Wtf, Ca?

[Etoile]

Biggest waste of time here is Etoiles superficial Snap comment. I guess there is a clique thing going here.

Why thank you. I love being called the biggest waste of time, and superficial too!

May I politely suggest that you lighten up. It's a conversation, not a high school debate competition. So I threw in a random comment rather than contributing helpfully to the discussion. So sue me.

As for clique, trust me - I don't know anybody in this thread. Except Netzach, because she is beautiful and intelligent and I love to stalk her.

Oops, that was a waste of time too...

 

[Etoile]

Know what I'm reading lately on GLBT blogs? "I'm never doing anything again for black people, fuck 'em they voted against me." I'm not kidding.

Stop the insanity.

I'm seeing the same thing. I really like this post from Pam's House Blend though. I haven't seen anything from Genia over at SistersTalk yet, but if I know her, she's got something cooking.

 

[Netzach]

I'm seeing the same thing. I really like this post from Pam's House Blend though. I haven't seen anything from Genia over at SistersTalk yet, but if I know her, she's got something cooking.

OMG, thank you for the link. I feel not-insane again.

 

[Wolfman1982]

Etoile, you are not a waste of time. Heck you are a wonderful woman, whom I have said before about. That if you and your wife ever happen to get to Denmark, and there is a Depeche Mode party in town (even though I am not a DM fan anymore) you are more than welcome, and if either your wife or you wants to dance, then I would love to dance with you

 

[none2_none2]

Hyperbole is so stupid.

If anyone thinks this is going to move us forward, if anyone thinks that the mainstream GLBT community doesn't need to get its own racism dealt with more actively, THIS is a huge problem. Because however people feel that the Democratic party has been treating queer people lately, that's how the rainbow pride mainstream of the GLBT movement has treated gay people of color, historically.

THAT is a problem. THAT needs to be addressed. When communities feel like they are hurting their own children and neighbors not some abstract celeb, they're going to be less inclined to be scared into stripping rights...

I'm sorry, but I don't think the answer to gay rights is that until we are perfect angels, we don't deserve them. Gays aren't some universal one mind entity. For example, sure I think it would be nice if there were no drag queens. As someone who was raised by two women (no not lesbians, just my grandma and mother), I find it highly offensive. I find it mocking to women. However, they exist and I have to deal with it. Likewise, I find it offensive when I see gays who mock religion. Do you think Sisters of Perpetual Indulgences is not offensive to Catholics? Do you think gay parades where after wards they sell sex toys mocking the Christian religion is appropriate? Like it or not, Christianity (whether people act like Christians or not) is the dominate religion in the US as well as many other places in the world. Imagine how popular such antics would be if they mocked wicans since there is a certain amount of that religion within our gay community. Or imagine they mocked muslims who many don't have much tolerance for offending their icons.


None of us can control the gay subculture as is the nature of any group of a decent size. I remember a lot of gays in a nearby city were frustrated that the only time they could get a crowd was if they offered a free keg and had a drag queen contest -- in other words bring a gay bar atmosphere to the event or they just assume not attend. Sure it was frustrating, but if that is where people are in their interests then there is nothing you can do. Like the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make the horse drink.

The only issue I have with gays on the subject of gay marriage is that with any right comes responsibilities. Within the gay male community, I have seen way to many times where there is a desire for rights but no responsibility. In the gay men's chorus that I used to sing in, the man in charge of the mailing lists had to do SO many changes to make all the time because way too many gays going in and out of relationships like musical chairs. If we clog the court system with marriage, divorce like it is some kind of monthly ritual, then we'll be laughed out of keeping such a right. I just hope that as we gain these rights (even if at a snails pace) that we don't forget just how serious a "marriage" should be. I've been with my partner now for over six years. Relationships take work, but I wouldn't give him up for anything. I don't think I have the courage to ever get a government piece of paper of "marriage, but if the US finally gave us that right I would feel more like I'm finally part of the American experience -- not just a tolerated observer.

(The reason I don't want a government sanctioned piece of paper with my name on it as being married to another guy is that I have always feared that the day would come that such a list might be used to "purge" us in the case that our government ever became like Germany. For those that study some on history, Germany was one of the most tolerant societies for homosexuals prior to the Nazis.)

That being said, my right to basic rights such as the right to marry whom I love regardless of the gender of my partner isn't based on whether I'm a gay Billy Graham/Mother Theresa or a bare breasted diesel dyke who refuses to associate with men, or a drag queen wearing animal leather with a fisting fetish. I don't get to pick who else is gay anymore than I can pick how they think and feel about various political issues because each individual is unique.

Think of it this way. If there was a law banning dwarfs from marrying, would it be an excuse to deny them such a basic right because some thought they didn't reach out enough to the giants or averaged-size people? What about the fact that they are entitled to it simply because it is fair; it is right; and it is the decent thing to do?

If we wait until we are perfect, then we might as well hang up the towel on any rights as it just isn't going to happen whether we are talking about gay rights or the rights of any racial, religious, etc. group of people. That is part of the human experience.

 

[none2_none2]

A tad bit off topic, but I wanted to share...

It is amazing how connected the internet is and how one topic can take you to another... I'm in the boonies and I only have rabbit ears for the TV. (Sorry, I'm cheap!) Anyway, I found www.hulu.com. At least it has some shows to watch. I happened to end up looking at a list of TV episodes from "The Incredible Hulk". I wasn't a big fan of that old show, but I always liked Bill Bixby. Anyway, so then I went to wiki on his name. Then I read about his life which included a wife who had a lesbian relationship with a minor and soon after their son died, she committed suicide. (It was also strange that it was like an hour after she had seen her younger girlfriend.) Anyway, the "National Enquirer" in me wanted to know more, so I clicked on the link to the young lesbian partner. Presto, Voila...:

She is a lesbian, feminist, yet VERY conservative talk show host:

http://tammybruce.com/

Now, I may not agree with her politics, but I love the fact that her thinking is her own blend of her takes on life. Be forewarned about going to that URL, many of you may hate her politics, and it may get you really pissed off. That wasn't my intention. I personally disagree 100% with her opinion on gay marriage. But I can still admire her "aux contraire" take on things. It just shows that gays are as unique as each pebble of sand is. (Of course when I read such political ideas I always wonder if it is for real, or just to get audience ratings higher.)

