THIS is "oppression" and "discrimination."

[Safe_Bet]

People are always trying to get additional or special rights based on thier race, thier gender, thier sexual orientation.

Some examples: Federal law mandates that women get 12 weeks off from work when they have a child, Companies are required to provide a private room for lactating mothers, companies are required in some cases to provide seperate restrooms for transgenders, colleges are required to accept a certain number of minority's even though they fail to meet the acedemic standards required. Illegal immigrants are granted in state tuition in many states whereas a legal citizen from another state pays a much higher price. Handicap people get the best parking spaces, companies have to design thier buildings around the fact that a handicap person may enter the building and make a lot of special architectural changes to the design of thier buildings I could go on for days. Wether you agree or disagree with them they are rights that some people have that others do not and are therefore not equal but additional.

^ OMFG! ^

 

[JNaylor]

Nope. Not gonna let you make a BUNCH of unfounded assumptions and allegations, DUDE! You have nothing to base your opinions on other then my use of CAPITALS and the use of the word "dude" (which I call everyone), so I can only guess that what really offends you is having a strong, lesbian woman correct your misconceptions.

That's all good, though. You see when I see a straight guy rhetorically arguing in "opposition" to me, mine and or our human rights, civilly or not, I get offended. SERIOUSLY!

Well I didn't

 

[Stella_Omega]

People are always trying to get additional or special rights based on thier race, thier gender, thier sexual orientation.

Some examples: Federal law mandates that women get 12 weeks off from work when they have a child, Companies are required to provide a private room for lactating mothers, companies are required in some cases to provide seperate restrooms for transgenders, colleges are required to accept a certain number of minority's even though they fail to meet the acedemic standards required. Illegal immigrants are granted in state tuition in many states whereas a legal citizen from another state pays a much higher price. Handicap people get the best parking spaces, companies have to design thier buildings around the fact that a handicap person may enter the building and make a lot of special architectural changes to the design of thier buildings I could go on for days. Wether you agree or disagree with them they are rights that some people have that others do not and are therefore not equal but additional.

Without letting us get sidetracked there-- what does any of that have to do with "the gay agenda?"

I mean... assuming the gay person isn't pregnant, in drag, a racial minority, or wheelchair bound-- All of which are side issues completely--

what do you think that gays might try to take away from straights?

Oh, and let's talk about this for a moment:

You are the only one that is offended and that kind of makes my point

What point?

 

[JNaylor]

Without letting us get sidetracked there-- what does any of that have to do with "the gay agenda?"

I mean... assuming the gay person isn't pregnant, in drag, a racial minority, or wheelchair bound-- All of which are side issues completely--

what do you think that gays might try to take away from straights?

Oh, and let's talk about this for a moment: What point?[/QUO
Stella I have greatly enjoyed talking to you.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Thanks-- you're a very brave man!

I'm hoping though, that you will stand up, when someone around you speaks about "the gay agenda" and ask them what they think it is.

The point I was making about her is that she seemed hostile toward me for being straight and therefore intolerant of straights which I thought was odd because we were talking in general about straights being tolerant of gays. And her statement kind of made my point.

We can talk about the difference between "being hostile" (or rude) and "being intolerant" another time, if you like.

 

[JNaylor]

Thanks-- you're a very brave man!

I'm hoping though, that you will stand up, when someone around you speaks about "the gay agenda" and ask them what they think it is.


We can talk about the difference between "being hostile" (or rude) and "being intolerant" another time, if you like.

You got it Stella I willand I look forward to it. Pardon my use of the word intolerant. Rude would have been a better choice.

Have a good night.

 

[Safe_Bet]

You got it Stella I willand I look forward to it. Pardon my use of the word intolerant. Rude would have been a better choice.

Have a good night.

Yup. It sure is "rude" to contradict you wild ass guesses and unfounded assumptions with documentation, numbers and facts!

 

[Stella_Omega]

There isn't enough knowledge in the fucking WORLD to fill in the black hole of ignorance that is the general American public.

 

[SubmissiveBrat]

We have an agenda?

Mine is to someday rule the world.

Even if such a ridiculous bill is passed I just can't see it as legal or constitutional.

