Law School Discussion

Ask a Homosexual

Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #150 on: May 19, 2006, 01:11:46 PM »
The whole point is that there should not be stereotypes about sexuality, that's what people were fighting for.  The civil rights movement was not about fighting for people to be looters, it's what so offensive about your analogies. 

Herein lies the crux of our disagreement.  I do not see the aim of the gay pride movement to be destruction of all notions, conceptions, and social mores surrounding sexuality.  The gay rights movement simply wants equal rights and acceptance for consentual adult partnerships, regardless of gender.  That's it. 

You are making the gay rights movement out to be some kind of free-form, nebulous, "Free Love" movement a la the 1960's counter-culture... and that's just not what it is.  It's not about tearing down society's approval of monogomous relationships over promiscuity.  It's not about the advancement of any particular fetish behaviors.  It's not about healing crystals, or wicca, or Tibetan chanting, or the dawning of the Age of Aquarius, or anything else.

As with any movement, there are no doubt subsets that have more expanded or specialized agendas.  However, that does not change the over-arching agenda that the movement holds in common.  You are right... I do not believe that the civil rights movement was about fighting for people's rights to be looters.  I also do not believe that the gay rights movement is about total sexual relativism, that's NOT what they're fighting for.

H4CS

  • ****
  • 2445
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #151 on: May 19, 2006, 01:20:11 PM »
Herein lies the crux of our disagreement. 

No, the problem is that you don't know history, nor can you read.  There are these things called tenses, you might want to learn how they work.  I said that the movement had once stood for these issues and that there is no need to cannibalize the past for the current trend of equal rights.  You still don't get it. 

EDIT: Trogdor's point is important.  When I say "the movement had once stood" I meant that there was more generalized support than I see now, but that's just my own reading.

Miss P

  • *****
  • 19300
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #152 on: May 19, 2006, 01:24:02 PM »
The whole point is that there should not be stereotypes about sexuality, that's what people were fighting for.  The civil rights movement was not about fighting for people to be looters, it's what so offensive about your analogies. 

Herein lies the crux of our disagreement.  I do not see the aim of the gay pride movement to be destruction of all notions, conceptions, and social mores surrounding sexuality.  The gay rights movement simply wants equal rights and acceptance for consentual adult partnerships, regardless of gender.  That's it. 

You are making the gay rights movement out to be some kind of free-form, nebulous, "Free Love" movement a la the 1960's counter-culture... and that's just not what it is.  It's not about tearing down society's approval of monogomous relationships over promiscuity.  It's not about the advancement of any particular fetish behaviors.  It's not about healing crystals, or wicca, or Tibetan chanting, or the dawning of the Age of Aquarius, or anything else.

As with any movement, there are no doubt subsets that have more expanded or specialized agendas.  However, that does not change the over-arching agenda that the movement holds in common.  You are right... I do not believe that the civil rights movement was about fighting for people's rights to be looters.  I also do not believe that the gay rights movement is about complete sexual relativism, the agenda is more narrowly focused.


AtlantaSteve, here I think you're wrong.  There are several things that you might, from the outside, call the "gay pride movement" -- two dominant strains being queer liberation and gay rights.  They actually want completely different things.  And while I see the value of (most) gay rights strategies as securing temporary toeholds in society for some gays and lesbians, I am more interested, long term, in busting the whole thing up.  I think sexuality is too central to questions of morality, family organization, and gender and everything else.  And I don't believe people will open themselves up to a full range of kinship and other relationships, bodily pleasures, etc.until we unlock or redraw these connections.  But that's perhaps just me.

I realize this probably sounds absurd to most of you.  Sorry.

->Soon

  • *****
  • 18818
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #153 on: May 19, 2006, 01:25:53 PM »
i liked the part about bodily pleasures....


algough, i doubt youll get many straights trying out the "other side"

wooooooooooo

trogdor

  • ****
  • 884
  • the BURNINATOR!
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #154 on: May 19, 2006, 01:26:37 PM »
Herein lies the crux of our disagreement.  I do not see the aim of the gay pride movement to be destruction of all notions, conceptions, and social mores surrounding sexuality.  The gay rights movement simply wants equal rights and acceptance for consentual adult partnerships, regardless of gender.  That's it. 

You are making the gay rights movement out to be some kind of free-form, nebulous, "Free Love" movement a la the 1960's counter-culture... and that's just not what it is.  It's not about tearing down society's approval of monogomous relationships over promiscuity.  It's not about the advancement of any particular fetish behaviors.  It's not about healing crystals, or wicca, or Tibetan chanting, or the dawning of the Age of Aquarius, or anything else.