 

[none2_none2]

...
"Perhaps I am not being clear. The idea that someone could go into a voting booth, consider a chicken, feel compassion and empathy for the chicken, and vote in favor of basic chicken rights; and THEN, immediately afterward, consider a person, feel no compassion or empathy, and vote to strip that person of a basic human right, is ABSURD AND CRIMINAL. That is what I am saying. Priorities, people..

Wayfarm, I don't know you, but I assume from your pic that are a straight male who is an ally to gay causes. I'm not trying to piss you off as we need all the straight allies we can get -- seriously. It is especially rare to find such tolerance from straight males. That is all the reason I commend you highly for being against this proposition...

Still, I really don't think you understand where I'm coming from.

I think I can put myself in the shoes of those who voted for it -- or at least in my head I think I can... They probably aren't mostly vagans or PETA members, but they don't want some of these extreme cruelties to animals. Maybe it is a pet loving thing. Maybe it is they just don't want animals abused to the point that the animal that eventually is on their plate has wallered in its own wastes. I just don't know that part. I just think they saw a problem and wanted it corrected.

On the other hand, they hate gays. (Ok, technically in their mind they hate the sinner and not the sin. What a lovely difference by the way. Maybe it is a non-Christian anti-gay approach which is just as problematic -- that homosexuality simply violates natural order of biology...) So to them they think it as one more indulgence by a sex obsessed subculture...

This really isn't about priorities. It isn't like there is a government budget for chicken free ranging and one for gay marriage, and the government can only afford one more expense. Rather, it is about doing what is right.

The problem with priorities is that if we get into the priorities mindset, then they have a whole host of reasons for people to delay giving us rights -- if ever. Anti-gay rights people would say things like:

Why should gays get rights when there are American soldiers dying in Afganistan and Iraq. Why should gays have rights when we have people who have lost their jobs and/or their life savings during this economic downturn. Why should gays have rights when we don't have a cure for cancer? Why should gays have rights when unborn children are being terminated? Why should gay's have rights when they tend to make more money than their straight counterparts?...
The list goes on and on. In fact, in my nearby town, one guy's logic is that gays are selfish to ask for gay marriage if we also don't include polyamory and incest. He goes on to say that these other groups also just want to be able to love who they want... With that stupid logic, imagine you were out raising funds for ovarian cancer research, and people didn't give you money based on the fact that it was selfish to ask for it when you also didn't include breast cancer fund raising in your request...

My point is, gay rights cannot be looked on as a higher, or lower, or sideways priority over other things. It simply is a matter of fairness, that should be the law of the land. Just like animal cruelty should be enacted (regardless of gay rights, regardless of abortion rights, etc) -- simply because it is the right thing to do.

Again, I want to emphasize your desire to see gay have the rights to marry is a VERY noble attitude. We ALL appreciate it when a non-gay person crosses the isle to wish us equality.

 

[Wolfman1982]

none2_none2. I am tired of trying to label myself any more. But you got an ally in me, and if my father could speak English. You would have an ally in him too, and oh by the way thanks for making the diplomatic wink to the infamous 12 drawings from my home and country . I stopped being a Christian in common sense, because I saw the hypocrisy in Christianity, and what I saw in the American form of Christianity, so I said to myself "fuck it !". I believe in God, I live by the karma laws (yes there are karma in the New testament), and the rest can be discussed calmly and over a cup of tea or two, and that is it. In my religious stuff. I eat pork, I fucking hate the PETA since they gas dogs as a side job, which should be the most cruel and most painful of killing any living being. But back to the main issue, I will support the GLBT rights until I die. And USA needs to open their eyes on many things. But you got an ally. And that is the truth, but don´t be certain that we agree on all things

And PETA are not animal lovers, I believe I would put them in the same boat as eco terrorists. Thanks to Pen and Teller for telling the truth about PETA in one of their BS shows.

 

[none2_none2]

none2_none2. I am tired of trying to label myself any more. But you got an ally in me, and if my father could speak English. You would have an ally in him too, and oh by the way thanks for making the diplomatic wink to the infamous 12 drawings from my home and country . I stopped being a Christian in common sense, because I saw the hypocrisy in Christianity, and what I saw in the American form of Christianity, so I said to myself "fuck it !". I believe in God, I live by the karma laws (yes there are karma in the New testament), and the rest can be discussed calmly and over a cup of tea or two, and that is it. In my religious stuff. I eat pork, I fucking hate the PETA since they gas dogs as a side job, which should be the most cruel and most painful of killing any living being. But back to the main issue, I will support the GLBT rights until I die. And USA needs to open their eyes on many things. But you got an ally. And that is the truth, but don´t be certain that we agree on all things

And PETA are not animal lovers, I believe I would put them in the same boat as eco terrorists. Thanks to Pen and Teller for telling the truth about PETA in one of their BS shows.

Actually, I did have the Danish cartoons in the back of my mind... I talked to an Indian friend/co-worker the other day. He said something I liked. (Heard it before, but not from people from other religions...) He has a Q'uran in his cubical because someone left it there for him to read. I asked him if he was thinking of converting from Hinduism. He said no. I told him I have a Q'uran too because a former roommate had one (he was Catholic). I told him I struggled to understand it, but I want to so that I would understand those that seem to come across to us as hating America and most things western. He told me, that he doesn't know the Q'uran, but common sense told him that any religion that has survived hundreds of years cannot survive on killing people. He said that those who kill in the name of Allah, don't care anything about their god -- only themselves.

At times it would be very easy for me to be very Anti-Muslem. Luckily, I have had some Muslem co-workers over the last few years. One of them really comes to mind was a guy my age who always referred to me as "sir". I think our age difference wasn't that great, so it kind of shocked me why he gave me that level of courtesy that is usually reserved for a superior or an elder person. So every time I hear about another bombing, beheading, etc. My gut feeling is anger as they have bombed Christians, they have bombed Hindus, they have bombed Jews, they have even bombed blacks who are Muslems in southern Sudan... However, I then remember my co-worker and a few others, and then I realize that the "They" doesn't equal "All Muslems". I will say that I'm very concerned about what their religious leaders tell them. Another Muslem co-worker I used to have, was nice to me also. However, when we would talk about things, he would say things he learned that just seemed wrong. He seemed to know via word of mouth who higher up in the corporation was "jewish". I don't know who is "jewish" and I really don't care -- not in a disrespectful sense, but in the sense that it makes no difference. He would also say things like the beheadings appear to have been staged at Abu-grave (spelling) where Americans held prisoners -- in other words the Americans staged this. He didn't say this out of anger. He didn't say this at the top of his head. These were things told to him...