I am not understanding what they are after. Are they wanting to remove mention of anybody that was GLBT from the books or just mention of their orientation?

 

[infinity706]

Honestly, I minored in history (and community health, but that's beside the point). I didn't know who any of the people were, other than Michaelangelo, until I came to this site. I didn't know Michaelangelo was gay until today.

 

[Stella_Omega]

We have an agenda?

Mine is to someday rule the world.

Even if such a ridiculous bill is passed I just can't see it as legal or constitutional.

I am not understanding what they are after. Are they wanting to remove mention of anybody that was GLBT from the books or just mention of their orientation?

The school board has agreed that the gayness of gay people in history is part of what we need to know about them. Just as black historic figures are spoken about as black.

This bill wants to make acknowledging someone's gender illegal ... and therefore, make gay history invisible.

It kind of doesn't matter if its legal or constitutional, look at the fucking mess that pro8 has left us with. Once some piece of shit has passed it takes time and money to rescind it.

Honestly, I minored in history (and community health, but that's beside the point). I didn't know who any of the people were, other than Michaelangelo, until I came to this site. I didn't know Michaelangelo was gay until today.

How about Alan Turing?

 

[HottieMama]

I am truly shocked that some don't know who Harvey Milk or Matthew Shepard are... They are such "icons," (for lack of a better word) that I figured everyone had at least heard of them.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Honestly, I minored in history (and community health, but that's beside the point). I didn't know who any of the people were, other than Michaelangelo, until I came to this site. I didn't know Michaelangelo was gay until today.

It shows, dude!

 

[Stella_Omega]

It shows, dude!

oh come on Amy, it's the most socially ept thing he's said in weeks--don't bite him for it.

...I just want sweetness and light and lady unicorn pee for the rest of today.....

 

[infinity706]

I didn't know who Alan Turing was, either, until I looked him up just now. You'd think he'd be way more famous. Of course, I am from the Bible Belt, so I guess I can't be surprised that gay figures were totally excluded, even from college history courses. Infact, sexual orientation was never mentioned in any class. I'd assume it's probably still that way, too. I only graduated 4 years ago.

 

[HottieMama]

Of course, I am from the Bible Belt

I've lived here in KS for 4.5 years, and I am surprised at how sheltered it seems everyone is about everything. I grew up in Philly, and did all of my schooling including university there, and people just seemed more "aware" about ANY social issue. Not here! If it doesn't involve Bible thumping, corn, farming, or bowling on a Friday night people just don't seem to give a shit....

It's sad really...

 

[Stella_Omega]

I didn't know who Alan Turing was, either, until I looked him up just now. You'd think he'd be way more famous. Of course, I am from the Bible Belt, so I guess I can't be surprised that gay figures were totally excluded, even from college history courses. Infact, sexual orientation was never mentioned in any class. I'd assume it's probably still that way, too. I only graduated 4 years ago.

I figured you fuck your brains out so regularly, they never get a chance to grow back...

 

[infinity706]

Hey now, I have 3 college degrees. I have to be pretty smart. I just "lack common sense" and "take a lot of getting used to." That's what my friends always say anyway.

 

[JNaylor]

I've lived here in KS for 4.5 years, and I am surprised at how sheltered it seems everyone is about everything. I grew up in Philly, and did all of my schooling including university there, and people just seemed more "aware" about ANY social issue. Not here! If it doesn't involve Bible thumping, corn, farming, or bowling on a Friday night people just don't seem to give a shit....

It's sad really...

At the risk

 

[HottieMama]

At the risk of sounding insensitive I'm not sure why you are all so surprised that straight people don't know who gay leaders or historical gay figures are. If your not gay why would you take the time to learn these things? There are dozens and dozens of outstanding historical figures that very few people know anything about yet noone takes the time to learn about them either. Do any of you know who Hal Moore is? As a straight male I have all kinds of interests that I'm sure none of you knows the least bit about but it doesn't offend me that you don't know anything about them, because I wouldn't expect you to know anything about them.

Didn't Hal Moore write "We Were Soldiers?" The reason WHY they are historical figures is the reason WHY everyone should know who they are. They aren't "Just" gay. They have had a profound impact on history and society as we know it.