As with any movement, there are no doubt subsets that have more expanded or specialized agendas.  However, that does not change the over-arching agenda that the movement holds in common.  You are right... I do not believe that the civil rights movement was about fighting for people's rights to be looters.  I also do not believe that the gay rights movement is about total sexual relativism, that's NOT what they're fighting for.


you make it sound like it's some organization called THE GAY RIGHTS MOVEMENT with a set charter, mission statement, and a linear path for accomplishments.  the thing about movements is that they ARE nebulous!  most gay people will tell you that yes, they want rights such as the right to marry, adopt, etc., but that's generally not ALL they want.  for many, it's not just about legal recognition.  it's about cultural change as well.  rights are merely legal benefits.  homophobia is far more intractable than a piece of paper that says a union is between a man and a woman.  the point that you seem to be missing is that ALL of these expressions may have some part to play in the grander scheme of things, regardless of whether they are representative of the majority.  policing people's morality by passing judgment on them as freaks and fetishists accomplishes nothing positive. 

finally

Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #155 on: May 19, 2006, 01:27:32 PM »
"But I have never been insulted by bicurious girl's suggestion that I am such a perfect exemplar of femininity that she could judge her attraction to women by having a few rolls in the hay with me. "

LOL.  You are hilarious, Miss P!  But what I was really talking about was, well for example,  Ellen (DeGenres)'s relationship with Anne Heche.  To me, she was faking it for the publicity.  I'm talking about the dishonest people.  I think that they should say upfront that they are merely "curious" to stop any hurt feelings.  

->Soon

  • *****
  • 18818
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #156 on: May 19, 2006, 01:30:49 PM »
"But I have never been insulted by bicurious girl's suggestion that I am such a perfect exemplar of femininity that she could judge her attraction to women by having a few rolls in the hay with me. "

LOL.  You are hilarious, Miss P!  But what I was really talking about was, well for example,  Ellen (DeGenres)'s relationship with Anne Heche.  To me, she was faking it for the publicity.  I'm talking about the dishonest people.  I think that they should say upfront that they are merely "curious" to stop any hurt feelings.  

see i dont see it like that.

but i dont see love as a
'forever' thing either

they were in love for awhile.  things wnt sour, she moved on.

trogdor

  • ****
  • 884
  • the BURNINATOR!
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #157 on: May 19, 2006, 01:39:35 PM »
I don't think it's true in general. It is true in some cases. But I'd say the majority of gays I meet say they have always known. But there are definitely some who can't "figure it out" until they are in their 30's or 40's. Personally, I don't see what in the h*ll there is to figure out. If you like girls you might as well be str8, it's a lot easier. And if you don't, can't you tell??

well, i think a lot of people do a good job confusing themselves.  i mostly think its due to repression/denial, like i said, not really objective confusion.  however, just because you think you're attracted to people of the same sex doesn't mean that you aren't trying to figure out whether that really translates into you wanting to be with them sexually, etc.  again, this isn't necessarily objective/disinterested confusion.  it seems more self-imposed. 

finally

Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #158 on: May 19, 2006, 01:59:55 PM »
"But I have never been insulted by bicurious girl's suggestion that I am such a perfect exemplar of femininity that she could judge her attraction to women by having a few rolls in the hay with me. "

LOL.  You are hilarious, Miss P!  But what I was really talking about was, well for example,  Ellen (DeGenres)'s relationship with Anne Heche.  To me, she was faking it for the publicity.  I'm talking about the dishonest people.  I think that they should say upfront that they are merely "curious" to stop any hurt feelings.  

see i dont see it like that.

but i dont see love as a
'forever' thing either

they were in love for awhile.  things wnt sour, she moved on.


is it just me or does this thread have 2 conversations going on at the same time?

Re: Ask a Homosexual
« Reply #159 on: May 19, 2006, 02:05:57 PM »
And while I see the value of (most) gay rights strategies as securing temporary toeholds in society for some gays and lesbians, I am more interested, long term, in busting the whole thing up. 

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "busting the whole thing up"?  My point of contention with H4CS is that he/she/it made it sound like they were arguing for the removal of ALL social mores surrounding sexuality.  In other words, that society should have no difference in its approval of promiscuity vs. monogamy, safe sex vs. irresponsible practice, healthy personal boundaries vs. acting out, etc.  I simply don't believe that such a position is wise, nor that it is a prerequisite for gay rights or acceptance.  I'm talking about certain values that are shared by most homosexuals... yet it seems like I'm being attacked and called a bigot for it, and it's simply not right.


***EDIT*** On reflection, maybe this is less a political thing and more an age/generational thing.  I'm in my mid-30's with a family today, whereas I get the impression that H4CS is a recent undergrad.  When I was in my early-20's, I looked at monogamy as a "frumpy" choice for people who were "uptight", I didn't see the big deal if I had sex without protection "only once in a awhile", and I could act out a bit at parties.  As I got older I started seeing those notions as being childish, that there is some wisdom to structures and values.