Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
53 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Faux Gay? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Let's get one thing perfectly clear.... I AM NOT GAY!!!

Okay, now that is out of the way. The various threads on the subject of gay marriage and it's impact on "culture" and traditional values has brought to mind a few observations of mine over recent years. Here, I'll start with one from the 90's:

When my daughter was in high school she had a friend who was gay. This guy claimed he wasn't, but trust me, he was. I told her he was and she scoffed at the idea. That led to us discussing what seemed to be a popular thing back then... I called it "faux lesbo" and it made her chuckle. Why? Because she was well aware of it. It's not as if there were tons of lesbian high schoolers in Idaho... but there was a very distinct segment of girls who "acted" in a lesbian fashion because, as my daughter expressed it, "They seem to like the attention it gets them."

When she went off to college she saw it there as well. Her first year she lived in a dorm and her beginning roomie started out by saying she was a lesbian but that my daughter wasn't her type. As time marched forward the lesbian roomie not only abandoned lesbianism... but moved in with a newly acquired boyfriend, got pregnant and dropped out of college... all before completing her freshman year.

Both my grown son and daughter have observed that enough young women pretend to be lesbians for it to be noteworthy. Both of them had friends growing up who were closet male homosexuals... and then "came out" in the relative safety of post-high school living. But for whatever reasons, the same negative view that kept the boys from being honest didn't apply to the girls... most of whom were actually being dishonest, because they weren't really lesbians.

Not to mention... as has been antecdotally shown in our little corner of the planet... none of the faux lesbians of their high school or college days were actually lesbians in the sense that they developed and maintained same-sex relationships. They pretty much hooked up with a guy when the right one came along.

At the time... over a decade ago, I dismissed the "faux" behaviour as simply young women struggling to set themselves aside from the herd... to be noticed and liked. Nothing wrong with that and the advent of MTV in our culture has rapidily shifted the focused to sex as being the reason to be noticed as opposed to whatever counted when I was in school... fistfights maybe.... or being the "go to" guy for ganja, rubbers and hot load ammo.

Fantasy versus Stigma

It's possible that one of the reasons that faux lesbians were met with approval... grudingly in some cases I'm sure... is that a common male fantasy is the F-M-F threesome. Yes, even us teens from the distant past wanted that... and in some cases, got it as well.

On the other hand, younger men are all about being accepted as "men" or manly, or masculine. And doing it with another guy is just way too submissive and emotionally upsetting for the bulk of teens. Add to that the classic early youth homo-erotic events like the circle jerk, "dare ya" hand jobs and drunken overnights at the friend's house who had the parents who got drunk very early and then passed out upstairs and you get some very confused and unstable reactions to male-male sex in the teenager's world.

Not to mention... girls still make fun of and deride teen boys who are gay or suspected of being gay. Most male egos are fragile enough to begin with and especially so in the hormonal years. What others think really does count no matter how much a parent says it doesn't.

Are we slowly becoming Libertines?

Yes. It's undisputable. If Madonna and Paris Hilton can suck face with a hottie on TV and all it does is sell more records or sex tapes, then I reckon we are. Look at Alice Cooper from the hazy past. Not gay. But appearing to be the golem of ugly homosexuality as a performer. How much of our cultural shift towards a more libertine society is based firmly in rock & roll, television imagery, movies and other dramatizations of sexual fantasy and repressed urges? Most of it I'd reckon.

I once had a trusted friend remark to me... about gay sex... that he often felt like younger men took to it because it was being offered without a struggle. Huh? He explained - as a young man it just flat-out wasn't easy to get laid. Even now I think that's still the case. So much struggle. So much emotional and mental energy invested in attempting to get a girl's panties off. But then, he explained, there are gay teens or younger gay men... they don't require anything more than dropping trou' and getting down to business.

Talk about libertine! What he was basically telling me is that sex, to a young man, is just sex. And to think that it can only happen with a female (if you're a male) is the path towards frustration and possibly even a life of quiet desperation.

