of me!


And quit trying to go baco to that 'you're obsessed with sex' crap... News flash.. homoSEXuality is a SEXual orientation. The basis being that you're attracted to those of the same SEX... an attraction that leads to.. ding ding ding! Sex!

"Oh, and my gayness makes me in no way sterile. If I wanted to breed, I could do so at any time. "

But wouldn't that count as cheating on your husband/boyfriend? Or perhaps you're of the type that consider all gay males in a big open relationship with one another - now those I must say I have a problem with. I'm not a fan of folks who sleep around, gay or straight.. but that's for another argument :P

"Of course, as long as they are silent little fags and dykes that don't dare perturb your, oh, so tolerant little world by actually being and acting gay, then you're OK with them. Well, you know what? Fuck that."

Christ... You don't get it. READ THE WORTS I TYPE FOR CRAPS SAKE!

I DONT GIVE A FLYING SHIT HOW GAY YOU ARE AS LONG AS YOU DON'T PARADE AROUND WITH JELLY DONGS AND PROCLAIM YOUR EXISTANCE EVERY FIVE MINUTES WITH THE PURPOSE OF ANGERING NON GAYS!

Go back a few posts... Here' I'll quote myself: "You want to complain about how there are so many straight people on TV? You think that every time a man takes a woman as his lawful wedded wife he's doing it to spite you and yours? Hell no. That's probably the last thing on his mind."

The pride parade has stopped being about gay rights and has started being more about getting to run around naked in numbers so great that they can't arrest you all for indecent exposure.

I'm of the opinion that it makes the gays look bad who just love someone of the same sex and leave it at that.


You trying to hold the argument that being surrounded by straight people is a parade of straight folks is like if I were to complain about how I'm surrounded by white folks and their skin color is offensive because I'm not white. It's not like it'll change anything. Them being white won't make me white, just like people being straight won't make you straight.

You just want something to demonise because you feel oppressed - you're feeling like a stranger in a strange land because in a way you are. You're surrounded by the majority.

I feel the same way sometimes, but it's the other way around. Where I'm from, it's folks like you constantly giving me shit because I'm straight - you villify everything of the opposing orientation... and for what? Does it help you sleep at night to know you've pissed off a straight person?

I mean, if your intention was to make the world more open to homosexuals, you're doing it the completely wrong way. Trying to back the opposition against a wall with slander and putting words in their mouths is a great way to get them on the offensive.

[snip]
The parades ARE there out of spite. People are running around naked and brandishing phalluses... you think that isn't offensive? If a straight person were doing that I'd be offended.

[snip]

The pride parade has stopped being about gay rights and has started being more about getting to run around naked in numbers so great that they can't arrest you all for indecent exposure.

what!?! they actually march naked in those parades?!?

I never knew... perhaps I should see this for myself. (I know some very well built lesbians... maybe they participate in these parades.) ;)

There's nudes on bikes, nudes with bright neon pink spraypaint, even onlookers got into the nudity and just let it all hang out.. it's mostly males though.

I think there's a float with lesbians somewhere in there but I think they were clothed for the most part. Compared to the guys anyway.

There's nudes on bikes, nudes with bright neon pink spraypaint, even onlookers got into the nudity and just let it all hang out.. it's mostly males though.

I think there's a float with lesbians somewhere in there but I think they were clothed for the most part. Compared to the guys anyway.

*lol
I don't know where you live, but the parade here is clothed... I didn't see any dildos, either.

*lol
I don't know where you live, but the parade here is clothed... I didn't see any dildos, either.awww... that's what I thought tho.
We don't have parades here. or at least they're not properly advertised.

then again, I really don't care who you sleep with. My friendships are built on other things besides sexual orientation.

Washington state in the USA.

I don't recall what day pride day is, but they do the same kinds of things during the solstice parade in Freemont. That one does have more naked women in it than men though, but phallus's still abound in one form or another.

then again, I really don't care who you sleep with. My friendships are built on other things besides sexual orientation. Exactly. It has nothing to do with friendship or functioning in society so it shouldn't have to be brought up.

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/01/011806europe.htm

Well among all these threads where you see homophobes give piss poor excuses for homophobia and where they try to latch on to Gay Pride events, conveniently omitting that every day is Straight Pride day wherever you go (I can't go five minutes outside without having heterosexuality shoved down my throat, and I'll tell you it's not as pleasant as it sounds at all), I think it's nice of the European Parliament to once and for all go "Hey, there is no excuse for homophobia, so, have a cup of STFU." :)
Good for them! One of the few things I've heard of note come out of that august body! :D

Washington state in the USA.

I don't recall what day pride day is, but they do the same kinds of things during the solstice parade in Freemont. That one does have more naked women in it than men though, but phallus's still abound in one form or another.

So it's the phalli you have the problem with, but naked women are absolutely ok?

"So it's the phalli you have the problem with, but naked women are absolutely ok?"

I have a problem with naked people in general. I'm of the persuasion that nudity and sexuality are best kept between the lovers and not out in public.. which is what most of my beef was with the local parade in the first place.

I say why be prideful of something like who you choose to love? Saying you have pride in it is like saying it's better than the other ways to be.. which when you think about it is insulting to anyone of any different orientation.

If you love someone, let the person you love know. Who cares what the universe thinks or has to say?

"So it's the phalli you have the problem with, but naked women are absolutely ok?"

I have a problem with naked people in general. I'm of the persuasion that nudity and sexuality are best kept between the lovers and not out in public.. which is what most of my beef was with the local parade in the first place.

I say why be prideful of something like who you choose to love? Saying you have pride in it is like saying it's better than the other ways to be.. which when you think about it is insulting to anyone of any different orientation.

If you love someone, let the person you love know. Who cares what the universe thinks or has to say?

So it's ok as long as they're clothed? Fair enough.

But I think you're wrong regarding the statement that it's irrelevant what the univers has to say about your sexuality.
Sexuality is not and never has been limited to the bedroom. It's something that shapes our entire behaviour, all our interaction with other people and basically the life we live. And society has an immense influence on that.
I don't think Fass was necessarily refering to hetero porn movies when he said you get heterosexuality shoved down your throat anytime you switch on TV, read a book, see and advertisment, go out on the street... it's not exclusively about sex, it's simply about human relationships. It's about the way we regard it as perfectly normal to see a movie about a heterosexual couple meeting and falling in love, it's just a chick flick or a comedy, but as soon as it is about a homosexual couple, the movie suddenly becomes a social study and a political and/or religious issue.
As long as the two movies can't be the same, I think gay pride parades are entirely justified.

It's about the way we regard it as perfectly normal to see a movie about a heterosexual couple meeting and falling in love, it's just a chick flick or a comedy, but as soon as it is about a homosexual couple, the movie suddenly becomes a social study and a political and/or religious issue.
As long as the two movies can't be the same, I think gay pride parades are entirely justified.and to be fair, it's not only the Heterosexuals that keep such types of movies apart.

There have been many movies that touch upon Homosexual/Heterosexual relationships, and wether or not I see one is baised on the same standards I use to see any other movie.

Does the plot interest me? Yes, then I will see the movie. No, then I pass on it.

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/01/011806europe.htm

Well among all these threads where you see homophobes give piss poor excuses for homophobia and where they try to latch on to Gay Pride events, conveniently omitting that every day is Straight Pride day wherever you go (I can't go five minutes outside without having heterosexuality shoved down my throat, and I'll tell you it's not as pleasant as it sounds at all), I think it's nice of the European Parliament to once and for all go "Hey, there is no excuse for homophobia, so, have a cup of STFU." :)

*sigh*

I don't think Fass was necessarily refering to hetero porn movies when he said you get heterosexuality shoved down your throat anytime you switch on TV, read a book, see and advertisment, go out on the street... it's not exclusively about sex, it's simply about human relationships. It's about the way we regard it as perfectly normal to see a movie about a heterosexual couple meeting and falling in love, it's just a chick flick or a comedy, but as soon as it is about a homosexual couple, the movie suddenly becomes a social study and a political and/or religious issue.
As long as the two movies can't be the same, I think gay pride parades are entirely justified.

Kudos! :fluffle:

So it's ok as long as they're clothed? Fair enough.

But I think you're wrong regarding the statement that it's irrelevant what the univers has to say about your sexuality.
Sexuality is not and never has been limited to the bedroom. It's something that shapes our entire behaviour, all our interaction with other people and basically the life we live. And society has an immense influence on that.
I don't think Fass was necessarily refering to hetero porn movies when he said you get heterosexuality shoved down your throat anytime you switch on TV, read a book, see and advertisment, go out on the street... it's not exclusively about sex, it's simply about human relationships. It's about the way we regard it as perfectly normal to see a movie about a heterosexual couple meeting and falling in love, it's just a chick flick or a comedy, but as soon as it is about a homosexual couple, the movie suddenly becomes a social study and a political and/or religious issue.
As long as the two movies can't be the same, I think gay pride parades are entirely justified.Kudos! :fluffle:Fass, is that what you were talking about when you make reference to having "Heterosexuality shoved down one's throat?"

Straight people do it all the fucking time.
Why not?

Oh, please. You'll bring up your girlfriend, or how that girl looks nice, or how your mom and dad are and so on and so forth. The pervasion in society of straight people proclaiming their heterosexuality is so omnipresent, you don't even notice. Turn on the TV and see how many signs of heterosexuality you can see within a five minute period, and then tell me with a straight face that heterosexuals aren't screaming at the top of their lungs that they are straight.


Big diffrence. You are mentioning aspects of your hetorsexual lifestyle. You arnt saying I am straight. If gay people were to talk about their partners, their lifestyle in the same way as hetrosexal people, rather than making a specical case of it.

"Sexuality is not and never has been limited to the bedroom. It's something that shapes our entire behaviour, all our interaction with other people and basically the life we live."

Other than it shaping who we hit on, I disagree.

"anytime you switch on TV, read a book, see and advertisment, go out on the street... it's not exclusively about sex, it's simply about human relationships. It's about the way we regard it as perfectly normal to see a movie about a heterosexual couple meeting and falling in love, it's just a chick flick or a comedy"

And the point I'm making is that it's not intentional throat-shoving as Fass seems to think it is by his replies. I'm saying that the pride parade is VERY intentional.

"but as soon as it is about a homosexual couple, the movie suddenly becomes a social study and a political and/or religious issue."

That is an unfortunate issue. One that I think would disappear in time if both sides backed the hell off. With the gays going STOP HATING US ALL THE TIME! and the rest going SHUT UP ABOUT IT! and them going NO YOURE OPPRESSING US!... it's a viscious cycle. One group is angering the other and neither will leave any room for bridging the social gap when both gropus are at odds with one another.

"As long as the two movies can't be the same, I think gay pride parades are entirely justified"

The parades are part of what perpetuates the gay-hate. If they'd at least dress in normal clothes and not be, well.. pervy about it, I'd be perfectly ok with them protesting against oppression.

The thing is, the local parade at least has become a modern Sodom on wheels - it's not about who you love, its about dressing like Dr. Frankenfurter and waving paper mache penises around.

That's the part that bothers me. My friends brother is gay. Every time I was over at his house hanging out with my friend and a few of our guy friends, there was never a time where his brother didn't bring up how he wished some of them were gay so they could go party. He's one of the blokes who went to the pride parade dressed in nary a thing and marched into his borthers room like that just to creep him out. That's just mean and uncalled for.

I have another friend. He's gay and has been with his mate for years now. The only time he mentions anything that would remotely hint at homosexuality is when he talks about his annevercary with his mate, or if they went to dinner or something. He's not trying to rub it in.

The point is gay/straightness doesn't make people act certain ways when out of a romantic situation (at least not that I've seen.. other than the steriotypical lisp, but I've never seen a gay person do that)

Big diffrence. You are mentioning aspects of your hetorsexual lifestyle. You arnt saying I am straight. If gay people were to talk about their partners, their lifestyle in the same way as hetrosexal people, rather than making a specical case of it.

That's the point. They can't, because the public reaction to it is exceptional (as in, not the normal reaction you'd get when talking about a heterosexual relationship)
I sure smile when somebody introduces himself to me with the words "Hi, I'm Joe, I'm gay", andI have been known to answer "Hi, I'm Brigitte, I'm bisexual". But at the same time I see why there is a desire to make homosexuality known straight away to avoid embarassing moments later on, and I find it kind of sad.

Someone close this thread....

Fass, is that what you were talking about when you make reference to having "Heterosexuality shoved down one's throat?"