In other words, people higher up share news in such a way that no blame would ever fall on Muslims. To give an analogy, Imagine in Nazi Germany the government had told the German people that there was no Holocaust, but rather "Zionist" and their American sympathizers had staged it in Hollywood in order to turn public opinion against Germans. Then it would be difficult for the German people to reflect on what transpired as it would have been seen as a hoax. So basically, I'm saying that there are good Muslims and there are probably good things to their religion. However, I do think that they are being spoon-fed dis-information.

I did once know a Saudi gay man. He told me that the punishment in his country for homosexuality was to be thrown to your death off the tallest building in the town. While I don't like things about the Christian right, I am thankful that it hasn't gone that far -- at least now-a-days. As to my own beliefs, I don't like using the term "Christian" because of how it has been represented. I do think that the Christian religion is a noble one to follow and believe in. I also don't like using the word "Christian" for myself, because I see it as an "ideal" to strive for. To label myself such (excluding the Christian right that people assume with it) puts on an air of some state of perfection that I have not attained -- BY FAR. The whole thing can be condensed into two things: Love your god & love your neighbor as yourself. I'm not that loving at times, but again it is a nobel ideal to follow...

I think most religions have a part of their past that is very shameful. That seems to be part of humanity -- regardless of religion. A truly non-violent religion, would probably only last a few centuries at the protection of another religion that wasn't so passive -- unfortunately.

As to gays, I can understand why many have turned their backs on the religion of their past. You can only take so much of being told your evil. Either you turn your back on that religion, or you simply learn to ignore the stupid parts of what they preach -- kind of like ignoring a friend when he passes gas. Another term used in the US is "cafeteria Christianity". (Cafeteria being a restaurant where you pick which foods you want to eat as you go through the line.) Meaning a Christian who believes that which makes sense and leaving the foul tasting stuff to someone else in back of the line who may want to believe in that -- such as the "horror" of homosexuality.

As for PETA, yes I have heard many bad things about them. I can only speak for myself. I bought a house on a few acres in the country. I have yet to kill one farm animal. I am not a vagan, but my meat has always been in a package from a grocery store. We have way to many male birds (chickens, turkeys, geese, ducks, etc.), but I don't have the heart to kill any of them. Luckily, I'm not poor, so I can afford to feed them all. I don't know if I'll ever have the heart for that. I'm hoping just for the eggs... My real goal animal-wise is to raise fur animals -- like Alpacas where currently the thought of harvesting them for their meat is considered unacceptable. Perhaps in time, I'll have to get out of the fantasy world of "no-kill". I don't see animals as "equals" to humans, but I do see myself as a steward. I don't like seeing them suffer.

If someone told ME I could marry my guy if I would just kill my animals, I 'd say NO WAY. My partner wouldn't see that as putting him secondary, but rather that my love for him isn't blood thirsty. If I have to kill something or take away rights from something or someone else, than I still don't have MY rights. Rather my enemies (opponents) are simply trying to make ME and other gays look like the really wicked people in such issues. I won't be suckered into such situations. I want my rights free and clear because it's simply the right thing to do.

Thanks again for being another ally of gay issues -- whether you are gay, str8, bi, -- or even label-less which is even better!

 

[Wolfman1982]

Thanks again for being another ally of gay issues -- whether you are gay, str8, bi, -- or even label-less which is even better!

You know, when I first arrived here to the vibe, there I saw myself as strange-straight. That again didn´t feel right , then I saw myself as bisexual. But now adays I see myself as a man, and a human being who love people for what they are. And not what the society sees them to be or not to be. And sexual ? yes I am sexual so label less fits me the most, but if I have to choose one, then bi suits me just fine. But all those labels just makes me cringe now a days. Thanks to the past , and what I have experienced through the years.

 

[blueyz22]

I've only skimmed through this thread but I wanted to say one thing. It's not fair that gays are not allowed to marry because they are expected to pay taxes and follow all rules and regulations that straight people are expected to follow. And yet they are not treated equally.

The people that feel that marriage should be between a man and a woman want to uphold the sanctity of marriage. Yet 3/4 marriages end in divorce. Do these people go out and preach to straight couples that have affairs? Probably the main reason why marriages end in divorce aside from $$ issues.

 

[none2_none2]

The people that feel that marriage should be between a man and a woman want to uphold the sanctity of marriage. Yet 3/4 marriages end in divorce. Do these people go out and preach to straight couples that have affairs? Probably the main reason why marriages end in divorce aside from $$ issues.

Is it rally up to 3/4? I thought it was still around 50%...

I still don't get what is so sacred about it just because of the divorce rate. It would be nice to know what percentage of the people who feel so strongly against gay marriage are either single or still with their first spouse. One anti-gay person stated that divorce was ok because people make mistakes... So basically, they want their cake, and they want to eat it too.

 

[John Doe]

I made the comparison because I felt it important to state my stance on this issue.

Why state your stance if you're not willing to discuss it?

Debating animal rights with someone who throws out an example as above is generally wasted time to me. Having said that, None2, I have read your input, and do appreciate you taking the time to provide your perspective.

I don't understand your objection to the example.

I felt that there was some assumptions made here, but again, bothers me not. Biggest waste of time here is Etoiles superficial Snap comment. I guess there is a clique thing going here. John Doe, a post count like that?! You make me nervous. I'll leave it at that.

1. It does seem to bother you, otherwise you wouldn't have repeatedly referred to it.

2. Etoile and I are not friends. We don't even know each other.

3. Why does my post count make you nervous? Why is it even relevant to this discussion?

I don't think I'm the only one to see this as a reflection of stupidity.