Frankly, there are times when any additional info would be TMI and that conversation was one of them. I wasn't going to dispute him... because there really is a certain amount of sense to what he said. What is a circle-jerk anyway, if it isn't just a bunch of young boys releasing their pent-up sexual frustrations in a mutually destructive setting? By that I mean if one boy tells, then he's as much a subject of scorn as the others.

Perhaps I'm just lucky. My formative teen years were spent in El Paso. If you didn't grow up there then maybe you don't see why that matters. It does. 6 miles from my house lay Juarez, Mexico. In Juarez I could get anything I wanted sexually or otherwise so long as I could pay for it and avoid the cops. That put things in a different perspective for me and my buddies because we weren't dependent on prudish teen girls in order to get our jollies. We could, in those days, drive to Juarez and for $5 or so get our Roscoe buffed by an accomplished artiste. Additional services doubled the price but included protection and some instruction for the neophyte teen.

In some cases, perhaps more than Des Moines, Iowa or Ziplock, Kentucky... the high school girls felt the need to compete. And they certainly did. So there you go again... a libertine from Texas... hard shell gouged open and the raving lunatic exposed for what he is... a sex-crazed fiend. Just like everybody else.

Which means what?

That really is the question. And it's probably why gays are having such a struggle to get their relationships treated exactly the same as hetero relationships. Gay sex is steeped in the myth (or reality?) of predator versus hormonal-stupidity. Not so much lesbian sex... which us guys all tend to slavor over and maybe even be a part of from time to time... but male gay sex.

I worked for a couple of years at a large restaurant in Dallas... during those times I spent with my mother there. In order to party, go to school and also work I willingly snagged Bennies when I could get them. Our manager was gay as was one of the two brothers who owned the eatery. Through him, one of the older workers hooked us younger guys up with a "guy" who could get what we wanted. He also had the habit of trying very hard to get in our pants. He was a sexual predator. As was the owner (who invited boys from all three restaurants to his house for "wrestling" instruction) and even Mister G, the manager would invite any of the young teens to his pace to check out his stereo.

Now, between you and me, I never, ever would have told my dad or mom about these guys. For one, I was complicit in that I acquired illegal drugs from one of them. For the other reason, I didn't mind them being the way they were so long as they didn't try and force me into something I wasn't willing to do.

But Hoo Boy! If these people's behaviour had become known there would have been a huge public outcry. Is that so hard to see? Yes, I know these particular men aren't representative of the gay lifestyle any more than that guy with the cult church that married off the 14 year olds represents traditional religion.

But this is sex we're talking about folks. Parents just flat don't want their kids willingly exposed to what they see as predatory. And to deny that young men (and women) in their teen years aren't beacons for sexually predatory tactics would like denying that sex feels good. We were, and they are, easy prey because we have almost uncontrollable sexual urges in our teen years.

So I really do understand the objections

At least those put forth by the religious and also the non-religious traditionalists. They see the battle in larger terms. They view the acceptance of gay marriage being equal to the natural man-woman marriage as an open invitiation to an embracing of libertine philosophy and a rejection of morality.

Yes. Morality. I'm perfectly happy that my daughter wasn't pregnant at 14 because she adpated my view that she not be "like" the girls I scored in high school. And I'm completely satisfied that my son was not the victim of a sexual predator when he was younger and crazier than he is now. Yes, I did have that "talk" with him... lingering visions of the creepiness of the predators I knew when I was young.

And I understand the counter-arguments

Not only are all gay men NOT spending their days luring young boys into the back of their car. Most gay men aren't. Just like most men who prey on young girls don't represent all heterosexual men.