Harvey Milk is the first openly gay person to be elected to public office. He was assassinated by a former police officer. The ensuing trial for his murderer is when the "Twinkie defense" was first born. (As in, the defense claimed he ate too many Twinkies and it clouded his judgment.)

Matthew Shepard was brutally tortured and murdered in a hate crime. His murderers were not charged with a hate crime because no such hate crime law existed in Wyoming at the time. His death has brought about changed to hate-crime legislation nationwide.

 

[Stella_Omega]

'm not sure why you are all so surprised that straight people don't know who gay leaders or historical gay figures are. If your not gay why would you take the time to learn these things?

That's why we need to mention a few of them in the history books.

And that's why the right wing doesn't want them to be mentioned in the history books.

But most kids know that George Washington Carver and Malcolm X were black men-- actually that might be the only thing they know about these men...

No-- I am not surprised at what you don't know. And I know that I don't know a lot either.

But I am often saddened-- though still unsurprised-- when people pass judgement on what they don't know.

 

[haurni]

Context.

Harvey Milk is famous for having been a gay politician. Michaelangelo, however, is famous for having been an artist - not so much a gay artist, I don't think, but an artist. However, if one were to discuss factors that may have influenced his art then it might be appropriate to mention that he was gay.

Similarly, Henry Ford is remembered primarily for his contributions to manufacturing and the automobile industry. To mention that he was an extreme anti-Semite is not really relevant in general but would be in a discussion of prejudice.

(That being said, I personally am of the opinion that it would be worthwhile to give prominent homosexuals in history some mention because I believe it would promote increased tolerance.)

If it's relevant to mention that someone was gay because it is directly related to the important things they did, then by all means, to deliberately suppress mention of it would be wrong. In terms of this group and what they are trying to accomplish, I'd call it blatant censorship because they are trying to remove mention of orientation even when it would be appropriate in context.

 

[2wet4words]

I'm very disappointed to read this thread

Before commenting on a piece of legislation, it makes sense to read it, doesn't it? I did since I was fairly certain something didn't hold together here. Ad hominem attacks on its supporters cannot substitute for reading the damn thing. I went to the law library and downloaded the draft and committee discussion. What it boils down to is whether an open-ended piece of legislation requiring public schools to teach about alternative lifestyles is a good thing. That is clearly debatable. Reducing it to anti-GLBT animus is misleading.

I am a girl who sleeps with women. I do not want to be banned from housing or paid less or forced to disavow my perceived needs. That's a long way from requiring schools to teach children about it.

California is a crazy place. Broke with an awful record of low achievement in public education. This is what they need?

If you want to do something, tutor an inner city kid. I do, every Thursday during the school year. Should you discuss sexuality with her? I don't think so.

 

[twister947]

I've lived here in KS for 4.5 years, and I am surprised at how sheltered it seems everyone is about everything. I grew up in Philly, and did all of my schooling including university there, and people just seemed more "aware" about ANY social issue. Not here! If it doesn't involve Bible thumping, corn, farming, or bowling on a Friday night people just don't seem to give a shit....

It's sad really...

I'm in OK, and I hear you.

It goes beyond indifference, though...willful ignorance comes closer to describing it.

For me, the issue is much broader than GLBT awareness. It's one of revisionist history. The battlegrounds are TX and CA, because textbooks approved for use in those states end up being adopted by the other 48, and the prizes are the minds of an entire generation.

 

[twister947]

At the risk of sounding insensitive I'm not sure why you are all so surprised that straight people don't know who gay leaders or historical gay figures are. If your not gay why would you take the time to learn these things? There are dozens and dozens of outstanding historical figures that very few people know anything about yet noone takes the time to learn about them either. Do any of you know who Hal Moore is? As a straight male I have all kinds of interests that I'm sure none of you knows the least bit about but it doesn't offend me that you don't know anything about them, because I wouldn't expect you to know anything about them.

In the absence of teaching these things in schools, it would depend on how old you are, and whether or not you bother to watch/read the news.

As for this: "If your not gay why would you take the time to learn these things?" , I'm stunned that you would ask such a question. Are you suggesting that you can't be bothered to learn about anything outside of your own, narrowly defined group? Really?