Chickens 1 Gays 0
http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/11/chickens_1_gays_0
"Perhaps I am not being clear. The idea that someone could go into a voting booth, consider a chicken, feel compassion and empathy for the chicken, and vote in favor of basic chicken rights; and THEN, immediately afterward, consider a person, feel no compassion or empathy, and vote to strip that person of a basic human right, is ABSURD AND CRIMINAL. That is what I am saying. Priorities, people.

http://www.hotfeeder.com/us/californians_like_chickens_more_than_gay_people_475928

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-protest7-2008nov07,0,3827549.story
Today, Barrett was alone, holding a sign that read, "Chickens - 1, Gays - 0

To me that only proves you're not the only one to assume that all (or at least the vast majority) of the people who voted yes on one proposition also voted yes on the other one.

 

[John Doe]

I've only skimmed through this thread but I wanted to say one thing. It's not fair that gays are not allowed to marry because they are expected to pay taxes and follow all rules and regulations that straight people are expected to follow. And yet they are not treated equally.

The people that feel that marriage should be between a man and a woman want to uphold the sanctity of marriage. Yet 3/4 marriages end in divorce. Do these people go out and preach to straight couples that have affairs? Probably the main reason why marriages end in divorce aside from $$ issues.

If they really believed in the sanctity of marriage they would be working to make it more difficult for everyone to get married, not just gays.

 

[Netzach]

I'm sorry, but I don't think the answer to gay rights is that until we are perfect angels, we don't deserve them. Gays aren't some universal one mind entity. For example, sure I think it would be nice if there were no drag queens. As someone who was raised by two women (no not lesbians, just my grandma and mother), I find it highly offensive. I find it mocking to women. However, they exist and I have to deal with it. Likewise, I find it offensive when I see gays who mock religion. Do you think Sisters of Perpetual Indulgences is not offensive to Catholics? Do you think gay parades where after wards they sell sex toys mocking the Christian religion is appropriate? Like it or not, Christianity (whether people act like Christians or not) is the dominate religion in the US as well as many other places in the world. Imagine how popular such antics would be if they mocked wicans since there is a certain amount of that religion within our gay community. Or imagine they mocked muslims who many don't have much tolerance for offending their icons.


None of us can control the gay subculture as is the nature of any group of a decent size. I remember a lot of gays in a nearby city were frustrated that the only time they could get a crowd was if they offered a free keg and had a drag queen contest -- in other words bring a gay bar atmosphere to the event or they just assume not attend. Sure it was frustrating, but if that is where people are in their interests then there is nothing you can do. Like the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make the horse drink.

The only issue I have with gays on the subject of gay marriage is that with any right comes responsibilities. Within the gay male community, I have seen way to many times where there is a desire for rights but no responsibility. In the gay men's chorus that I used to sing in, the man in charge of the mailing lists had to do SO many changes to make all the time because way too many gays going in and out of relationships like musical chairs. If we clog the court system with marriage, divorce like it is some kind of monthly ritual, then we'll be laughed out of keeping such a right. I just hope that as we gain these rights (even if at a snails pace) that we don't forget just how serious a "marriage" should be. I've been with my partner now for over six years. Relationships take work, but I wouldn't give him up for anything. I don't think I have the courage to ever get a government piece of paper of "marriage, but if the US finally gave us that right I would feel more like I'm finally part of the American experience -- not just a tolerated observer.

(The reason I don't want a government sanctioned piece of paper with my name on it as being married to another guy is that I have always feared that the day would come that such a list might be used to "purge" us in the case that our government ever became like Germany. For those that study some on history, Germany was one of the most tolerant societies for homosexuals prior to the Nazis.)

That being said, my right to basic rights such as the right to marry whom I love regardless of the gender of my partner isn't based on whether I'm a gay Billy Graham/Mother Theresa or a bare breasted diesel dyke who refuses to associate with men, or a drag queen wearing animal leather with a fisting fetish. I don't get to pick who else is gay anymore than I can pick how they think and feel about various political issues because each individual is unique.

Think of it this way. If there was a law banning dwarfs from marrying, would it be an excuse to deny them such a basic right because some thought they didn't reach out enough to the giants or averaged-size people? What about the fact that they are entitled to it simply because it is fair; it is right; and it is the decent thing to do?

If we wait until we are perfect, then we might as well hang up the towel on any rights as it just isn't going to happen whether we are talking about gay rights or the rights of any racial, religious, etc. group of people. That is part of the human experience.

There are practical as well as ethical realities to handling our own diversity better than we currently are, yes?

 

[none2_none2]

There are practical as well as ethical realities to handling our own diversity better than we currently are, yes?

Such a statement could be said for most groups that go for political action. Even among people of the same ethnic or religious background, few people think exactly alike. I seriously doubt that most advocates for a cause take in all opinions.

I'm not someone who you would classify as a gay activist. To be honest, literotica is about the only "gay" social thing (if you can call it that) that I do anymore. Sure I have my partner, but between our regular jobs and the farm, and other things that came up recently, that is my life. I assume that most gay activists go around to the bars and a other well established gay activities/hangouts and ask people to help out/contribute, etc. I'm not going to criticize their efforts if they don't go out of their way to reach out to me. It is as much MY responsibility (if not more) to reach out to the gay political movement as it is for that movement to reach out to me.

Sure there are things I don't agree with within the gay movement. I'll express those differences quite freely, but I don't expect gay advocates to change their tune for me. That doesn't mean I don't want gay rights. I just cannot buy into the same arguments they give out.

Those things include:

1) "Gay genes":
Sorry, but I couldn't care less. We deserve our rights regardless of a gay gene. If a dwarf marries a normal sized person, to some it may be considered "odd". Nevertheless, if someone tried to prevent them from marrying, would they have to come up with some "genetic" reason for the attraction?

2) "*isms" and "*ist" and "*obias"
Many in the gay community, are quick to label our opponents with such suffixes -- including myself at times. It isn't worth doing. Unless you are going to do battle with them, you do not persuade people's opinions by personally attacking them. What it does is make us look childish. If we want to criticize them and we are in an all "gay" group, then let the opinions be expressed, but when facing outsiders we don't make progress by going down to their level.