Well, let's take this as an example: When I was growing up, I was expected to get a girlfriend. All the books I read were about princes and princesses. I turn on the TV, they're all straight and all the ads are about heterosexuality luring to buy that car/use that shampoo/get this mortgage so that the other sex will like you. I step out my door, there are straight couples all over the place. All the cards for sweethearts are for heterosexuals in the stores. The pictures on the cereal boxes are of happy straight people doing straight things in the morning, with the mother and the father making their brood eat the sugary cereal. My application for a student loan assumes I have a female spouse if I have one. The tax return does as well. I go to school, everyone is straight and talks about their wives and how their life together is. I go out to have a drink, straight women hit on me all the time.

I am discriminated against when people find out I'm gay on a regular basis. I've been spit at, I've been attacked and bashed and I've had the police refuse to let me fill out a form to report the attack - a form, which, by the way, also assumed I was straight.

And so on and so on. And then I come to this forum and I see people bitch about a parade that only happens once a year, and bitch about how all those fags and dykes are, oh, so in their faces. Well, you know what: You live my life for a day and see who the hell is in who's face.

Most people don't have a problem with homosexuality. Even the one person I know whose religious beliefs make him think it is morally wrong, is perfectly happy to get along with blatantly gay people without judging them or preaching at them over their preferences.

A lot of people, gay and straight, have a problem with sexual display in public, by any form of couple. That can range from a couple kissing on the pavement to waving papier mache phalluses around.

Some gay people, in my experience, take the disapproval of any form of public display of a sexual nature and misconstrue it as homophobia. And then accuse people of that. And everyone loses out. Cos there's people going round saying they're being persecuted, and people going round knowing that was not what they were doing.

There is still significant discrimination around the world, but what most people, certainly that I know/know of want is for the whole thing to settle down, with people being open about whatever their sexuality is...without making a big thing about it. Because face it, as has I think already been said, it doesn't matter what sexuality one of your friends is unless you fancy them...

"This message has been deleted by Fass. Reason: do not feed the troll, I tell myself "

Awww! I wanna see you bash some more! :D

"Sexuality is not and never has been limited to the bedroom. It's something that shapes our entire behaviour, all our interaction with other people and basically the life we live."

Other than it shaping who we hit on, I disagree.

Humans are social beings, and relationships are social entities. They interfere with all our perception of ourselves, our place in society and our view of everybody else.


"anytime you switch on TV, read a book, see and advertisment, go out on the street... it's not exclusively about sex, it's simply about human relationships. It's about the way we regard it as perfectly normal to see a movie about a heterosexual couple meeting and falling in love, it's just a chick flick or a comedy"

And the point I'm making is that it's not intentional throat-shoving as Fass seems to think it is by his replies. I'm saying that the pride parade is VERY intentional.

Yes, it is unintentional. Because it is normal. Because it's what we grew up with, what we see every day, what we regard as everyday stuff.
And yes, a gay pride parade is intentional, because that is the only way to make an effort to change our perception of normality.


"but as soon as it is about a homosexual couple, the movie suddenly becomes a social study and a political and/or religious issue."

That is an unfortunate issue. One that I think would disappear in time if both sides backed the hell off. With the gays going STOP HATING US ALL THE TIME! and the rest going SHUT UP ABOUT IT! and them going NO YOURE OPPRESSING US!... it's a viscious cycle. One group is angering the other and neither will leave any room for bridging the social gap when both gropus are at odds with one another.

You'll always heve people claiming to be oppressed, be that gays, christians, women, blacks, the list is endless.
"Backing the hell off" is not an option if your social life is being infringed upon by legislation and society.


"As long as the two movies can't be the same, I think gay pride parades are entirely justified"

The parades are part of what perpetuates the gay-hate. If they'd at least dress in normal clothes and not be, well.. pervy about it, I'd be perfectly ok with them protesting against oppression.

The thing is, the local parade at least has become a modern Sodom on wheels - it's not about who you love, its about dressing like Dr. Frankenfurter and waving paper mache penises around.

That's the part that bothers me. My friends brother is gay. Every time I was over at his house hanging out with my friend and a few of our guy friends, there was never a time where his brother didn't bring up how he wished some of them were gay so they could go party. He's one of the blokes who went to the pride parade dressed in nary a thing and marched into his borthers room like that just to creep him out. That's just mean and uncalled for.

I have another friend. He's gay and has been with his mate for years now. The only time he mentions anything that would remotely hint at homosexuality is when he talks about his annevercary with his mate, or if they went to dinner or something. He's not trying to rub it in.

The point is gay/straightness doesn't make people act certain ways when out of a romantic situation (at least not that I've seen.. other than the steriotypical lisp, but I've never seen a gay person do that)

Well, so you know one gay guy who's a jerk, and one gay guy who's a nice fellow. What's the point you're trying to make?
Do you have the same problem about Mardi Gras parades? Carnival in Rio? If so, I'd say you have a general problem with sexually liberal parades and shouldn't focus on gay pride so much.

So it's ok as long as they're clothed? Fair enough.

But I think you're wrong regarding the statement that it's irrelevant what the univers has to say about your sexuality.
Sexuality is not and never has been limited to the bedroom. It's something that shapes our entire behaviour, all our interaction with other people and basically the life we live. And society has an immense influence on that.
I don't think Fass was necessarily refering to hetero porn movies when he said you get heterosexuality shoved down your throat anytime you switch on TV, read a book, see and advertisment, go out on the street... it's not exclusively about sex, it's simply about human relationships. It's about the way we regard it as perfectly normal to see a movie about a heterosexual couple meeting and falling in love, it's just a chick flick or a comedy, but as soon as it is about a homosexual couple, the movie suddenly becomes a social study and a political and/or religious issue.
As long as the two movies can't be the same, I think gay pride parades are entirely justified.
You took the words right out of my mouth. :)

Cheers to the EU! Not only is it a necessary and excellent resolution, it's also good that they are doing what they really should be doing -- defining a social identity for Europe. I think this resolution is in keeping with the generally inclusive and individualistic traditions of most of European culture, and I'm glad they are willing to draw a line and say, look, some kinds of behavior are just not European, and that includes a legal system that promotes bigotry, so get with the program or opt out, god damn it, frigging Poland.

When I was growing up, I was expected to be white. All the books I read were about white people. I turn on the TV, they're all white and all the ads star white models luring to buy that car/use that shampoo/get this mortgage so that the hot white person will like you. I step out my door, there are white couples all over the place. The pictures on the cereal boxes are of happy white people doing white things in the morning, with the white mother and the white father making their brood eat the sugery cereal. My application for a student loan assumes I am either caucasian or 'other'. The tax return does as well. I go to school, everyone is white. I go out to have a drink, white folks hit on me all the time.

I am discriminated against for my skin color on a regular basis. I've been spit at, I've been attacked and bashed and I've had the police refuse to let me fill out a form to report the attack - a form, which, by the way, also assumed I was white or 'other'.

"You live my life for a day and see who the hell is in who's face"

See, herein lies the rub...

I've lived that edit up there almost to the letter... Except the drinking. I don't drink. ...But after all the BS I've dealt with, I don't hate white people. I don't think they're rubbing their whiteness in my face. I was born with different skin... so what? Those with prejudices will continue to have them. There are assholes in every color, in every creed, in every orientation.

You're not the only one who's had a hard life.

So, so what if you've seen straight people all your life? They were born that way, just like the white folks were born that way.. And those white folks write white stories and make white cereal boxes... So instead of turning into an opressed ball of hate, write some gay stories, make some gay annevercary cards. Show the world not that you're loud and gay, they already know that. Show them that you're not going to let peoples opinions of you get in your way to a happy life.

huh... i always knew the brits were queer

When I was growing up, I was expected to be white. All the books I read were about white people. I turn on the TV, they're all white and all the ads star white models luring to buy that car/use that shampoo/get this mortgage so that the hot white person will like you. I step out my door, there are white couples all over the place. The pictures on the cereal boxes are of happy white people doing white things in the morning, with the white mother and the white father making their brood eat the sugery cereal. My application for a student loan assumes I am either caucasian or 'other'. The tax return does as well. I go to school, everyone is white. I go out to have a drink, white folks hit on me all the time.

I am discriminated against for my skin color on a regular basis. I've been spit at, I've been attacked and bashed and I've had the police refuse to let me fill out a form to report the attack - a form, which, by the way, also assumed I was white or 'other'.

"You live my life for a day and see who the hell is in who's face"

See, herein lies the rub...

I've lived that edit up there almost to the letter... Except the drinking. I don't drink. ...But after all the BS I've dealt with, I don't hate white people. I don't think they're rubbing their whiteness in my face. I was born with different skin... so what? Those with prejudices will continue to have them. There are assholes in every color, in every creed, in every orientation.

You're not the only one who's had a hard life.

So, so what if you've seen straight people all your life? They were born that way, just like the white folks were born that way.. And those white folks write white stories and make white cereal boxes... So instead of turning into an opressed ball of hate, write some gay stories, make some gay annevercary cards. Show the world not that you're loud and gay, they already know that. Show them that you're not going to let peoples opinions of you get in your way to a happy life.

But the book no longer are all about white people, are they? The TV ads are no longer exclusively about white people. are they? When you go out in the street today, you do see balck and Asian couples as well, don't you?
Do you think this would be the case without people starting to make a fuss at one point, refusing to take the back seat in the bus? Without programs to promote equal rights for all? Without a radical change in society and general perception of skin colour?
Then why so you oppose the same process happening for homosexual people so much?

When I was growing up, I was expected to be white. All the books I read were about white people. I turn on the TV, they're all white and all the ads star white models luring to buy that car/use that shampoo/get this mortgage so that the hot white person will like you. I step out my door, there are white couples all over the place. The pictures on the cereal boxes are of happy white people doing white things in the morning, with the white mother and the white father making their brood eat the sugery cereal. My application for a student loan assumes I am either caucasian or 'other'. The tax return does as well. I go to school, everyone is white. I go out to have a drink, white folks hit on me all the time.

I am discriminated against for my skin color on a regular basis. I've been spit at, I've been attacked and bashed and I've had the police refuse to let me fill out a form to report the attack - a form, which, by the way, also assumed I was white or 'other'.

"You live my life for a day and see who the hell is in who's face"

See, herein lies the rub...

And, what if those same white people then turned around and went "oh, those niggers/gooks/"others"," they're always in our face with their Kwanzaas and their "civil cockamamie rights" and their anti-discrimination drives and their talk about minority culture and diversity and whatnot, and their silly clothes, and their stupid marches on Washington and their refusal to just sit at the back of the bus so on. Hey, guess what! Those white people did do that! And you're doing the same exact thing here.

I've lived that edit up there almost to the letter... Except the drinking. I don't drink. ...But after all the BS I've dealt with, I don't hate white people. I don't think they're rubbing their whiteness in my face. I was born with different skin... so what? Those with prejudices will continue to have them. There are assholes in every color, in every creed, in every orientation.

You're not the only one who's had a hard life.

So, so what if you've seen straight people all your life? They were born that way, just like the white folks were born that way.. And those white folks write white stories and make white cereal boxes... So instead of turning into an opressed ball of hate, write some gay stories, make some gay annevercary cards. Show the world not that you're loud and gay, they already know that. Show them that you're not going to let peoples opinions of you get in your way to a happy life.

Again - I am not bitter about the heterosexual people doing what the hell they want. I am just sick and tired of the bitching about "fags be all up in our face!" when they themselves are a thousand times worse than I could ever even hope to be. It is the hypocrisy of it that I am annoyed at. So, please, stop assuming I'm bitching about a hard life (my life had been soooo much easier than the majority of humanity's) or that I am heterophobic. I am trying to show you the hypocrisy that lies in your bitching.

"Humans are social beings, and relationships are social entities. They interfere with all our perception of ourselves, our place in society and our view of everybody else."

Maybe I'm just too rational, but all it does for me is signal that certain males aren't on the 'possible datables' list.

"And yes, a gay pride parade is intentional, because that is the only way to make an effort to change our perception of normality."

There's got to be another way than the Seattle parade..

"You'll always heve people claiming to be oppressed, be that gays, christians, women, blacks, the list is endless."

They all need to shut up too :)

"Backing the hell off" is not an option if your social life is being infringed upon by legislation and society. "

I do agree that legislation needs to step away from this issue. The government shouldn't be for or against as that would be forcing people to act a certain way and that's blatantly unconstitutional (not to mention unethical)

"Well, so you know one gay guy who's a jerk, and one gay guy who's a nice fellow. What's the point you're trying to make?"