But the issue isn't that clear cut because we have a culture that actually values and wants to keep non-libertine morality. Mainly, I think, because they have determined that it's the healthiest one for their children. Shit. I agree. My kids didn't need to know Johnny had two daddies. And if they had known it when they wer 8 or 9 or whatever age, it most certainly wouldn't have made their lives richer. They both grew up without a shred of anti-gay bias in a world where gays aren't entitled to be legally narried and I can't come up with a single thing that gay marriage would have offered their generation that would have made them feel more of something... I dunno... equality?... towards gays. They already don't have bias. So the only gain is in the minds of the gay couple who are demanding that society become accepting... overnight. Legally.

Which runs counter to the natural inclination to reject libertine philosophy by people who have moved to the parenting years.

*disclaimer*

No. I don't believe gay sex is bad. I think I already explained that lesbian sex is hot in my view. No. I don't believe that gay men and women are always more promiscuious than heteros. Although, you'll have to admit, the media has been their enemy in this regard by dramatizing them as promiscuious spreaders of AIDS and highlighting them as bathroom stalkers and furtive, skinny men who lurk in the bushes in public parks.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A few thoughts.

Gay men are more promiscuous than any other group, for the same reason that you and your friends would drive and pay money for sex with a prostitute while the girls your age had no interest in doing so. Men are more promiscuous than women, so gay men are basically sluts whose dating pool consists entirely of fellow sluts.

The whole 'fake lesbian' thing is really funny. It definitely works for attracting men, not merely because of hopes of a threesome but because most non-gay men find it hot. Go figure, women who want to attract men do something that attracts men! Bisexual young women are more likely to flaunt that side of themselves, just as bisexual young men are more likely to hide it.

My hunch is that stigma against male homosexuality is actually biological (i.e a product of evolution) rather than purely cultural, but I wouldn't call it more than a hunch or perhaps hypothesis if I'm feeling bold.

Anyway, a lot of what you've said here makes sense to me...but I have one lingering question. If aversion to gay marriage is really about resisting libertine attitudes towards sex, then why fight something that encourages gay and lesbian people to commit to monogamous relationships?
9 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul DeStefano
United States
Long Island
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
It's a Zendrum. www.zendrum.com
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:
My hunch is that stigma against male homosexuality is actually biological


I have never considered this, and it makes an odd and interesting sense.

Have a GG for introducing a new thought.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Quote:
If aversion to gay marriage is really about resisting libertine attitudes towards sex, then why fight something that encourages gay and lesbian people to commit to monogamous relationships?


My guess would be that monogamy itself doesn't make the liason more moral. Like if you married your 11 year old cousin and declared it moral on the grounds that you weren't also fucking her schoolmates.

That is the crux isn't it? What legalized, sanctioned marriage between homosexual men and women would effectively do, in their minds, is make their relationships moral. Not moral to them... because I reckon they already don't need benediction from anyone regarding that. But a sort of enforced definition of morality... Here ya go fucker! The law says I'm married, just like you, so you can take your morality BS and stick it up your pipe.

The more reasoned elements of the pro movement aren't that "in your face"... but as has been discussed, there are enough who exude that attitude to make the whole issue run off the rails.
5 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
Chad-
If the Gay Marriage folk were pushing for a conception of marriage that promoted all of the other values but in a Same Sex marriage, this debate would probably be a non issue.

The problem is the perception amongst many that this issue is NOT about equality before the law, but about gaining acceptance for Homosexuality in general- in ALL of its aspects (the perception of promiscuity, etc.) The more and more that the Gay Rights movement makes this about 'acceptance', the more resistance they face. Thats because what many social conservatives are hearing is that this is a call for acceptance of a lifestyle that is PERCEIVED as being equivalent to the Gay Rights parades in San Francisco (Gay men in leather speedos, NAMBLA, etc).

And I don't think that the Gay Marriage activists are being clear about this. If its about equality before the law, then why not a drive to make all Civil Unions equal before the law? (And as for the question of international aspects, it will CERTAINLY be easier to get Saudi Arabia to recognize the 'civil union' status of a gay couple than its 'married' status.) The push for 'Marriage', to me, sounds like an effort to raise homosexuality to the same 'normal' status as heterosexuality- which many voters are not willing to follow, for many of the reasons outlined by Tripp.