3) The biggest "*ism" we have is sexism within our community as well as in the majority community.
The whole problem to the majority about gay marriage is about the role of a woman and a man. How we think, how we feel, how we mechanically use our privates in their minds is paramount -- whether their logic is based on "God's Word", or what they perceive as non-religious "natural law".
However, we ourselves are just as guilty of sexism. How many people are comfortable with effeminate men or masculine women within our community? (I'm not talking about drag which in my mind is on par with black painted faces on white comedians. Rather with people who aren't the "ideal" gender model.)
We also have many in the gay community that perceive there to be some kind of "male soul" or "female soul". This is just crazy. Lets just put aside that some may have absolutely no world view. Does it really do our subculture good to keep this stupid divide? Why do we have to have so many one gender only get-togethers? Does it all have to get down to getting off in the party, so we don't want the other gender around? Personally, I have had just as much fun at pot-lucks that have lesbians included, than some of the "male only" events.

I remember that there was a gay "men's festival" where the camp coordinator for the camp they were renting was a female. Some militant gay male wiccans were saying all this BS about how the "female" essence on the premise was destroying the event -- even though she just stayed in her cabin the whole time. How stupid can you get. There are also female birds, insects, etc during the whole thing. Did that also negatively impact the event? My opinion of gay male wiccans really went WAY downhill after such rubbish. (Luckily, I knew one or two that didn't have such sexist views.)

4) I'm not queer -- I'm gay:

There are plenty of us old timers who do not like the term. I don't think "taking back the term" makes it any more palatable. It is derogatory and offensive whether it comes from a majority person or from someone within our subculture. Granted, I know that there is not a good term that is inclusive of other sexual minorities, but I would think they would have come up with a nicer word. I don't want to recycle some filthy derogatory word to describe myself.

5) Sexuality Fidelity (maybe just a gay male issue):
I don't like being told rubbish from the gay male community that somehow it is ok to fool around because we are "males". A person makes their own destiny. I'm perfectly capable of making such a choice. I have hormones just like the next person, but it is my choice to be faithful. I don't need umpteen books saying it is unnatural -- I get that enough from the majority community because of my same sex attraction. How are we ever going to be given rights to marry when it wouldn't take much digging into gay literature by the religious right to hear lots of voices that we don't have much respect for our own relationships? Such just more fuel against giving us the right to marry.

6) Finally, our ultimate goal:
Our ultimate goal should be the disillusionment of our own subculture. We should be totally integrated into the majority culture. Why would we need things such as gay bars, if we could freely mingle in a regular bar without fear insult or our very lives if we ask someone on a date or a dance that we haven't offended someone with a different sexual preference? Of course this is a long way off. Nevertheless, if we were to get all our rights -- not just legally but also in the minds of most majority people, then the need for a segregated subculture would go away. We would no longer have to create our own little parallel universe.


=======================

 

[Netzach]

Such a statement could be said for most groups that go for political action. Even among people of the same ethnic or religious background, few people think exactly alike. I seriously doubt that most advocates for a cause take in all opinions.

I'm not someone who you would classify as a gay activist. To be honest, literotica is about the only "gay" social thing (if you can call it that) that I do anymore. Sure I have my partner, but between our regular jobs and the farm, and other things that came up recently, that is my life. I assume that most gay activists go around to the bars and a other well established gay activities/hangouts and ask people to help out/contribute, etc. I'm not going to criticize their efforts if they don't go out of their way to reach out to me. It is as much MY responsibility (if not more) to reach out to the gay political movement as it is for that movement to reach out to me.

Sure there are things I don't agree with within the gay movement. I'll express those differences quite freely, but I don't expect gay advocates to change their tune for me. That doesn't mean I don't want gay rights. I just cannot buy into the same arguments they give out.

Those things include:

1) "Gay genes":
Sorry, but I couldn't care less. We deserve our rights regardless of a gay gene. If a dwarf marries a normal sized person, to some it may be considered "odd". Nevertheless, if someone tried to prevent them from marrying, would they have to come up with some "genetic" reason for the attraction?

2) "*isms" and "*ist" and "*obias"
Many in the gay community, are quick to label our opponents with such suffixes -- including myself at times. It isn't worth doing. Unless you are going to do battle with them, you do not persuade people's opinions by personally attacking them. What it does is make us look childish. If we want to criticize them and we are in an all "gay" group, then let the opinions be expressed, but when facing outsiders we don't make progress by going down to their level.

3) The biggest "*ism" we have is sexism within our community as well as in the majority community.
The whole problem to the majority about gay marriage is about the role of a woman and a man. How we think, how we feel, how we mechanically use our privates in their minds is paramount -- whether their logic is based on "God's Word", or what they perceive as non-religious "natural law".
However, we ourselves are just as guilty of sexism. How many people are comfortable with effeminate men or masculine women within our community? (I'm not talking about drag which in my mind is on par with black painted faces on white comedians. Rather with people who aren't the "ideal" gender model.)
We also have many in the gay community that perceive there to be some kind of "male soul" or "female soul". This is just crazy. Lets just put aside that some may have absolutely no world view. Does it really do our subculture good to keep this stupid divide? Why do we have to have so many one gender only get-togethers? Does it all have to get down to getting off in the party, so we don't want the other gender around? Personally, I have had just as much fun at pot-lucks that have lesbians included, than some of the "male only" events.

I remember that there was a gay "men's festival" where the camp coordinator for the camp they were renting was a female. Some militant gay male wiccans were saying all this BS about how the "female" essence on the premise was destroying the event -- even though she just stayed in her cabin the whole time. How stupid can you get. There are also female birds, insects, etc during the whole thing. Did that also negatively impact the event? My opinion of gay male wiccans really went WAY downhill after such rubbish. (Luckily, I knew one or two that didn't have such sexist views.)

4) I'm not queer -- I'm gay:

There are plenty of us old timers who do not like the term. I don't think "taking back the term" makes it any more palatable. It is derogatory and offensive whether it comes from a majority person or from someone within our subculture. Granted, I know that there is not a good term that is inclusive of other sexual minorities, but I would think they would have come up with a nicer word. I don't want to recycle some filthy derogatory word to describe myself.