That it's the jerk-types who make the nice guys look bad. The nice guys who don't get in everyones face about their choice of mate.

"Do you have the same problem about Mardi Gras parades? Carnival in Rio? If so, I'd say you have a general problem with sexually liberal parades and shouldn't focus on gay pride so much"

Can't say I'm a fan of either (as stated before, I think love belongs between the two partners in private) but the focus on the pride parade is that like Fass's posts, it's being loud and obnoxious and assuming too much when it comes to the 'opposing viewpoint'.

huh... i always knew the brits were queer

Really? I thought the same of Americans, based on their national anthem. Most anthems are about the glory of a country and what it stands for. The US national anthem is basially "Ooooh! What a pretty flag! It's all colourful and even got nice sparkly little stars spangled all over it!"

Fass, is that what you were talking about when you make reference to having "Heterosexuality shoved down one's throat?"
I'm not going to speak for Fass and what he meant, but I have to say that (as an American heterosexual woman (just for the record)) I'll be watching televsion and, after a while, I'll start wondering what happened to all the other people. You know, all the people who aren't white and hetero and protestant and don't live in suburbs and don't drive big cars, etc.

When I see an advertisement for, say, laundry detergent or a bank or a car, and it features "minorities" using/selling the product and it is not specifically targeting "minorities," I actually feel better about the business/product because I feel like these people are in touch with reality and are not just trying to shore up the prejuidices of the power structure.

For instance, in the US, there is an ad compaign for Citibank financial services that promotes the idea that you can trust them to take care of your money so you can be free to pursue the things that matter in life, which are the things you need the money for. Among the many ad spots is one featuring a father and son quietly flying kites on a beach. The father and son are black. There is no attempt to make this a "black" ad. Kite flying is not a specifically "black" hobby. This is proper inclusiveness.

Every now and then, in the US, I see ads for dating services that, showing pictures of happy couples, let you know they serve both heteros and gays. I like that. Also, I like it when a character in a movie or series is gay, for instance, without gayness being the point of the character. This character is gay, but is not meant to somehow represent all gays as a token.

This kind of acknowledgment that, yes, people may be different from each other in some ways, but in most ways, we're not different, and the differences that exists are not that important -- this is what I think of as inclusiveness and tolerance, and it's what I look for in my society.

"Humans are social beings, and relationships are social entities. They interfere with all our perception of ourselves, our place in society and our view of everybody else."

Maybe I'm just too rational, but all it does for me is signal that certain males aren't on the 'possible datables' list.

No... I think you just lack the ability to put yourself in somebody else's shoes here.


"And yes, a gay pride parade is intentional, because that is the only way to make an effort to change our perception of normality."

There's got to be another way than the Seattle parade..

Suggest one. I'm sure the gay community is always open for suggestion and grateful for new approaches.


"Backing the hell off" is not an option if your social life is being infringed upon by legislation and society. "

I do agree that legislation needs to step away from this issue. The government shouldn't be for or against as that would be forcing people to act a certain way and that's blatantly unconstitutional (not to mention unethical)

The thing about government is, the population has to tell it what it should be doing. So the gay population do need to get themselves noticed...


"Well, so you know one gay guy who's a jerk, and one gay guy who's a nice fellow. What's the point you're trying to make?"

That it's the jerk-types who make the nice guys look bad. The nice guys who don't get in everyones face about their choice of mate.

THAT is exaclty what I meant. Exactly.
If the jerk guy was straight, you'd just put him down as a jerk, nothing more. But he is a homosexual, so he's giving the rest of them a bad name?


"Do you have the same problem about Mardi Gras parades? Carnival in Rio? If so, I'd say you have a general problem with sexually liberal parades and shouldn't focus on gay pride so much"

Can't say I'm a fan of either (as stated before, I think love belongs between the two partners in private) but the focus on the pride parade is that like Fass's posts, it's being loud and obnoxious and assuming too much when it comes to the 'opposing viewpoint'.

Careful... that's a bit close to a personal insult.
Those parades are not exclusively about love, they are and expression of lifestyle, they are a celebration of life, love, sex, music, and more. They are making political and social statements in a fun way.
Doesn't mean you have to like them, but to single out one of them seems a bit unfair to say the least.

You took the words right out of my mouth. :)

Cheers to the EU! Not only is it a necessary and excellent resolution, it's also good that they are doing what they really should be doing -- defining a social identity for Europe. I think this resolution is in keeping with the generally inclusive and individualistic traditions of most of European culture, and I'm glad they are willing to draw a line and say, look, some kinds of behaviour are just not European, and that includes a legal system that promotes bigotry, so get with the program or opt out, god damn it, frigging Poland.

You're right! Let's get this thread back on topic of the EU's resolution and the leave this discussion about majority hypocrisy behind us. :)

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/01/011806europe.htm


Good god. So they are able to make reasonable resolutions.

Something new. Every day.

Good god. So they are able to make reasonable resolutions.

Something new. Every day.

I know. Shocked me, too. Something good done by the EU - it's almost oxymoronic, that phrase! ;)

While you may say "But that is preventing Equal Rights, this legislation allows for equallity." it is also preventing people from speaking out against what they think is wrong. if they want to change the country, then they need to change their Government and then it's the government's job to enact and enforce such laws.

in other words, This legislation is a form of Thought control and censorship.
It's not. This is not legislation, merely a declaration. Nothing is enforced.

Good for the EU.

For the Religious types; Why don't you get into the closet and learn what it's like?

I have a clue for you. If you weren't so "offended" by gays then guess what? There would not be any gay pride parades.

Of the the crap that goes on with life why do people get so bent out of shape by a tiny percentage of people and their goings on?

Meh. I guess it's easier to be upset by this tiny amount of "immoral" people then thinking of ways to solve the divorse problem, hunger, education, .....

Well, let's take this as an example: When I was growing up, I was expected to get a girlfriend. All the books I read were about princes and princesses. I turn on the TV, they're all straight and all the ads are about heterosexuality luring to buy that car/use that shampoo/get this mortgage so that the other sex will like you. I step out my door, there are straight couples all over the place. All the cards for sweethearts are for heterosexuals in the stores. The pictures on the cereal boxes are of happy straight people doing straight things in the morning, with the mother and the father making their brood eat the sugary cereal. My application for a student loan assumes I have a female spouse if I have one. The tax return does as well. I go to school, everyone is straight and talks about their wives and how their life together is. I go out to have a drink, straight women hit on me all the time.

I am discriminated against when people find out I'm gay on a regular basis. I've been spit at, I've been attacked and bashed and I've had the police refuse to let me fill out a form to report the attack - a form, which, by the way, also assumed I was straight.then that is not Heterosexuality being cramming down your thoat, that society moving along.

what about all the Vegitarians/Vegans who have to live with all the Burger King/McDonald/Outback Steak House commercials that glorify meat eating. or the fact that all Supermarkets sell meat in one form or another. you don't hear them bitching about it.

what of all the animal rights group that sees dogs on leashes or cows being milked?

How about the ideas that the only way one can be sexually appealing is by drinking alcohol and smoking?

Then there are Pacifists that are constantly seeing violence in one form or another in books, movies, songs, and tv?

Do you cry Discrimination when a show is primarily African American and other minorities with the "White man" being portrayed as the idiot?

yet somehow, you think all that is aimed just at Homosexuals? that's rather selfish thinking isn't it?

And then I come to this forum and I see people bitch about a parade that only happens once a year, and bitch about how all those fags and dykes are, oh, so in their faces. Well, you know what: You live my life for a day and see who the hell is in who's face.so you hate people voicing their opinion that are not the same as yours and thus the only opinion that should ever to be voiced is yours or those that mirror your values? know what?? You DO want to censor everyone else then.

and you think your cause is special? you've been in my face on issues that I find important. You have a different opinion and I do take those seriously. I don't automatically call "HATE" or "DISCRIMIATION" so yes, on other issues, I do walk in your shoes and yes, if I were to take your definition of "Cramming things down one's throat" mine is worse since it's Government supported. But do I hate the Government? no. Do I hate those who stand against me? no.

However, I don't define cramming things down my throat the same way you do. perhaps that's why I don't get so worked up when people voice differing opinions.

People bitch about one parade, people bitch about one holiday, one country/nation, one group of people, the point is... people will bitch... especially on a forum. my opinion and advice? Take it in stride, don't post in anger.

and humor sometimes helps. ;)

then that is not Heterosexuality being cramming down your thoat, that society moving along.

Hey, if they get to bitch about a parade, I get to bitch about this. This whole point was about the hypocrisy that gay people are bitched at when they "act gay," but when straight people act straight, we're supposed to go "oh, well, but that's society moving along." Either we get to bitch in the same way as they, or they get to go "oh, but that's society moving on."

so you hate people voicing their opinion that are not the same as yours and thus the only opinion that should ever to be voiced is yours or those that mirror your values? know what?? You DO want to censor everyone else then.

What a torpid straw man. Pointing out the hypocrisy is "hating" and "censoring"? Please. Where have I said that they should be silenced? Where have I said I hate straight people? I hate the hypocrisy and I am pointing it out. You know what? That's me excercising my freedom of speech as much as they are, and you should be lauding me in it, as you seem to be them.

However, I don't define cramming things down my throat the same way you do. perhaps that's why I don't get so worked up when people voice differing opinions.

You mean not getting so worked up as to calling a differing opinion "hate" and "censorship" yourself? Yeah, real good going there! :rolleyes:

You're right! Let's get this thread back on topic of the EU's resolution and the leave this discussion about majority hypocrisy behind us. :)
Gladly.

Let's talk about what the EU is really for. A lot of people criticize the EU for not doing anything, but, for crying out loud, it hasn't existed all that long. They're probably still trying to get business cards and coffee mugs distributed to all their offices at this point. They are clearly still working out what the rules for membership are going to be.

Some countries that, frankly, have built their power structure on exploiting prejudices (I'm looking at you, Poland), would like the EU to be nothing more than a trade treaty so they can make money off it, like NAFTA. But the vision of the EU is to join all the populations of Europe together so that all of the countries will enjoy economic, military, and political power comparable to nations/groups the size of the US and China. If this experiment works over the next decade, it could be applied productively, imo, to South America and Africa as well.

But the trick of it is that trade and money are just not meaningful enough to bond distant populations to each other. They are also too easily corrupted by special interests.

Social/cultural identity is a much stronger bond, and it does tend to cover whole continents. It is perfectly legitmate to say there is such a thing as "European culture." Such a claim is supported by both history and archeology. But it is not immediately obvious what that culture is because it is muddied up by its own history. The fact is, if you look at the WHOLE of European history, inclusiveness, individualism, and social commingling are far more prevalent traditions than prejudice, conformity or regional isolationism. The former trends have been going on longer (both peacefully and not so peacefully) and have reasserted themselves during and after every outbreak of the latter trends (which tend to occur only in pockets and only at times of political disorder -- so they're more like fads than trends).

So, regardless of what the Polish government wishes, if Europe is to be considered a cohesive entity, it must clarify and stick to the real identifying traditions of Europe, which include that people get to travel where they like, live with who they like, be whatever they like. I think this is what the EU has tried to do with its resolutions so far, and this anti-homophobia resolution is the clearest yet.

If this means that Poland gets reduced to the level of an unfriendly neighborhood that the rest of the community doesn't really respect much, well, tough shit for Poland. Now they get to know what it's like to be considered "abnormal."

It's not. This is not legislation, merely a declaration. Nothing is enforced.
"The resolution says the Commission should begin proceedings against those countries that fail to implement the directive on equal treatment in employment and occupation, and it says the Commission should consider the use of criminal penalties in cases of violation."

"The Commission is also asked to put forward proposals that would guarantee the rights of same-sex couples and their children."

"In October the European Commission warned Poland that if it continues to oppose gay rights the country risks losing its voting rights in the EU.(story) "
sounds like they are trying to enforce and pressure other Nations to alter their internal legislation.

sounds like they are trying to enforce and pressure other Nations to alter their internal legislation.

That's what tends to happen when you join a community. You'll have to follow the rules....

Gladly.

Let's talk about what the EU is really for. A lot of people criticize the EU for not doing anything, but, for crying out loud, it hasn't existed all that long. They're probably still trying to get business cards and coffee mugs distributed to all their offices at this point. They are clearly still working out what the rules for membership are going to be.