Ultimately, this is a form of culture 'war', between two different interpretations of what we mean by 'moral behavior'. Thats why its so important to resolve this fairly, by both sides. Using the courts, or the press, or intimidation, or language itself, to silence one or the other side removes the possibility of acheiveing a consensus on this.

Darilian
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
It's possible that one of the reasons that faux lesbians were met with approval... grudingly in some cases I'm sure... is that a common male fantasy is the F-M-F threesome.


Definitely more desired than then the M-F-M threesome.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Kenney
United States
New Milford
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Gotta catch 'em all!
badge
I like shorts. They are comfy and easy to wear.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
I called it "faux lesbo" and it made her chuckle. Why? Because she was well aware of it.


We called these chicks LUGs: Lesbians Until Graduation.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
This Guy
United States
Durham
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
Faux lesbians don't have the stigma of penetration attached to their activities. The line being crossed (without toys, of course) is far different from dabbling in homosexuality. It's losing your orientation virginity for guys.

Back in college, we had a friend who was bisexual, but not of his own declaration. He considered himself heterosexual, despite liking to sleep with the occasional Pretty Boy. One of my friends said of him, "He's not gay, but he'll hold it in his mouth until the swelling goes down."

It's telling that we thought there was something amusing in a person saying he was straight, even if he slept with guys. None of us had problems with a guy being gay, it was his own judgement of the words "bisexual" and "homosexual" that he was struggling with, not ours.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Quote:
It's losing your orientation virginity for guys.


Yes, it is. Or can be. That was partly the point my friend - the one who suggested gay sex is easier for young men - was making. It is a delicate subject, especially for parents because their own children actually having sex can be a traumatic event for the parents. I viewed my children as worthy of protection from most of the things I was exposed to as a teen and I definitely wanted them to have their experiences be as normal as possible.

Quote:
One of my friends said of him, "He's not gay, but he'll hold it in his mouth until the swelling goes down."


Heh. reminds me of this really nice guy I worked with selling Mercedes. He had just finished up a deal with a repeat customer, who was gay, when another sales rep came up and said, "So, Phil? Did the fag buy another one?"

Phil replied, "Hey! Hey! Just because a guy sucks a dick now and then ain't no reason to call him a fag!"

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
King of All Simians — Not a Mere Diplomat
United States
Wilmington
Select State
flag msg tools
designer
I love you.
badge
I love you.
Avatar
mb
It hurts my heart to see someone who identifies themselves as an ally in the struggle for gay rights say that gay men are sluts; it's a slanderous and bigoted contention that undermines the struggle, and I'm sure it wasn't intended to be as broad a statement as it was written.

While it's true that gay men are more promiscuous, and it's somewhat true that this has to do with a more willing pool of potential sexual partners, most gay men want relationships and love, in the same fashion as anyone else, but they've been prohibited from acting on this natural impulse because of institutionalized sexism and homophobia. When you're not allowed to enter into a relationship, or even avow your heart in a public fashion, you're forced underground.

Legitimizing gay relationships won't end chicken-hawking like Tripp describes--there'll always be folks, gay or straight, that groove on young strange regardless of their other options--but you'd see a lot less cruising and anonymous sex. If Larry Craig felt comfortable enough to find a boyfriend, he probably wouldna been tappin' his toes in the airport bathroom.

A hundred years of this transitional gay culture--not getting stoned to death anymore, but still not allowed to express themselves fully--has created an underground party culture that's clearly destructive. Now we're in a feedback loop, where the party creates the stigma, and the stigma prevents legitimization, which in turn engenders the party. Now that there are receptive folks in mainstream society, there are more and more gay men stepping out of the cycle into relationships that mirror the mainstream that they were brought up in, and that's a good thing.