5) Sexuality Fidelity (maybe just a gay male issue):
I don't like being told rubbish from the gay male community that somehow it is ok to fool around because we are "males". A person makes their own destiny. I'm perfectly capable of making such a choice. I have hormones just like the next person, but it is my choice to be faithful. I don't need umpteen books saying it is unnatural -- I get that enough from the majority community because of my same sex attraction. How are we ever going to be given rights to marry when it wouldn't take much digging into gay literature by the religious right to hear lots of voices that we don't have much respect for our own relationships? Such just more fuel against giving us the right to marry.

6) Finally, our ultimate goal:
Our ultimate goal should be the disillusionment of our own subculture. We should be totally integrated into the majority culture. Why would we need things such as gay bars, if we could freely mingle in a regular bar without fear insult or our very lives if we ask someone on a date or a dance that we haven't offended someone with a different sexual preference? Of course this is a long way off. Nevertheless, if we were to get all our rights -- not just legally but also in the minds of most majority people, then the need for a segregated subculture would go away. We would no longer have to create our own little parallel universe.


=======================

How does any of this negate my opinion that we need to be talking to people within the demographic "gay" who *are* black and brown and/or religious = without being completely condescending to them and insisting that their races and religions are the problem?

I don't agree with you that a totally integrated society with no classifications is ideal. I will always want to spend some time among women who are sexual with other women. I also don't have word issues around the word "queer" but I trust that my desire for some of the same objectives as you can get us both to some common ground, so I'm not going to spend eons defending how I feel about it or rubbing it in your face.

Let's assume that you come from a Christian denomination and feel tied to it in spite of its rejections of you, or that your relationship to it isn't black and white. If I get in line to bash your particular tradition, I'm not meeting you where you live.

THAT is what I'm talking about. We haven't figured out how to do this.

A good read today:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-stranahan/four-lessons-gay-marriage_b_142469.html

I'm not in wholesale agreement - I think anger has a time and a place, but if it's ALL you're putting out there, forget it. We need some icy-cool leadership here.

 

[Etoile]

Such a statement could be said for most groups that go for political action. Even among people of the same ethnic or religious background, few people think exactly alike. I seriously doubt that most advocates for a cause take in all opinions.

You're quite right, there is diversity of thought in any large group. But regardless of differences, activists are fighting for all of us. Even if you are completely opposed to their methods, morals, and actions, they are fighting for you too. Gay rights activism is on behalf of all gay people. If same sex marriage is legalized, it's for all gay people - nobody will say "you can't get married because you didn't support us when we were fighting."

I'm not someone who you would classify as a gay activist. To be honest, literotica is about the only "gay" social thing (if you can call it that) that I do anymore. Sure I have my partner, but between our regular jobs and the farm, and other things that came up recently, that is my life. I assume that most gay activists go around to the bars and a other well established gay activities/hangouts and ask people to help out/contribute, etc. I'm not going to criticize their efforts if they don't go out of their way to reach out to me. It is as much MY responsibility (if not more) to reach out to the gay political movement as it is for that movement to reach out to me.

So you're just a run of the mill person who happens to be gay. But you're still gay. It's kind of like the deaf world. Some deaf people are very political and participate in the deaf community. They may have a few hearing friends, but by and large they spend their time with deaf people, and they are happy that way. And then there are the millions of deaf people who aren't involved in the deaf community. They socialize with hearing people, work in the hearing world, and never interact with other deaf people. It's not WRONG that they don't embrace the deaf community, it's just their preference. Just like being a regular gay person is your preference. You don't have to reach out if you don't want to. You just are who you are, and hey, if same sex marriage passes, you'll reap the benefits too. Nothing wrong with that.

Sure there are things I don't agree with within the gay movement. I'll express those differences quite freely, but I don't expect gay advocates to change their tune for me. That doesn't mean I don't want gay rights. I just cannot buy into the same arguments they give out.

Nobody asks you to buy into their arguments. Leave them all behind if you want to. If you feel pressure to conform to the gay activist party line, that's your own pressure. Again, you don't have to do a damn thing about gay activism. Just sit and wait and someday you will be able to get married. (Throughout this post I am using gay marriage as a synonym for all gay rights issues.) You don't have to do anything, nobody expects you to do anything.

1) "Gay genes":
Sorry, but I couldn't care less. We deserve our rights regardless of a gay gene. If a dwarf marries a normal sized person, to some it may be considered "odd". Nevertheless, if someone tried to prevent them from marrying, would they have to come up with some "genetic" reason for the attraction?

I don't know if there's a gay gene or not. I do agree with you that rights have nothing to do with genetics. But I think the "gay gene" discussion is meant to put pressure on those who are against gay marriage, to show that we are the same as them. Unfortunately we can't just embrace our differences and say "deal with it" - those who are against gays don't WANT to deal with it. So the gay gene thing is an attempt to feed them what they want to hear, IMHO. Is it true or not? Who knows. But if it convinces someone to vote for gay rights, that's good enough for me.

2) "*isms" and "*ist" and "*obias"
Many in the gay community, are quick to label our opponents with such suffixes -- including myself at times. It isn't worth doing. Unless you are going to do battle with them, you do not persuade people's opinions by personally attacking them. What it does is make us look childish. If we want to criticize them and we are in an all "gay" group, then let the opinions be expressed, but when facing outsiders we don't make progress by going down to their level.

I don't think the labels are given without reason, though. They are who they are - conservatives, homophobes, etc. It's not a derogatory label like "faggot" - it's just classification. I think, anyway.

3) The biggest "*ism" we have is sexism within our community as well as in the majority community.
The whole problem to the majority about gay marriage is about the role of a woman and a man. How we think, how we feel, how we mechanically use our privates in their minds is paramount -- whether their logic is based on "God's Word", or what they perceive as non-religious "natural law".
However, we ourselves are just as guilty of sexism. How many people are comfortable with effeminate men or masculine women within our community? (I'm not talking about drag which in my mind is on par with black painted faces on white comedians. Rather with people who aren't the "ideal" gender model.)
We also have many in the gay community that perceive there to be some kind of "male soul" or "female soul". This is just crazy. Lets just put aside that some may have absolutely no world view. Does it really do our subculture good to keep this stupid divide? Why do we have to have so many one gender only get-togethers? Does it all have to get down to getting off in the party, so we don't want the other gender around? Personally, I have had just as much fun at pot-lucks that have lesbians included, than some of the "male only" events.