Some countries that, frankly, have built their power structure on exploiting prejudices (I'm looking at you, Poland), would like the EU to be nothing more than a trade treaty so they can make money off it, like NAFTA. But the vision of the EU is to join all the populations of Europe together so that all of the countries will enjoy economic, military, and political power comparable to nations/groups the size of the US and China. If this experiment works over the next decade, it could be applied productively, imo, to South America and Africa as well.

But the trick of it is that trade and money are just not meaningful enough to bond distant populations to each other. They are also too easily corrupted by special interests.

Social/cultural identity is a much stronger bond, and it does tend to cover whole continents. It is perfectly legitmate to say there is such a thing as "European culture." Such a is supported by both history and archeology. But it is not immediately obvious what that culture is because it is muddied up by its own history. The fact is, if you look at the WHOLE of European history, inclusiveness, individualism, and social commingling are far more prevalent traditions than prejudice, conformity or regional isolationism. The former trends have been going on longer (both peacefully and not so peacefully) and have reasserted themselves during and after every outbreak of the latter trends (which tend to occur only in pockets and only at times of political disorder -- so they're more like fads than trends).

So, regardless of what the Polish government wishes, if Europe is to be considered a cohesive entity, it must clarify and stick to the real identifying traditions of Europe, which include that people get to travel where they like, live with who they like, be whatever they like. I think this is what the EU has tried to do with its resolutions so far, and this anti-homophobia resolution is the clearest yet.

If this means that Poland gets reduced to the level of an unfriendly neighborhood that the rest of the community doesn't really respect much, well, tough shit for Poland. Now they get to know what it's like to be considered "abnormal."

I agree with you on many points there and I am not one to say that the EU does no good, ever, I'm however very Eurosceptic in relation to my own country. It's a selfish thinking, I know, but it sort of goes along the line that the EU is not needed in Sweden as it is needed in those countries.

We stand less to gain than they do, it feels at times, and there is always the fear that it will not be our way of life and our values of inclusiveness and openness and tolerance that become the standard by which the EU works, but that it will become their backwards social agenda that prevails. Even though there is practically no debate in the West about things such as abortions and most are in favour of anti-discrimination, those Eastern countries have started to try pushing their anti-abortionist and oppressive social agendas onto the EU and my fears are that the EU may not be able to resist them, and that they will thus be forced upon us or, even worse, spread to us and be adopted.

Now, I of course hope that it goes the other way, that the EU becomes the force that finally makes these countries abide by the Convention on Human Rights and to our "Western" values, because, I do think they are better, not only for myself, but for all people. So I am stuck somewhere between "we should cut ties to avoid being tainted" and "we need to use the EU to whip them into shape." Hmm, yeah, it's a bit schizo, that way. ;)

sounds like they are trying to enforce and pressure other Nations to alter their internal legislation.

Umm, you know, that's what the EU does. When you join it, you are to abide by its rules. They do not get to pick and choose which part of the Convention on Human Rights and the legislation on equal rights they are to obey. They joined the EU, and thus gave the EU the power to enforce EU law. And they vowed to abide by that. If they want to be part of the club, they follow the rules of the club.

sounds like they are trying to enforce and pressure other Nations to alter their internal legislation.
Okay, but don't they have a right to do so? The EU is a kind of club. Don't they have a right to dictate the conditions for being a member of their club? Poland doesn't have to change it's internal legislation. Poland can have any laws it likes, but that may mean that other countries don't want to be their allies. Actions have consequences, and this is an example of that.

Poland can be as homophobic as it likes, but it can't be a member of the EU at the same time. I don't see a problem with this. Poland just has to decide what's more important to its interests -- joining the EU or keeping down the homos.

I don't know about the rest of the world, but if I'm correct, I believe America is about 11% homosexual. Now I don't know the specifics about America, but I know that 95% of the world believes in a God of some sort.

So since I'm agnostic, then I'm in an even smaler minority than homosexuals, but I don't run around bitching about religion being crammed down my throat every day! And do you know why? Because when your the minority, you should expect to be overwhelmed with majority opinion.

Now that cwertainly doesn't give the majority the right to discriminate against the minority, but it does give them the right to be the majority, and thus be represented accordingly in society.

Frankly, if you feel flooded with heterosexuality in the world, it's because the world is mostly heterosexual. I suggest you shut the hell up about it, just be gay, be yourself, and quit worrying so much about what other people are doing.

And byt the way, if you want to have gay pride parades, more power to you, and I hope you have a good time, but incidentally, would it piss you off if I had a straight pride parade?

Seems I'd get the same reaction as yelling "White Power"

Frankly, if you feel flooded with heterosexuality in the world, it's because the world is mostly heterosexual. I suggest you shut the hell up about it, just be gay, be yourself, and quit worrying so much about what other people are doing.

Likewise to straight people who bitch about gay people "shoving" homosexuality down their throats. Your argument works both ways.

And byt the way, if you want to have gay pride parades, more power to you, and I hope you have a good time, but incidentally, would it piss you off if I had a straight pride parade?

No, as long as your parade truly is "yay being straight" and not "booh on the gays, ban them, discriminate against them." Not that I see the need for the parade, as all of society already is a straght pride parade.

Seems I'd get the same reaction as yelling "White Power"

"White Power" is used by racists. Don't be surprised to be assumed one if you adopt their rhetoric. The thing about "white power" is that it doesn't stand for the affirmation of white people, but more for "down with everyone else." Not to mention that racism, no matter by which "race," is stupid and "white power" is as stupid as "black power."

sounds like they are trying to enforce and pressure other Nations to alter their internal legislation.
None of the above indicate that the freedom to openly disapprove of homosexuality is going to be taken away.

None of the above indicate that the freedom to openly disapprove of homosexuality is going to be taken away.

Yeah, that bugs me too, that they think that just because you will no longer be allowed to oppress gay people and will not be able to discriminate against people based on sexual orientation, you won't be allowed to disapprove or went a differing opinion. It's also interesting to see that EU law was used in Sweden by the Supreme Court to protect homophobic speech - so, so much for that! :)

Well, all I can say is I didn't know all of us straight people rammed heterosexuality down everyone's throats all the time. I must be missing out! It's high time I started ramming my heterosexuality down other people's throats - loudly, and more frequently!

I agree with you on many points there and I am not one to say that the EU does no good, ever, I'm however very Eurosceptic in relation to my own country. It's a selfish thinking, I know, but it sort of goes along the line that the EU is not needed in Sweden as it is needed in those countries.

We stand less to gain than they do, it feels at times, and there is always the fear that it will not be our way of life and our values of inclusiveness and openness and tolerance that become the standard by which the EU works, but that it will become their backwards social agenda that prevails. Even though there is practically no debate in the West about things such as abortions and most are in favour of anti-discrimination, those Eastern countries have started to try pushing their anti-abortionist and oppressive social agendas onto the EU and my fears are that the EU may not be able to resist them, and that they will thus be forced upon us or, even worse, spread to us and be adopted.

Now, I of course hope that it goes the other way, that the EU becomes the force that finally makes these countries abide by the Convention on Human Rights and to our "Western" values, because, I do think they are better, not only for myself, but for all people. So I am stuck somewhere between "we should cut ties to avoid being tainted" and "we need to use the EU to whip them into shape." Hmm, yeah, it's a bit schizo, that way. ;)
It's a difficult question because it's hard to tell exactly where Europe leaves off on the eastern edge. There's a lot of argument about whether Turkey can be considered European, but I think the same questions can be applied to Eastern Europe. I think the question should not be about ethnicity or language or any of that, but rather it should be about general cultural attitudes.

The farther back you go, the more "Euro" Eastern Europe clearly is. But its (relatively) recent history is full of socio-cultural interference by waves of immigration and power interests (churches, etc).

Just to compare two countries, I think the Czech Republic, though it has work to do to modernize its society, may be more clearly Euro because that country has made conscious efforts over many centuries of invasion and oppression to preserve its own cultural identity. This has been going on so long with them, that the culture they have preserved is quite close to Western Europe. In fact, the Czechs have a history of taking action for tolerance and individual liberties that, in some periods, has outstripped the west.

Poland, on the other hand, in the Middle Ages, bought completely into the socio-political power structure of the Church, which made it rich and powerful for a very long time. It is a power structure based on membership by exclusion -- i.e., you have to be not a Jew, not a Muslim, not gay, not a whole bunch of things. All the things you have to not be are typically demonized, and the inherent human fear of strangers is exploited to reinforce this negative identity. Poland, although it has suffered the same historical experiences as the Czech Republic, has usually reacted to them somewhat differently. They are more likely to reassert their own group identity by targeting an outside scapegoat.

If the EU decides that this scapegoating attitude is un-European, then Poland has no choice but to skip joining the Union or else re-evaluate its own social power structure.

Scandanavia has a similar question to ask itself. In other words, what is the real, proper function of a European Union, and does Scandanavia want to associate itself with such a group? If Scandanavia decides that it would benefit from a Union, but only if the Union adheres to Scandanvian cultural values, then I would say Scandanavia should get active pushing those values onto the agenda. If, in the end, the EU goes the wrong way, then Scandanavia should reserve the right to withdraw from the Union and give up the practical benefits of membership.

Essentially, by giving up membership, a country might be saying, well, if this is what European is, then we're not European.

Well, all I can say is I didn't know all of us straight people rammed heterosexuality down everyone's throats all the time.

I was as surprised at the claim that gay people did and straight people didn't.

I must be missing out! It's high time I started ramming my heterosexuality down other people's throats - loudly, and more frequently!

Oh, seeing you post over this forum, I think you're doing a smashing job of it already.

Oh, seeing you post over this forum, I think you're doing a smashing job of it already.


Oh, you flatterer. But I think you'd better cite me some specific examples first. Because personally, I don't think I've been doing anywhere near as good a job as my brother and sister heteros.

Usually I don't particularly care about what the European Parliament has to say, because when I think of it, the term 'gravy train' springs to mind. But now I think they're starting to get dangerous. I completely disagree with the idea of putting any kind of sanctions on Poland for the situation within Poland. The gay rights movement doesn't affect any other nations nations in Europe, it's purely a Polish affair.

But it all boils down to what kind of Europe you want to see, wether it be a social entity and a superstate, or simply an economic bloc where home affairs are entirely the domain of national governments.

Essentially, by giving up membership, a country might be saying, well, if this is what European is, then we're not European.

Ca va de soi, of course, and there is a debate here on whether we should leave or not - people here are the most Eurosceptic of all and if the referendum on joining were to be held today, we would not join. There is a perception that we are too small to be able to affect, that the bigger, Western countries are being too complacent about all this, and that our government is far too willing to compromise in certain issues where a compromise is a failure to us, be to environmental policy, or civil liberties. Fortunately the negative bent of the populace will lead to the government being more "bellicose" in Brussels.

This of course raises the question - how does one leave? There are no rules as to that, and the only ones that were, were in the (fortunately) rejected Constitution. It would be interesting, although devastating to the Union, to see someone try to leave.

It's high time I started ramming my heterosexuality down other people's throats - loudly, and more frequently!

You know.. that reads sooo wrong ;) Will there be a movie showing your "heterosexuality" as it is "rammed down throats" :p ?

I don't know about the rest of the world, but if I'm correct, I believe America is about 11% homosexual. Now I don't know the specifics about America, but I know that 95% of the world believes in a God of some sort.

So since I'm agnostic, then I'm in an even smaler minority than homosexuals, but I don't run around bitching about religion being crammed down my throat every day! And do you know why? Because when your the minority, you should expect to be overwhelmed with majority opinion.



I think you are working on some well skewered numbers that activists would like you to believe. While there is virtually no way of knowing an exact number because the government doesnt track them, to say that 11% of the population is homosexual is about as big a whopper as can be told no matter how one trys to define the term to suit their wishes. If one were to believe this then there would be almost as many homosexuals in the US as African Americans which come in at 12%. A much more accurate measure is around 3% and that is probably a bit high, but much depends on how you define the term.
As far as 95% of the world believing in a God. Once again, it depends on how you define "God" and how you ask the question, but they generally include those that have doubts or religions that are spiritual but godless. 95% is also out of the ball park in reality, even though athiests are but a much smaller percentage of the remainder you allow.

I'm glad that they passed the resolution, as the sort of behaviour mentioned in the article was rather appalling and it's surprising that they got away with it for as long as they did. There really isn't any excuse for homophobia... I think the only thing I've said that comes close to being homophobic is that I'm sad that Fass isn't straight... one less cute-sounding guy for me. :(

The gay rights movement doesn't affect any other nations nations in Europe, it's purely a Polish affair.