As for the notion that homophobia is based in evolution, I ain't feelin' it. By my reading, the stigma against homosexuality is rooted in the all-too-human constructs of sexism, not biology. Homosexual sex occurs all across the animal kingdom, while the anti-gay movement is strictly a human pastime. Men who "act like women" and women who reject men are challenges to patriarchal authority, and must be dealt with harshly to maintain the male-dominated social order. Pretty women who make out with and have occasional sex with women are OK, 'cos they're playing into male sex fantasies. Lesbians considered unattractive or too assertive are cast as castrating bull-dykes, and that's all about their unwillingness to toe the line and submit to male authority.

It's no coincidence that the rise of the gay rights movement occurred hand-in-hand with the second wave of feminism, which engaged the patriarchal power structure directly, and it's no coincidence that the staunchest modern opponents of gay rights are the institutions most strongly in favor of male domination.
10 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chief Slovenly
United States
Burlington
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think part of the problem is that for reasons both justified and completely unjustified, gay people are held to a more exacting standard of "quality of relationship": if you're a gay man, married, in SF and still going to sex clubs or having a guy or two on the side -- as many in the gay community probably do -- your relationship, or marriage, or whatever you want to call it, is more deserving of scorn than the guy who either has an "open marriage" with his wife, or goes to sex clubs on the side, or otherwise does all the things a gay partner would do minus the same-sex attraction.

Damn, that's a long sentence. Sorry.

Anyway, my stance is that equality should mean equality in all senses of the word: gay people should be free to make their own mistakes and colossal fuckups in the dating and marriage world just as straights do, on a moral level. On something as fluid as sexuality (how's that for a gross pairing of words), morality is entirely subjective -- so I figure the basic rights granted to us in a pluralistic society, explicitly designed to protect minorities, trump subjective moral views. It's also why I'd be in favor of polygamy if hardcore Mormons and Muslims in this country wanna go for it. It's all about consent.

(No murder analogies, please. And another long sentence. Dammit. Can't help myself.)

I don't really see it as the advance of libertinism rather than... an honest recognition of differences, I guess. If we recognize that gay people exist and are deserving of carving out a family for themselves that straights do, then that goes for Mormon notions of polygamous family. That's about as individual a notion of human freedom as this country has to offer.

Edit:

Quote:
When you're not allowed to enter into a relationship, or even avow your heart in a public fashion, you're forced underground.


Quoted for extreme truth, which is a lot closer to the tone I was trying to convey with my extreme verbiage.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Geosphere wrote:
Chad_Ellis wrote:
My hunch is that stigma against male homosexuality is actually biological


I have never considered this, and it makes an odd and interesting sense.

Have a GG for introducing a new thought.


Thanks! Evolutionary psychology is an area I find fascinating. I've naturally been curious about why we have such asymmetry about homosexuality, and evolutionary psychology seems like it offers an obvious answer.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DWTripp wrote:
Quote:
If aversion to gay marriage is really about resisting libertine attitudes towards sex, then why fight something that encourages gay and lesbian people to commit to monogamous relationships?


My guess would be that monogamy itself doesn't make the liason more moral. Like if you married your 11 year old cousin and declared it moral on the grounds that you weren't also fucking her schoolmates.


Bleah. Do you really need to compare gay relationships to incestual child molesting? I know you're doing it to make a point, but the fact that you have to compare it to something extreme is telling.

How about a man and a woman living together unmarried? This would be considered sinful by many religions, but much less so if they were monogamous. Indeed, a commitment to mutual monogamy would change it from sin to common-law marriage in the minds of many churches.

Quote:
That is the crux isn't it? What legalized, sanctioned marriage between homosexual men and women would effectively do, in their minds, is make their relationships moral. Not moral to them... because I reckon they already don't need benediction from anyone regarding that. But a sort of enforced definition of morality... Here ya go fucker! The law says I'm married, just like you, so you can take your morality BS and stick it up your pipe.