I remember that there was a gay "men's festival" where the camp coordinator for the camp they were renting was a female. Some militant gay male wiccans were saying all this BS about how the "female" essence on the premise was destroying the event -- even though she just stayed in her cabin the whole time. How stupid can you get. There are also female birds, insects, etc during the whole thing. Did that also negatively impact the event? My opinion of gay male wiccans really went WAY downhill after such rubbish. (Luckily, I knew one or two that didn't have such sexist views.)

Remember when I said all gay people get rights, regardless of if they fought for them or not? This goes for everybody, whether we like them or not. I have heard of people who are anti-drag, anti-flaming homo, etc. They think we should make ourselves palatable so we don't scare off the straights who might vote to support us. But we all get the rights, whether we are palatable or not.

As for sexism, I know a lot of people who are comfortable with people who blur the gender line by acting like the other gender. It hasn't bothered anybody that I know. As I said, it may bother those who want us to be palatable, but who cares? And the one-gender events, people get to socialize with whoever they want. Attending a mixed-gender potluck does not mean you support women, and attending a males-only bar does not mean you are against women. It's just who you choose to associate with. There are misogynists and misandrists, to be sure, but I hardly think they are in the majority.

I don't see how sexism in our community, whether or not it exists, has any effect on the gay rights struggle.

4) I'm not queer -- I'm gay:

There are plenty of us old timers who do not like the term. I don't think "taking back the term" makes it any more palatable. It is derogatory and offensive whether it comes from a majority person or from someone within our subculture. Granted, I know that there is not a good term that is inclusive of other sexual minorities, but I would think they would have come up with a nicer word. I don't want to recycle some filthy derogatory word to describe myself.

Language is what it is. If you don't want to use the word queer, don't use it. Make up another term for sexual minorities, like "alternative sexualities" or whatever. But the word queer shouldn't keep you from donating to a gay rights group that uses the word. Ignore the language, focus on the attributes. If they are doing effective work for a worthy cause, but they call themselves Queers United, would that keep you from donating to them? (I realize you may not donate to gay causes at all; let's think hypothetically.) Put it this way...the word "queer" is NOT the issue. Don't focus on it.

5) Sexuality Fidelity (maybe just a gay male issue):
I don't like being told rubbish from the gay male community that somehow it is ok to fool around because we are "males". A person makes their own destiny. I'm perfectly capable of making such a choice. I have hormones just like the next person, but it is my choice to be faithful. I don't need umpteen books saying it is unnatural -- I get that enough from the majority community because of my same sex attraction. How are we ever going to be given rights to marry when it wouldn't take much digging into gay literature by the religious right to hear lots of voices that we don't have much respect for our own relationships? Such just more fuel against giving us the right to marry.

One thing has very little to do with the other, though. When confronted with hard numbers, I'm sure the percentage of straight people who have been divorced is higher than the percentage of gay people who practice non-monogamy. Fidelity only changes rights in the sense you mentioned - they use it as fuel against us. But I see that as fair in love and war. It's called muckraking - twisting reality and facts to fit your cause. In the real world, though, one thing isn't related to the other...the passage of gay marriage would have little effect on the guys who want to sleep around.

6) Finally, our ultimate goal:
Our ultimate goal should be the disillusionment of our own subculture. We should be totally integrated into the majority culture. Why would we need things such as gay bars, if we could freely mingle in a regular bar without fear insult or our very lives if we ask someone on a date or a dance that we haven't offended someone with a different sexual preference? Of course this is a long way off. Nevertheless, if we were to get all our rights -- not just legally but also in the minds of most majority people, then the need for a segregated subculture would go away. We would no longer have to create our own little parallel universe.

What if we LIKE our little parallel universe? I don't go to gay bars because I'm afraid of holding somebody's hand in a straight bar, I go to gay bars because I like the people who patronize them. You can't just wish away the community part of "gay community" - people like to be with people who are like them. Yes, it would be great to have bars where everybody could interact, where a straight girl wouldn't be offended if I mistakenly asked her for a date. But that doesn't mean it's okay to get rid of gay bars. Like I said earlier, it's about socializing with who you want to. If you don't like gay bars, don't come to them. But some people like celebrating ourselves. If we just blend into the majority, where is our pride? I don't want to be just another person. I'm proud to be gay. 99% of the time it doesn't show - as you can see from my picture, I am not butch at all - but I like to be able to revel in my homosexuality when I want to. I bring it up in my sociology class all the time, to remind my classmates that not everybody is heterosexual. It's too easy to forget about minorities, but I'm a proud lesbian and I want people to remember us.

 

[blueyz22]

Is it really up to 3/4? I thought it was still around 50%...

I still don't get what is so sacred about it just because of the divorce rate. It would be nice to know what percentage of the people who feel so strongly against gay marriage are either single or still with their first spouse. One anti-gay person stated that divorce was ok because people make mistakes... So basically, they want their cake, and they want to eat it too.

I could be wrong but that's the statistic that I last heard. I didn't look it up.

If they really believed in the sanctity of marriage they would be working to make it more difficult for everyone to get married, not just gays.

I agree. But it really is just too easy to get married and divorced..........if you're straight.

 

[Wolfman1982]

none2_none2: are you related to this gay stand up comedian by the name of Steven John.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OgkpdtZ7RM&NR=1

Since you basically have carbon copied a lot of what you said from him . I know you used some of it in another way, but there are some inconsistencies. And a whole lot of similarities.

 

[kinkyknickers]

I just had to comment on none2-none2's feelings that Drag queens are offensive to women because it's seen as a piss-take, for want of a layman's term.
I think Drag queens are a riot. I don't find it offensive at all that they try to mimick (and often succeed at being more realistic than many) women.
I thought mimickery was the highest form of flattery anyway.
Call me crazy for having a sense of humour about it, but I love a good filthy mouthed drag show.
Still, each to their own. I can see why you would be offended, but I think offence comes more from intent than action.