No, it isn't. The European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights), as well as many EU laws on equality, grant EU citizens rights, and no member of the EU can just decide to violate those rights. Poland is doing just that, hence the threat of repercussions. This is indeed a very European affair, as it comes to basic rights that the EU guarantees its citizens. Poland's violating them cannot be tolerated.

This of course raises the question - how does one leave? There are no rules as to that, and the only ones that were, were in the (fortunately) rejected Constitution. It would be interesting, although devastating to the Union, to see someone try to leave.
I think it would be very amusing to see a nation just leave the EU on national sovereignty grounds. To do that they could simply unsign all EU treaties and stop abiding by the rules of the EU - but at the same time, due to the fact that there are no treaty mechanisms to leave, that country would probably be officially recognised by the EU to be a member state, even when they are de facto independent. It would be very funny to see EU politicians run around like headless chickens, wondering what to do when a nation doesn't recognise EU membership, with the union still seeing them as a member!

I think it would be very amusing to see a nation just leave the EU on national sovereignty grounds. To do that they could simply unsign all EU treaties and stop abiding by the rules of the EU - but at the same time, due to the fact that there are no treaty mechanisms to leave, that country would probably be officially recognised by the EU to be a member state, even when they are de facto independent. It would be very funny to see EU politicians run around like headless chickens, wondering what to do when a nation doesn't recognise EU membership, with the union still seeing them as a member!

The EU would not force any country that wants to leave to stay. They would just probably pass a resolution that says "They are no longer members, all their privileges are rescinded" and that would be that. I was referring more to the discussion that would be interesting, not the bureaucracy of it.

Well, all I can say is I didn't know all of us straight people rammed heterosexuality down everyone's throats all the time. I must be missing out! It's high time I started ramming my heterosexuality down other people's throats - loudly, and more frequently!

You don't have too. Activists on any topic never know when to quit and push to the point that the average individual stops saying to themselves, "You know those (insert activist) people have a point, maybe I should reconsider my position." and instead say to themselves, "Oh what fun it would be to stand on his head until such time it popped like a grape."
Actually the backlash has already begun with businesses now writing into workplace rules that, "whining, sniviling, pissing and moaning" is cause for dismissal. Good for them, they may keep a few grapes whole.

why are y'all so determined to not understand what fass is saying? all he is saying that if YOU can complain that gays are shoving their sexuality in your face that HE can complain that straights do the same-- except that with heterosexuality its constant, pervasive and impossible to get away from. its not that radical a point.

so anyway, lets take a look at where you "anti-gay pride" people are going wrong....

you see a boy and a girl kissing passionately in the park. they have their hands all over each other. its WAY past anyones sense of propriety. you think "why dont they get a room?" or "why didnt their parents teach them better?"

you see a boy and a boy kissing passionately in the park. they have their hands all over each other. its WAY pas anyone's sense of propriety. you think "why do gay people behave that way?"

they are just 2 couples each behaving badly. they only reflect themselves. YOU decide to generalize about the gay couple as if they represent all gay people in the world. you dont think that one straight couple making out in the park means that all straight people are disgusting. why do you think that it means that there is something wrong with gay people and that they all just want to shove their sexuality in your face?

you go to a mardi gras parade. people dress freaky and do freaky things. men toss beads to women in return for the women baring their breasts. do you think that everyone in the parade is a sexual deviant because some people there act badly?

you go to a gay pride parade. people dress freaky and do freaky things. some men get naked, some carry plastic penises. why do you generalize that everyone in that parade is a sexual deviant/pervert? why do you further generalize that the behavior of gay men during one hour of one day of one year means that all gay men spend all their time shoving their sexuality in your face??

and WHY would you ever go to a gay pride parade if you find it offensive? how 'bout you just let other people have their fun on their day? they are out to enjoy themselves not to offend you.

Scandinavia...and Britain. Both have important questions to ask, though slightly differing ones. We have bought in to this great project; but we have allowed one narrow view of the project to dominate.

Do we really want the EU to supplant national governments? Should we want to compete with China and the USA? Especially if that means losing our own identity.

If we can gain in the EU without losing too much that we value, then I'm all for it. Often that doesnt seem to happen though.

I hear Euro-scepticism is growing in Sweden, and that right wing, slightly harder edged politics is beginning to supplant the social consensus. Is that true in your view?

No, it isn't. The European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights), as well as many EU laws, grant EU citizens rights, and no member of the EU can just decide to violate those rights. Poland is doing just that, hence the threat of repercussions. This is indeed a very European affair, as it comes to basic rights that the EU guarantees its citizens. Poland's violating them cannot be tolerated.
I meant in a more literal sense. I realise that the Convention on Human Rights gives European bodies the power to override national laws. But it doesn't alter the fact that the actions of the Polish government towards gay rights do not specifically affect the way other EU member states conduct themselves. For example, gay rights does not directly affect other member states like import tariffs would or emissions would. The reason individual nations can be overrided on home affairs issues like gay rights is not out of necessity like it is with trade, but rather a lust for power among EU politicians who ultimately want an EU superstate. I see somethng like this a gross violation of national sovereignty.

But as I said before, I realise that it's part of the rules in being in the 'club'. Which is why I would like to see a change in the nature of our membership of the club, or failing that, possibly get out of it altogether.

I hear Euro-scepticism is growing in Sweden, and that right wing, slightly harder edged politics is beginning to supplant the social consensus. Is that true in your view?

Euroscpeticism has always been high here, and while it has not grown all that much (it has actually diminished marginally), it remains high. Here, the left wing is anti-EU and the right wing is pro-EU, generally. And, no, the right wing parties have had to move very close to the centre (the Moderates, the most right wing economically speaking in the Riksdag) has adopted many of the policies of the Social Democrats to stand a chance at winning an election together with the right wing block - in fact, that is just what they may end up doing, but, again, that is basically thanks to them abandoning many of the "old" right wing ideas and moving centre, and even left sometimes, in many core issues.

There is no provision for any Member State of the EU to leave the EU. Technically, there is no legitimate way to leave the EU, except by getting the other members to (presumably unanimously) put a provision in kicking you out.

I meant in a more literal sense. I realise that the Convention on Human Rights gives European bodies the power to override national laws. But it doesn't alter the fact that the actions of the Polish government towards gay rights do not specifically affect the way other EU member states conduct themselves. For example, gay rights does not directly affect other member states like import tariffs would or emissions would. The reason individual nations can be overrided on home affairs issues like gay rights is not out of necessity like it is with trade, but rather a lust for power among EU politicians who ultimately want an EU superstate. I see somethng like this a gross violation of national sovereignty.

But as I said before, I realise that it's part of the rules in being in the 'club'. Which is why I would like to see a change in the nature of our membership of the club, or failing that, possibly get out of it altogether.

The thing is, Poland knew all this before they joined - they had to agree to abide by the Convention and had to acknowledge the right of the EU to take action against them should they fail to do so. So, neither Poland nor anyone else gets to go "oh, waa, but we should be able to do it" - that has never been on the table. Convention ratification is a prerequisite for joining, in that is included the abolition of the death penalty and the respect for equal rights, and I am glad that it is.

The EU cannot function if it tolerates despotism in the member states, and contrary to popular belief, the EU was never meant to be solely an economic union - it has always had on its agenda the advancement of democratic values and freedoms. So, the "national sovereignty" argument when it comes to basic rights of citizens does not fly with me at all.

why are y'all so determined to not understand what fass is saying? all he is saying that if YOU can complain that gays are shoving their sexuality in your face that HE can complain that straights do the same-- except that with heterosexuality its constant, pervasive and impossible to get away from. its not that radical a point.

so anyway, lets take a look at where you "anti-gay pride" people are going wrong....

you see a boy and a girl kissing passionately in the park. they have their hands all over each other. its WAY past anyones sense of propriety. you think "why dont they get a room?" or "why didnt their parents teach them better?"

you see a boy and a boy kissing passionately in the park. they have their hands all over each other. its WAY pas anyone's sense of propriety. you think "why do gay people behave that way?"

they are just 2 couples each behaving badly. they only reflect themselves. YOU decide to generalize about the gay couple as if they represent all gay people in the world. you dont think that one straight couple making out in the park means that all straight people are disgusting. why do you think that it means that there is something wrong with gay people and that they all just want to shove their sexuality in your face?

you go to a mardi gras parade. people dress freaky and do freaky things. men toss beads to women in return for the women baring their breasts. do you think that everyone in the parade is a sexual deviant because some people there act badly?

you go to a gay pride parade. people dress freaky and do freaky things. some men get naked, some carry plastic penises. why do you generalize that everyone in that parade is a sexual deviant/pervert? why do you further generalize that the behavior of gay men during one hour of one day of one year means that all gay men spend all their time shoving their sexuality in your face??

and WHY would you ever go to a gay pride parade if you find it offensive? how 'bout you just let other people have their fun on their day? they are out to enjoy themselves not to offend you.

I knew there was a reason I liked you, Ashmoria. Thank you! :fluffle:

The EU always had ever-closer union on the agenda, right from the ECSC, via EEC, EC to EU.

Democratic rights and freedoms, on the other hand, fit extremely well with the purely appointed Commission. Yeah.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not attacking this particular move by the EU. Discrimination on anything people can't choose for themselves, along with a lot of things they can (political affiliation) does not fit with being an open, democratic society, which all EU members should at least be on the road to being, even if they haven't made it quite yet.

The EU itself gives very little impression of standing up for democracy. Most observers of the EU agree it's credibility is threatened by a democratic deficit, in that the EU seems to disregard the citizens of its member states, in favour of self-serving "grands projets"

The EU always had ever-closer union on the agenda, right from the ECSC, via EEC, EC to EU.

Democratic rights and freedoms, on the other hand, fit extremely well with the purely appointed Commission. Yeah.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not attacking this particular move by the EU. Discrimination on anything people can't choose for themselves, along with a lot of things they can (political affiliation) does not fit with being an open, democratic society, which all EU members should at least be on the road to being, even if they haven't made it quite yet.

The EU itself gives very little impression of standing up for democracy. Most observers of the EU agree it's credibility is threatened by a democratic deficit, in that the EU seems to disregard the citizens of its member states, in favour of self-serving "grands projets"

I do agree that it itself as an institution needs reforming to become a lot more transparent and democratic - really, no argument there, I would love for the Commission to truly be subservient to Parliament, and that the Council of Ministers be turned into an "Upper House" of sorts. It is way too distant from accountability before the citizens today.

But it has never been coy about what it expects from the members who join, and adherence to the rights of citizens spelled out in its laws is one of them.

The thing is, Poland knew all this before they joined - they had to agree to abide by the Convention and had to acknowledge the right of the EU to take action against them should they fail to do so. So, neither Poland nor anyone else gets to go "oh, waa, but we should be able to do it" - that has never been on the table. Convention ratification is a prerequisite for joining, in that is included the abolition of the death penalty and the respect for equal rights, and I am glad that it is.

The EU cannot function if it tolerates despotism in the member states, and contrary to popular belief, the EU was never meant to be solely an economic union - it has always had on its agenda the advancement of democratic values and freedoms. So, the "national sovereignty" argument when it comes to basic rights of citizens does not fly with me at all.
I agree that Poland can't really complain about what they're getting by the way of things like gay rights. That's what they agreed to when they joined. But that doesn't discount the possibility of changing things. There's increasing Euroscepticism across the continent. If this Euroscepticism increases sufficiently, then its possible that it could be harnessed to bring about real change in EU membership. Perhaps a system where more Eurosceptic countries opted out of the social side of the EU and paricipated solely in the trade side, without their home affairs, human rights, defence, foreign policy, ect being touched.

If there was enough pressure for this among enough EU member states, then EU politicians would have no choice, otherwise they would risk tearing the union apart. This is only hypothetical at the moment, but it's not a completely unrealistic possibility in the future.

I agree that Poland can't really complain about what they're getting by the way of things like gay rights. That's what they agreed to when they joined. But that doesn't discount the possibility of changing things. There's increasing Euroscepticism across the continent. If this Euroscepticism increases sufficiently, then its possible that it could be harnessed to bring about real change in EU membership. Perhaps a system where more Eurosceptic countries opted out of the social side of the EU and paricipated solely in the trade side, without their home affairs, human rights, defence, foreign policy, ect being touched.

If there was enough pressure for this among enough EU member states, then EU politicians would have no choice, otherwise they would risk tearing the union apart. This is only hypothetical at the moment, but it's not a completely unrealistic possibility in the future.

One possibility I hope never becomes reality. Europe needs a force like the EU to guarantee these rights. Our awful history in this matter is but testament to that. My gripe with the EU isn't that it establishes basic rights and basic requirements, it is that it often also establishes ceilings on them that prevent the members from going further and offering more in terms of, for example, Environmental Protection and worker's rights. IMHO, the EU should act as a sort of upward-pushing equaliser, and not a bidirectional squeezer.

I agree that Poland can't really complain about what they're getting by the way of things like gay rights. That's what they agreed to when they joined. But that doesn't discount the possibility of changing things. There's increasing Euroscepticism across the continent. If this Euroscepticism increases sufficiently, then its possible that it could be harnessed to bring about real change in EU membership. Perhaps a system where more Eurosceptic countries opted out of the social side of the EU and paricipated solely in the trade side, without their home affairs, human rights, defence, foreign policy, ect being touched.

If there was enough pressure for this among enough EU member states, then EU politicians would have no choice, otherwise they would risk tearing the union apart. This is only hypothetical at the moment, but it's not a completely unrealistic possibility in the future.


That's one version of the EU I never hope to see....

It will get harder and harder to get agreement amongst 25 member states for a direction for the EU. Which makes it all the more important that a minority is not allowed to drive us further down the process of ever-closer union.

Maybe we did sign up for that, but in a political union of (iirc) best part of 400 million people you can't continue with an unpopular policy just because in signing up 30 odd years ago your nation agreed to it.

Oh yeah, Fass, I was agreeing with you. At least on this bit
"I do agree that it itself as an institution needs reforming to become a lot more transparent and democratic - really, no argument there, I would love for the Commission to truly be subservient to Parliament, and that the Council of Ministers be turned into an "Upper House" of sorts. It is way too distant from accountability before the citizens today.

But it has never been coy about what it expects from the members who join, and adherence to the rights of citizens spelled out in its laws is one of them."

http://365gay.com/Newscon06/01/011806europe.htm

Well among all these threads where you see homophobes give piss poor excuses for homophobia and where they try to latch on to Gay Pride events, conveniently omitting that every day is Straight Pride day wherever you go (I can't go five minutes outside without having heterosexuality shoved down my throat, and I'll tell you it's not as pleasant as it sounds at all), I think it's nice of the European Parliament to once and for all go "Hey, there is no excuse for homophobia, so, have a cup of STFU." :)

For once I can finally be proud of something the EU has acomplished. I believe strongly in European federalism. That is a very long way down the road but until then I can be proud for a little social progressivism they've shown here.

I find it a bit odd to denounce a phobia. People with phobias should get help to get over it, not be denounced.
Besides, people are scary..

So who else wants heterosexuality shoved down their throats right now? :)

So who else wants heterosexuality shoved down their throats right now? :)

I misread that at first. :(

share the love and peace :fluffle:

I misread that at first. :(
misread is as what? :D

misread is as what? :D

It would violate the PG-13 rule if I told you.

It would violate the PG-13 rule if I told you.
How about you tell everyone and not just me in particular then?

It would violate the PG-13 rule if I told you.
since it's LP, I would wager that the "mis-read" one was the one LP was thinking about. :p

How about you tell everyone and not just me in particular then?

Don't be cheeky. Let's just say it involved throats and things to shove down them - things I am in possession of and would have gladly shoved down yours.

*ahem*

in sweden, if you say or write something that offends homos, you go to jail under their hate-crime-lawA Swedish court has sentenced Ake Green, a pastor belonging to the Pentecostal movement, to a month in prison, under a law against incitement, after he was found guilty of having offended homosexuals in a sermon, according to Ecumenical News International.

Ca va de soi, of course, and there is a debate here on whether we should leave or not - people here are the most Eurosceptic of all and if the referendum on joining were to be held today, we would not join. There is a perception that we are too small to be able to affect, that the bigger, Western countries are being too complacent about all this, and that our government is far too willing to compromise in certain issues where a compromise is a failure to us, be to environmental policy, or civil liberties. Fortunately the negative bent of the populace will lead to the government being more "bellicose" in Brussels.

This of course raises the question - how does one leave? There are no rules as to that, and the only ones that were, were in the (fortunately) rejected Constitution. It would be interesting, although devastating to the Union, to see someone try to leave.
Well, that's the whole crux of the thing right there -- is there such a thing as "European" beyond a geographical location and if there is, does anyone want to be it enough to give up a measure of national sovereignty?

My opinion on this is just so much talk because I'm an American (though the way things are going here, who knows -- the old country is starting to look not as bad to me as it did to my great-grandparents). That said, however, I will say I'm pretty much a federalist, to the extent that I'm anti-nationalist (citizen of the world and all that crap), so I'm rooting for the EU. But it is a grand experiment, and there's no guarantee it will succeed. It really is asking people not only to redefine their public identity to an extent, but also to redefine what their interests are and how to fulfill and protect them. It's moving away from the national model, and I, personally, believe that this is the wave of the future. Whether that wave is here yet or not, is another question. It's actually pretty radical and the more I hear about it, the more obvious its radical nature is becoming. I wonder if the people who started it all, realized how radical an idea it was.

As for how to leave the Union, let me suggest step 1: quit paying the dues. That's a good way to kicked out of any club. ;)

in sweden, if you say or write something that offends homos, you go to jail under their hate-crime-law

Before you speak of Sweden again, I suggest you get a clue. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=456541)

Sweden is a wonderful country. Probably the only thing they've got going against them is their relatively large external-debt. $172 billion US. Most of it was achieved in the 70s and 80s as most developed nations, however it's nothing compared to the US's 600+ billion debt that's increasing every year.

in sweden, if you say or write something that offends homos, you go to jail under their hate-crime-law

Untrue. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4530209.stm

Kossackja I suggest to ignore The Cat-Tribe. The Cat-Tribe doesn't seem to understand or share the view that whoever labels minority groups that don't threaten or offend anyone, such as homosexuals, as "cancer's of society" should be considered a promoter of hatred and active discrimination.

Kossackja I suggest to ignore The Cat-Tribe. The Cat-Tribe doesn't seem to understand or share the view that whoever labels minority groups that don't threaten or offend anyone, such as homosexuals, as "cancer's of society" should be considered a promoter of hatred and active discrimination.

Um. I don't think you know jackshit about me.

I consider someone that would label any minority group a "cancer" to be an asshole -- as well as a promoter of hatred and active discrimination.

As an American, however, I do believe in freedom of speech.

Regardless, Kossackja was wrong -- in more than one respect.

Untrue. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4530209.stm

This is the update to that story: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=456541

This is the update to that story: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=456541

Thanks. I thought the guy was ultimately acquitted in that case, but I couldn't find a link to final outcome.

EDIT: Because my views are in danger of being misrepresented, I should add that I was glad the guy was acquitted because of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I think, however, he is a "cancer." I fully support hate crime legislation and abhor homophobia.

Ever considered though that keeping it constantly in the foreground could be harming the cause?

Case in point, the current Republican/Christian control of the US. Constantly rubbing in homosexuality will just get the extreme right on the defensive. Unlike myself, politicians don't have the luxory of acceptance (it could lose votes from the extreme rightist voters!)

The holocaust was killing people by the hundreds in horrible ways.
Homophobia doesn't kill near that many people in near as horrid ways (that I've seen - again, I don't watch TV)

But what it all boils down to in the end is love, right? It's about a man loving a man or a woman loving a woman.. Sexual relations that honestly don't need to leave the bedroom. If everyone just shut up about what they do on their own time, it wouldn't matter to anyone because nobody would know.

True, but then again, wouldn't it be nice for the heterosexual community to keep their vertical sex in the home rather than sprawling themselves against the nearest object of support so they can have their way with each other.

i missed that devellopment of the story, thank you for the update, Fass.I was glad the guy was acquitted because of freedom of speech and freedom of religion...
I fully support hate crime legislation and abhor homophobia.now what is it, are you for laws making homophobia a crime or not?

Well, let's take this as an example: When I was growing up, I was expected to get a girlfriend. All the books I read were about princes and princesses. I turn on the TV, they're all straight and all the ads are about heterosexuality luring to buy that car/use that shampoo/get this mortgage so that the other sex will like you. I step out my door, there are straight couples all over the place. All the cards for sweethearts are for heterosexuals in the stores. The pictures on the cereal boxes are of happy straight people doing straight things in the morning, with the mother and the father making their brood eat the sugary cereal. My application for a student loan assumes I have a female spouse if I have one. The tax return does as well. I go to school, everyone is straight and talks about their wives and how their life together is. I go out to have a drink, straight women hit on me all the time.
I am discriminated against when people find out I'm gay on a regular basis. I've been spit at, I've been attacked and bashed and I've had the police refuse to let me fill out a form to report the attack - a form, which, by the way, also assumed I was straight.

And so on and so on. And then I come to this forum and I see people bitch about a parade that only happens once a year, and bitch about how all those fags and dykes are, oh, so in their faces. Well, you know what: You live my life for a day and see who the hell is in who's face.

I agree totally with the rest. It is disgusting to see this kind of blatant homophobia and discrimination in this day and age. But as to the bolded bit, Fass, are you saying that straight women shouldn't hit on guys, or that they should first interrogate them about their sexuality? Coz I'd feel real uncomfortable walking up to a guy and going, "hi are you gay? No, good I shall now proceed to hit on you."

I agree totally with the rest. It is disgusting to see this kind of blatant homophobia and discrimination in this day and age. But as to the bolded bit, Fass, are you saying that straight women shouldn't hit on guys, or that they should first interrogate them about their sexuality? Coz I'd feel real uncomfortable walking up to a guy and going, "hi are you gay? No, good I shall now proceed to hit on you."

Of course not. The point of that was that was to show that straight people hit on me all the time and I am expected to take it nicely, while if a gay person hits on someone straight, they get all "omg, the gays are forcing themselves on me, shoving their homosexuality in my face!".

I'm very relieved. At first I thought your Government was restricting free speech of the people, not forcing the govts to at least try to be progressive.

Just to start off on the right foot, Fass I've got nothing against you or everyone else of your orientation (using gay or homosexuality just promotes the differences and we don't need that.)

But all it comes down to is decency. Have your parade, be proud of yourself, but try to set a modicum of decency. Don't let the minority strip down naked and wave themselves about for all to see (including children). It's that group that, obviously, shapes people's view on the group as a whole.

Going back to the holocaust. You think all of Germany were Nazi's and wanted to kills the Jewish and everyone else who was different? Not a chance. In that situation though, they were terrified to speak out against the ruling party. You on the other hand, can denounce those that just want to flaunt their body parts and get away with it under the guise of "pride".

Look, I'll come clean. I don't LIKE gay people, but neither do I hate them, nor denounce their way of life. My opinion of people comes from my experience with them. I really haven't HAD any experiences, which is fine since I don't need to know sexual orientation to judge a person.

You talk about how society is "cramming heterosexuality down your throat." Just realize that's the majority and that's how things go. No matter what, the majority determines everything. You also notice it's mostly attractive people too! Does this mean ugly people should go around waving themselves in the middle of the street. No.

I don't know if it makes sense or is structured properly, but that's my speil for now.

now what is it, are you for laws making homophobia a crime or not?
If I understand the matter correctly, Cat and I are in the same boat: we do not believe that homophobia should be a crime, because homophobia is feelings/opinions, and we believe that individuals should be free to have whatever feelings and opinions they choose. However, we do believe in laws restricting how individuals are permitted to express their feelings and opinions.

For instance, if a homophobe wants to have a public rally, with all the necessary permits etc, and talk about how gays are evil, then they have as much right to do that as any of us would have to throw a similar rally denouncing homophobia. A homophobe has as much right to put out an anti-gay newsletter as I have to put out an anti-homophobia newsletter. On the other hand, a homophobe does not have the right to assault gay people, any more than I have the right to assault homophobes. A homophobe does not have the right to steal or vandalize the property of homosexuals, just as I do not have the right to steal or vandalize the property of homophobes.

Of course not. The point of that was that was to show that straight people hit on me all the time and I am expected to take it nicely, while if a gay person hits on someone straight, they get all "omg, the gays are forcing themselves on me, shoving their homosexuality in my face!".
Indeed! I've always detested this double standard.

Now if they'll only outlaw hoplophobia...