 

[none2_none2]

I just had to comment on none2-none2's feelings that Drag queens are offensive to women because it's seen as a piss-take, for want of a layman's term.
I think Drag queens are a riot. I don't find it offensive at all that they try to mimick (and often succeed at being more realistic than many) women.
I thought mimickery was the highest form of flattery anyway.
Call me crazy for having a sense of humour about it, but I love a good filthy mouthed drag show.
Still, each to their own. I can see why you would be offended, but I think offence comes more from intent than action.

It doesn't bother me like it used to. It isn't worth the emotional energy to let it bother me. Maybe it is a generational thing. It used to be VERY offensive for a white to imitate a black for jokes. Where as it was considered funny for a male to imitate a female? I would think stereotyping someone based on ethnicity OR gender would be equally offensive OR equally funny.

I don't think the white imitating black thing has the same level of negativity anymore. I saw an episode of 30 Rock on the internet where the white woman imitated a black man and the black man imitated a white woman. There have only been a few times in the past where no one was criticized for such. I don't remember Lilly Tomlin ever being condemned for some skit of impersonating a black man that she occasionally did years ago.

 

[none2_none2]

none2_none2: are you related to this gay stand up comedian by the name of Steven John.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OgkpdtZ7RM&NR=1

Since you basically have carbon copied a lot of what you said from him . I know you used some of it in another way, but there are some inconsistencies. And a whole lot of similarities.

Carbon copied implies that I took my ideas from someone else. From the looks of that guy, he was probably not even conceived when I came of age. He is more likely around your age. If he IS my age, I'd sure like to know his plastic surgeon!

No I'm not a comedian. As to a whole lot of similarities, I don't follow you. Somethings he does I just wouldn't do. I don't use the term homo or fag or queer. I don't even like using the word bitch as I see it in the same light as the "n" word.

As for specific jokes, I really don't follow him. For instance, I wouldn't joke about domestic violence or gay bashing. That would be like joking about rape or road rage or child abuse.

 

[Wolfman1982]

none2_none2: thanks for correcting me in some of the things I said. But why is it, that some people in USA can´t fathom that the GLBT area should be just as allowed to be happy in matrimony as any one else. That baffles me the most, and that is why I sometimes say to myself , USA is the most homophobic country in the western hemisphere. Fucked up beyond repair. In so many ways, that I have to explain every time I say something about "it". So everybody can understand where I am heading in what I am writing in support to the struggles in the GLBT area in USA. or else there will be shit thrown my way , even though I support equal rights for every body. And not just the so-called straight society.

none2_none2 you are A ok, nothing to worry about.

I just don´t fucking get some things going on, every now and then. I can only shake my shoulders and say "well that is sadly typical for USA". When in reality, there are over 1500 animals on mother Earth who are gay in some ways or another. It is just strange really.

 

[none2_none2]

You're quite right, there is diversity of thought in any large group. But regardless of differences, activists are fighting for all of us. Even if you are completely opposed to their methods, morals, and actions, they are fighting for you too. Gay rights activism is on behalf of all gay people. If same sex marriage is legalized, it's for all gay people - nobody will say "you can't get married because you didn't support us when we were fighting."

The problem with long essays (such as mine) is the more written, the more it is subject to misinterpretation. My point with elaborating on several differences was to establish a case where I'm definitely in a separate place from MANY that are in those political groups.

With my own ideology break being clearly established in my writing, my point to make was that I do NOT vote against gay rights ballot initiatives, and I would never vote against them for reasons such as:

a) NOT seeing eye to eye on 100% of the members in the movement.

b) NOT receiving a hand written letter on fancy paper begging me to join and help fight for the cause.

c) NOT seeing my My demographic group (animal-loving, older, post-urban, non-pagan, non-atheist, politically independent, male, non-penis-obsessed ) represented above some threshold.

Additionally, even if I got a real fancy invitation and came to the political meetings and saw plenty of other faces and ideas that were similar to mine, (To much the same kind of scares me like one of those cloning sci-fi shows, or waking up to find out that your partially absorbed twin has re-emerged and now his head is next to yours -- or maybe popping out of your chest.) I cannot tell you that all of a sudden all my friends and family are going to support gay rights. Whether you are white, black, brown, yellow, red, pink, or purple poky dotted, gay is not cool for most cultures. It may not be as strongly opposed as in some of our western/middle-eastern religiously dominated cultures, but I don't know of many cultures past or present that hold it in as high esteem as heterosexuality.

Furthermore, there are gay issues that I support simply because it seems right for OTHER gays even if my better judgment says there could be future negative consequences for those that want this right.

Case in point, I have a real hard time supporting gays in the military. No, it isn't about troop moral. No, it isn't about slipping bars of soap in the men's public showers. No, it isn't even about being a pacifist. Rather, my fear is that it could end up going the other way. Attitudes such as:

Why send a family man with wife and children to battle. She needs her husband, and those children need their father. Why not send the singles and the gay guys. They don't have any real families that need them. They are more expendable...

That is what worries me about that topic of gays in the military. However, there are gay men and women who want to serve regardless of MY fears. Who am I to gang up with the majority and also deny them that which they truly want to do. So if allowing gays in the military were on a "ballot" initiative, I'd bite my tongue and vote to allow it. Not because of my beliefs, but for the beliefs of those who are intimately impacted by such discrimination.

I know some gay people who voted against gay marriage in my state (not California) because they see marriage as heterosexual mimicry, or a reminder of the fact that women were seen as subservient, or because monogamy is a heterosexual farce. Fine, believe that, but don't deny the rest of us the right to want it. (Similar to my logic on gays in the military -- think how OTHER gays are impacted not just myself.)

In summary, my purpose of writing was to address that I don't buy this idea that gays are at fault for the Proposition 8 passing because gay political action groups are some how racists and thus many blacks and Hispanics voted against us. Likewise, I don't believe that if we had more black & Hispanic gays in the political action groups that they would bring their friends and family on board. If the race of the political action members brought pro-gay-rights votes in from their own race, then Proposition 8 would have failed by the white relatives & friends alone. I wasn't there, and I don't know every single gay person who fought this, but I'm not going to label them racist or not inclusive. The gays I know who get politically active, are VERY passionate about their causes, so I have nothing but praise for their efforts -- even if I strongly disagree with some of their opinions (such as labels, monogamy, etc).

PS: I'll write more later.