Now if they'll only outlaw hoplophobia...

Nothing was outlawed here, and hoplophobia is a positive thing - it keeps you from shooting other people or yourself.

Nothing was outlawed here, and hoplophobia is a positive thing - it keeps you from shooting other people or yourself.

Hoplophobia refers to all weapons, even martial arts.

Tell me that this weapon would be too much. I admit he's older and a bit hairy, but he's built like a rock.
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b283/jtkwon/ChuckNorris-Motivator.jpg

You talk about how society is "cramming heterosexuality down your throat." Just realize that's the majority and that's how things go. No matter what, the majority determines everything. You also notice it's mostly attractive people too! Does this mean ugly people should go around waving themselves in the middle of the street. No.


I don't really think anybody has much of a problem with that as such. It is the majority, so this is what we will be presented with. Fair enough.
But it stops being ok if the minority can't do the exact same thing. It's not ok that homosexuals have to risk running into an open fist by hitting on random people who just happen to be straight, but are expected to laugh and find it funny if a straight person hits on them.
It's not ok that a movie about a heterosexual relationship/lovestory get rated G, but a movie about a homosexual relationship/lovestory get rated PG13 or above.
It's not ok that some people here complain about having homosexuality shoved in their face anytime somebody so much as mentions his/her sexuality in a thread about the topic, but threads about heterosexual sex are accepted by the vast majority (those who don't like them just stay away, I don't think I ever saw anybody complain in ANY of them)

I could go on for hours, but I hope you catch my drift...

I don't really think anybody has much of a problem with that as such. It is the majority, so this is what we will be presented with. Fair enough.
But it stops being ok if the minority can't do the exact same thing. It's not ok that homosexuals have to risk running into an open fist by hitting on random people who just happen to be straight, but are expected to laugh and find it funny if a straight person hits on them.
It's not ok that a movie about a heterosexual relationship/lovestory get rated G, but a movie about a homosexual relationship/lovestory get rated PG13 or above.
It's not ok that some people here complain about having homosexuality shoved in their face anytime somebody so much as mentions his/her sexuality in a thread about the topic, but threads about heterosexual sex are accepted by the vast majority (those who don't like them just stay away, I don't think I ever saw anybody complain in ANY of them)

I could go on for hours, but I hope you catch my drift...
You know what makes me really sad? The argument about gay people "shoving their sexuality in people's faces" are exactly the same arguments that racists used to use about black people who wanted to ride in the front of the bus, or eat in "white" restaurants. The racists would say, "We're okay with there being black people, and we're okay with black people going to movies or riding busses or playing ball, but they shouldn't FLAUNT their blackness. They shouldn't force us white folks to SEE them being black. They shouldn't give their kids such black names, because then the rest of us would have to HEAR those black names. They shouldn't speak in "black" slang, because then we have to HEAR their black voices. They should just quietly keep to themselves, and go be black where we don't have to see it or know about it. Why must they shove their blackness in our faces?"

You know what makes me really sad? The argument about gay people "shoving their sexuality in people's faces" are exactly the same arguments that racists used to use about black people who wanted to ride in the front of the bus, or eat in "white" restaurants. The racists would say, "We're okay with there being black people, and we're okay with black people going to movies or riding busses or playing ball, but they shouldn't FLAUNT their blackness. They shouldn't force us white folks to SEE them being black. They shouldn't give their kids such black names, because then the rest of us would have to HEAR those black names. They shouldn't speak in "black" slang, because then we have to HEAR their black voices. They should just quietly keep to themselves, and go be black where we don't have to see it or know about it. Why must they shove their blackness in our faces?"

My thoughts exactly. I just didn't know how to phrase it.

My thoughts exactly. I just didn't know how to phrase it.
It just frightens me that we lived through THIS EXACT SAME CRAP less than half a century ago. People who lived through the Civil Rights Movement are ALREADY making the same mistakes over again. People will denounce racism in one breath and then praise homophobia in another...and they don't even seem to register the contradiction.

Are we, as a people, really this stupid? Are we really so unable to learn from experience? Are we really prepared to explain to yet another generation of children that yes, bigotry was once enshrined in our laws and our culture?

I once asked my mother if it was really true that people used to hate black children so much that they wouldn't let the children go to school. A few years later, I watched a gay student pelted with stones and broken bottles as he tried to walk from his bus into his school building. I once asked if people really tried to stop interracial couples from getting married. Now I watch as state after state passes anti-marriage, anti-family amendments that violate the fundamental civil rights of countless loving (tax-paying!) couples.

I used to have trouble really believing in the level of hate described in my history books. I don't have trouble believing it any more.

Ever considered though that keeping it constantly in the foreground could be harming the cause?

Case in point, the current Republican/Christian control of the US. Constantly rubbing in homosexuality will just get the extreme right on the defensive. Unlike myself, politicians don't have the luxory of acceptance (it could lose votes from the extreme rightist voters!)

The holocaust was killing people by the hundreds in horrible ways.
Homophobia doesn't kill near that many people in near as horrid ways (that I've seen - again, I don't watch TV)

But what it all boils down to in the end is love, right? It's about a man loving a man or a woman loving a woman.. Sexual relations that honestly don't need to leave the bedroom. If everyone just shut up about what they do on their own time, it wouldn't matter to anyone because nobody would know.

I think the problem they(homosexuals) are haveing now is they want to have the same rights as heterosexual(spelling!?!?!) couples...ie. Marrage or at LEAST a legal union. Which I think they should have because the only "real" argument against it in the US is christian belieifs... Which brings up the question...Why do we have to suffer though christian beleifs if not all of us are christian...(please don't start a debate on this question in this thread. If you wish to go start a new thread)

And it's not all behind the bedroom door. Why can't they hold hands in public? Why can't they give their partner a peck on the cheek without the fear of physical retribution from some queer bashing bastard?(i'm not talking about tonsle hockey kind of kiss...I don't want to see that in public from anyone! BLECH!)

Untrue. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4530209.stm
um...yeah, he needs to go to jail...

um...yeah, he needs to go to jail...
Hell no! He should be encouraged to continue speaking his hate! It's a beautiful example for the gay-rights movement: on one side, you have loving couples and families, private citizens who simply want the freedom to make their personal choices without the government controlling their genitals. On the other side, you have hate-filled crazies who spout lies at every opportunity.

Hell no! He should be encouraged to continue speaking his hate! It's a beautiful example for the gay-rights movement: on one side, you have loving couples and families, private citizens who simply want the freedom to make their personal choices without the government controlling their genitals. On the other side, you have hate-filled crazies who spout lies at every opportunity.

*giggle* to true, to true.

Hell no! He should be encouraged to continue speaking his hate! It's a beautiful example for the gay-rights movement: on one side, you have loving couples and families, private citizens who simply want the freedom to make their personal choices without the government controlling their genitals. On the other side, you have hate-filled crazies who spout lies at every opportunity.as long as people don't take him as speaking for all of Christianity... either way is fine.

I once asked if people really tried to stop interracial couples from getting married. Now I watch as state after state passes anti-marriage, anti-family amendments that violate the fundamental civil rights of countless loving (tax-paying!) couples.

I wonder... could the homosexual couples argue that since they have less rights than their straight counterparts - they should also pay less tax ? Less for less so to speak.
And would the US government, faced with that sudden loss of tax-money (also due to an enormous rise of people living together claiming to be gay ;)), suddenly decide to grant equal rights ?

I wonder... could the homosexual couples argue that since they have less rights than their straight counterparts - they should also pay less tax ? Less for less so to speak.

Some do try to argue that. Many gay couples point out that their tax dollars are spent on benefits for hetero couples, benefits that the gay couples are prevented from enjoying. Of course, the homophobe response is that the gay couples are free to enjoy those benefits...if they settle down into nice hetero relationships. Which is as stupid as saying that interracial couples can only enjoy marriage benefits if they split up and form nice racially-uniform unions.


And would the US government, faced with that sudden loss of tax-money (also due to an enormous rise of people living together claiming to be gay ;)), suddenly decide to grant equal rights ?
If there were a way to get every gay citizen to stop paying taxes at the same time, I think the US government would get a very nasty surprise. A huge amount of revenue is being taken from gay citizens, and if they stood by the "no taxation without representation" principle then there would probably be some non-trivial fireworks.

um...yeah, he needs to go to jail...

What is wrong with you people? Whatever happened to free speech?

Also, would someone care to explain to me what gay pride is about? I can't see anything to be proud of: after all, it's not like to get to choose.

You might as well have "Ginger Pride" parades.

What is wrong with you people? Whatever happened to free speech?

How about "the more influence your words have, the less right you have to abuse them" ?

How about "the more influence your words have, the less right you have to abuse them" ?

Who are you to say it is an abuse?

How about "the more influence your words have, the less right you have to abuse them" ?

Man, what? I agree that what the priest said was stupid, bit you shouldnt be able to censor or imprison him unless he advocated violence to homosexuals. Your post seems to suggest anyone that can reach a large amount of people whould be banned from speaking controversial views.

I agree that what the priest said was stupid, bit you shouldnt be able to censor or imprison him unless he advocated violence to homosexuals.You shouldn't be able to imprison him until he whacked a gay around the head. Up until that point, he is causing no actual bodily harm.

um...yeah, he needs to go to jail...

No not really.

If you want to claim freedom of speech, you have to allow for asswipes like this to spew the filth.

Jail time is deserved when he says "they are a cancer and they must be assaulted and or killed."

His message is bad; defining proper speech is worst!

You shouldn't be able to imprison him until he whacked a gay around the head. Up until that point, he is causing no actual bodily harm.

The US and the UK have laws against advocating violence, inciting riots etc, dont they?

Well thats good to hear. You think gays have it bad though? Try being a vegetarian. You suddenly are being bashed from conservatives and liberals. Always shoving their meat eating in your face while putting you down for even mentioning vegetarianism.

Gay vegetarians on the other hand...

Well thats good to hear. You think gays have it bad though? Try being a vegetarian. You suddenly are being bashed from conservatives and liberals. Always shoving their meat eating in your face while putting you down for even mentioning vegetarianism.

Gay vegetarians on the other hand...

:eek:
You don't want to hear the question that suddenly popped up in my head about vegan gays and oral sex....

:eek:
You don't want to hear the question that suddenly popped up in my head about vegan gays and oral sex....

GET OUT OF MY HEAD!

:p

Well thats good to hear. You think gays have it bad though? Try being a vegetarian. You suddenly are being bashed from conservatives and liberals. Always shoving their meat eating in your face while putting you down for even mentioning vegetarianism.

Gay vegetarians on the other hand...
Ugh, omnivores are often asshats.

I mean, if gay people want to complain about being asked why they're gay, they should try going vegetarian for a month and see how many times they get asked about their eating habits.


as for the oral sex comment... if you're wondering about taste, yes, vegetarians do taste better.

as for the oral sex comment... if you're wondering about taste, yes, vegetarians do taste better.

Is it being a vegetarian or the amount of caffine intake? A gal once told me somebody who drinks a great deal of coffee is rather nasty tasting.

:eek:
You don't want to hear the question that suddenly popped up in my head about vegan gays and oral sex....


I ALWAYS want to hear questions about oral sex

Ugh, omnivores are often asshats.

I mean, if gay people want to complain about being asked why they're gay, they should try going vegetarian for a month and see how many times they get asked about their eating habits.


as for the oral sex comment... if you're wondering about taste, yes, vegetarians do taste better.

lol

I would say that omnivores that engage in asshattery are asshats but that's as far as I will go.

Yes it is true that vegetarians taste better. And it could be the caffine intake I guess but I think it's the whole diet.

For once I can finally be proud of something the EU has acomplished. I believe strongly in European federalism. That is a very long way down the road but until then I can be proud for a little social progressivism they've shown here.
Do you know anything about the EU? It has achieved many more important things than passing this declaration.

in sweden, if you say or write something that offends homos, you go to jail under their hate-crime-law
You news is quite old. The charges were dropped. There was a danger that free speech (even if it was homophobic) was under threat, but it won out in the end.

Nothing was outlawed here, and hoplophobia is a positive thing - it keeps you from shooting other people or yourself.
How is any phobia (an irrational fear) a good thing?

If there were a way to get every gay citizen to stop paying taxes at the same time, I think the US government would get a very nasty surprise. A huge amount of revenue is being taken from gay citizens, and if they stood by the "no taxation without representation" principle then there would probably be some non-trivial fireworks.
Presumably all the lawbreakers would be jailed. Imgaine the international headlines, "US puts all gay citizens in prison". It would surely be the final nail in the coffin of Europe's respect for America.

as for the oral sex comment... if you're wondering about taste, yes, vegetarians do taste better.
Hmmm I had not noticed that

oh and sorry for going off topic. back to your regularly scheduled bickering

Hmmm I had not noticed that


I guess it's time for you to do an experiment. Try to get an omnivore and vegetarian there at teh same time for direct comparison.

I guess it's time for you to do an experiment. Try to get an omnivore and vegetarian there at teh same time for direct comparison.

Would be interesting to find out... my problem is that I don't really know many vegetarians.

I guess it's time for you to do an experiment. Try to get an omnivore and vegetarian there at teh same time for direct comparison.
Eye eye captian

Would be interesting to find out... my problem is that I don't really know many vegetarians.

I'd be willing to offer myself up in the name of science. :p

I'd be willing to offer myself up in the name of science. :p
Ohhh I call omnivore position!

I'd be willing to offer myself up in the name of science. :p

As long as you're satisfied with a personal opinion and I won't have to write a thesis about the subjects after doing the research ... :D

As long as you're satisfied with a personal opinion and I won't have to write a thesis about the subjects after doing the research ... :D


I'll only be satisfied if your opinion is that I taste better than UpwardThrust. If not I would liek to retake the test until I finally do win the battle of the flavors.

I'll only be satisfied if your opinion is that I taste better than UpwardThrust. If not I would liek to retake the test until I finally do win the battle of the flavors.
Anything in the name of science

Anything in the name of science


Yep - we must advance our knowledge of this very important topic.

I'll only be satisfied if your opinion is that I taste better than UpwardThrust. If not I would liek to retake the test until I finally do win the battle of the flavors.

I once heard a rumour about drinking a lot of pineapple juice... but that might have been an urban legend.

How many tests are we talking about here?

I once heard a rumour about drinking a lot of pineapple juice... but that might have been an urban legend.

How many tests are we talking about here?

maybe we should try a whole buffet of people with different diets for taste testing. Get some raw foodists and fruitarians in there as well. Though I'm not sure if those kind of people really exist.

maybe we should try a whole buffet of people with different diets for taste testing. Get some raw foodists and fruitarians in there as well. Though I'm not sure if those kind of people really exist.

I've heard of fruitarians... though they somehow don't seem to be the kind of people who'd get the spirit of the experiment.
What on earth are raw foodists?

I've heard of fruitarians... though they somehow don't seem to be the kind of people who'd get the spirit of the experiment.
What on earth are raw foodists?


raw foodists are people who only eat food that is raw :p

i think they are always vegan, though I imagine some may eat raw fish.

I mean, if gay people want to complain about being asked why they're gay, they should try going vegetarian for a month and see how many times they get asked about their eating habits.

You know, I think I have to call BS on that one. I may not be a vegitarian, but I often go many many months at a stretch without eating meat (just because I don't really feel like it) and I often order veggie food options because I happen to like them. I also was a vegitarian for about a year because we (incorrectly) thought that I had a medical condition that required a change in my diet. During all of my various veggie periods, I have never ONCE gotten crap from a single person about it. The worst that's happened is somebody said, "Oh, are you a vegitarian?"

On the other hand, as a member of the "out" community of non-heterosexuals, I have been insulted, sexually harassed, and physically threatened due to my sexual orientation. Ordering a veggie entre at a restaurant has never gotten me so much as a sideways glance, but sitting in a booth next to my girlfriend "provoked" a nearby patron to dump food on us.

You people are just perverts!

You people are just perverts!
If it's wrong to find sexual messages in a discussion of dietary choices, then baby I don't wanna be right. ;)

You know, I think I have to call BS on that one. I may not be a vegitarian, but I often go many many months at a stretch without eating meat (just because I don't really feel like it) and I often order veggie food options because I happen to like them. I also was a vegitarian for about a year because we (incorrectly) thought that I had a medical condition that required a change in my diet. During all of my various veggie periods, I have never ONCE gotten crap from a single person about it. The worst that's happened is somebody said, "Oh, are you a vegitarian?"

On the other hand, as a member of the "out" community of non-heterosexuals, I have been insulted, sexually harassed, and physically threatened due to my sexual orientation. Ordering a veggie entre at a restaurant has never gotten me so much as a sideways glance, but sitting in a booth next to my girlfriend "provoked" a nearby patron to dump food on us.

No it truely isn't BS. Perhaps you are in a more tolerant community than we. When you look at the threads dedicated to vegetarianism on this board you will see many of the same intolerant pricks that I encounter monthly if not weekly in my personal life. I get shit from co-workers, people at every gathering I've been too that involves food, waiters at a few eating establishments have even ridiculed my diet choice.

But you are corect that vegetarians are less likely to be physically harassed or threatened because of our diet.

No it truely isn't BS. Perhaps you are in a more tolerant community than we. When you look at the threads dedicated to vegetarianism on this board you will see many of the same intolerant pricks that I encounter monthly if not weekly in my personal life. I get shit from co-workers, people at every gathering I've been too that involves food, waiters at a few eating establishments have even ridiculed my diet choice.

But you are corect that vegetarians are less likely to be physically harassed or threatened because of our diet.
I'm not saying veggies never get crap, because I know they sometimes do. However, I don't think veggies face anywhere NEAR the level of harassment and societal distain that non-heterosexuals do. When the President of the United States proposes an amendment banning vegitarians from getting married, then maybe veggies will at least be in the running.

I also think that the majority of "anti-veggie" responses have to do more with the perceived "vegitarian movement" than with the actual decision to be a vegitarian. Most non-veggies just hate the bitchy veggies, the ones who feel the need to talk about animal cruelty every time somebody orders a burger. These are the veggies who make their diet everybody else's business. These are the veggies that attract the strongest responses, and the most negative ones.

I've lived in three completely different areas of the US, and in several different cities, suburbs, and towns. I have been both gay and vegitarian at varying points throughout my life. I have never seen a single place in which anti-veggie sentiment came anywhere remotely close to anti-gay sentiment, with the single exception of the gay bar-and-grill at which I tended bar one summer.

I'm not saying veggies never get crap, because I know they sometimes do. However, I don't think veggies face anywhere NEAR the level of harassment and societal distain that non-heterosexuals do. When the President of the United States proposes an amendment banning vegitarians from getting married, then maybe veggies will at least be in the running.


I know, when I brought up the point initially I was doing it for a bit of comic releif by drawing parallels.

I also think that the majority of "anti-veggie" responses have to do more with the perceived "vegitarian movement" than with the actual decision to be a vegitarian. Most non-veggies just hate the bitchy veggies, the ones who feel the need to talk about animal cruelty every time somebody orders a burger. These are the veggies who make their diet everybody else's business. These are the veggies that attract the strongest responses, and the most negative ones.

That is true but I think the vegetarian movement that people are so loudly against is being overblown in their mind as I know many vegetarians and only one of them is outspoken about it. I think too many people equate all vegetarians to PETA erronously as I have too often had to explain that I am not a member of PETA, nor do I agree with their tactics, plus I coudl care less what anybody else eats. Omnivores are by far more outspoken against vegetarians than vegetarians are about ominivores.

I've lived in three completely different areas of the US, and in several different cities, suburbs, and towns. I have been both gay and vegitarian at varying points throughout my life. I have never seen a single place in which anti-veggie sentiment came anywhere remotely close to anti-gay sentiment, with the single exception of the gay bar-and-grill at which I tended bar one summer.

I am in complete agreement with you because I am out as a vegetarian but there are plenty of people I hide my bisexuality from.

It seems to work both ways, from my experiences. I, being a male, with a date (a female platinum blonde) went to a lesbian bar I had occasionally frequented with several friends of mine (lesbian women of course), and I went to the bathroom and came back to find that my date had half a dozen new beers in front of her. It was quite humorous.

If heterosexuals can be rude, so can homosexuals (or asexuals for that matter) be rude when the tables are turned. Sexuality has nothing to do with the fact that people treat other people in ways they would rather not be treated themselves.

If heterosexuals can be rude, so can homosexuals (or asexuals for that matter) be rude when the tables are turned. Sexuality has nothing to do with the fact that people treat other people in ways they would rather not be treated themselves.

:eek: Now you are going to tell us that there are gay men that have no sense of fashion?!?!?!?!?!

:p

:eek: Now you are going to tell us that there are gay men that have no sense of fashion?!?!?!?!?!

:p

No, because a gay male that has no fashion sense isn't homosexual, he's asexual.... :p

lol j/k

Thank you BitchKitten. I'd rather not hear the taste of being described by ANYONE, man or woman.

You know what makes me really sad? The argument about gay people "shoving their sexuality in people's faces" are exactly the same arguments that racists used to use about black people who wanted to ride in the front of the bus, or eat in "white" restaurants. The racists would say, "We're okay with there being black people, and we're okay with black people going to movies or riding busses or playing ball, but they shouldn't FLAUNT their blackness. They shouldn't force us white folks to SEE them being black. They shouldn't give their kids such black names, because then the rest of us would have to HEAR those black names. They shouldn't speak in "black" slang, because then we have to HEAR their black voices. They should just quietly keep to themselves, and go be black where we don't have to see it or know about it. Why must they shove their blackness in our faces?"

Nice logic, but no. Being black or any other race is biological. And so far, sexual orientation isn't. And "urban" speak or whatever it's called can be intimidating, mostly due to the stereotyping of black youth today. But so can any other language.

Of course not. The point of that was that was to show that straight people hit on me all the time and I am expected to take it nicely, while if a gay person hits on someone straight, they get all "omg, the gays are forcing themselves on me, shoving their homosexuality in my face!".

Ah, I get it now. Please forgive me, I'm a noob and don't know everyone's posting style yet.

I know exactly what you mean. As for me, I take it as flattery when lesbians hit on me. Just like with anyone who does it.

And when they don't, I just assume they don't appreciate the finer things in life :D .

In an aside; it does depend on context. I had a friend who was hit on by a guy, whilst in a strip club. With female dancers. He found it a little disconcerting.

<snip>
Nice logic, but no. Being black or any other race is biological. And so far, sexual orientation isn't. And "urban" speak or whatever it's called can be intimidating, mostly due to the stereotyping of black youth today. But so can any other language.
Don't jump to conclusions. Studies are still being done, but so far there is increasing evidence that sexuality is indeed biological. The indications so far are that, in every large population, roughly the same percentages of people will be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual, and that these tendencies are hardwired into our brains from birth.

The issue is clouded by the fact that, to some extent, we can control and manipulate our sexuality (more than our physical gender, for instance), depending on our experiences and motives. So there may be gays-by-choice, but there are also just plain gays.

The bottom line is there has never been a society that did not include homosexuals. It's just a variety of human being -- left/right-handed, male/female, gay/straight, tall/short, etc.

Nice logic, but no. Being black or any other race is biological. And so far, sexual orientation isn't. And "urban" speak or whatever it's called can be intimidating, mostly due to the stereotyping of black youth today. But so can any other language.
No; being "black" or "any other race" is a choice, a choice to lump people together based on a particular arbitrary physical characteristic.

No; being "black" or "any other race" is a choice, a choice to lump people together based on a particular arbitrary physical characteristic.
Nicely put. :)

Well there will certainly be no more "homophobia" now: The EU HAS SPOKEN! :rolleyes:

Interesting how a "Merry Christmas" sign on city hall is "shoving your religion down my throat", and this endless tirade of homosexuality is just a calm statement of opinion.

Watch the Merry Christmas backlash.

Hell, I'm no Christian and I'd join.....

Don't jump to conclusions. Studies are still being done, but so far there is increasing evidence that sexuality is indeed biological. The indications so far are that, in every large population, roughly the same percentages of people will be heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual, and that these tendencies are hardwired into our brains from birth.

The issue is clouded by the fact that, to some extent, we can control and manipulate our sexuality (more than our physical gender, for instance), depending on our experiences and motives. So there may be gays-by-choice, but there are also just plain gays.

The bottom line is there has never been a society that did not include homosexuals. It's just a variety of human being -- left/right-handed, male/female, gay/straight, tall/short, etc.

That sounds like a risky slope to argue from, the come back to it is something along the lines of: cleft lips are genetic traits that show up at birth and every society has a certain percentage of them and always has...Of course we fix those now.

Percentages of birth ratios can be used many ways, I'd recommend you use them with caution.