I know it seems that way to you, but no, I don't think this is how it seems to them.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chief Slovenly
United States
Burlington
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hey, I just found an example of faux-gay in men!

Or is it real-gay? I'll say real-gay.

OK, I was just looking for an excuse to post Soup clips:

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Holmes! wrote:
It hurts my heart to see someone who identifies themselves as an ally in the struggle for gay rights say that gay men are sluts; it's a slanderous and bigoted contention that undermines the struggle, and I'm sure it wasn't intended to be as broad a statement as it was written.


First off, I'm not an ally; I'm a participant. Second, you misunderstand me. Men, as a whole, are sluts -- not gay men, not bisexual men, but men. That's not to say that all men are sluts, but that as a group (compared to women as a group), they are. This isn't just a human thing either; it's true for every mammal and for most non-mammals. It has absolutely nothing to do with being gay or straight; it's simple biology, and traits that have evolved over millions of years.

Quote:
While it's true that gay men are more promiscuous, and it's somewhat true that this has to do with a more willing pool of potential sexual partners, most gay men want relationships and love, in the same fashion as anyone else, but they've been prohibited from acting on this natural impulse because of institutionalized sexism and homophobia. When you're not allowed to enter into a relationship, or even avow your heart in a public fashion, you're forced underground.


I agree, and what I said about male promiscuity should in no way indicate that I trivialize the struggle of gay men who want to find life partners. I get it, because I'm a slut myself and I've been monogamous for going on eight years now and expect to remain so for the rest of my life.

Quote:
As for the notion that homophobia is based in evolution, I ain't feelin' it. By my reading, the stigma against homosexuality is rooted in the all-too-human constructs of sexism, not biology. Homosexual sex occurs all across the animal kingdom, while the anti-gay movement is strictly a human pastime.


All "movements" are strictly human. That doesn't mean they don't have a root in biology. I can see the arguments for culture being the driver, but the near-universality of it makes me skeptical. In any case, I don't claim it to be more than an interesting (to me) hypothesis.
9 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Holmes! wrote:
It hurts my heart to see someone who identifies themselves as an ally in the struggle for gay rights say that gay men are sluts; it's a slanderous and bigoted contention that undermines the struggle, and I'm sure it wasn't intended to be as broad a statement as it was written.


I think you missed the mirth that Chad's statement implied. Men are, at heart, sluts. Hound dogs. Gay men, as he suggested, are no different. But then, you carry on and agree with him?

Quote:
While it's true that gay men are more promiscuous, and it's somewhat true that this has to do with a more willing pool of potential sexual partners


Quote:
When you're not allowed to enter into a relationship, or even avow your heart in a public fashion, you're forced underground.


Except in small, very conservative communities, that is certainly not true. You live in Chicago fer Chrissakes! How can you say that?

Quote:
Legitimizing gay relationships won't end chicken-hawking like Tripp describes--there'll always be folks, gay or straight, that groove on young strange regardless of their other options--but you'd see a lot less cruising and anonymous sex.


Huh? Straight marriage didn't reduce cruising or anonymous sex. In fact, I'd say it's as common now or even moreso than in my liberated 60's era. What on earth gives you the idea that passing laws legitimizing gay marriage will reduce sexual cruising?

Quote:
As for the notion that homophobia is based in evolution, I ain't feelin' it. By my reading, the stigma against homosexuality is rooted in the all-too-human constructs of sexism, not biology.


Well, on one side you have the definitely pro-gay segment that aims to prove homosexuality is exactly that... genetic. If you allow that in the picture as opposed to it being a choice, then you are not going to get a drop of sympathy for the idea that resistence to it isn't also based in biology.

I will also point out that "homophobia" is a word that ill-defines the vast majority of people who resist gay marriage being legalized. It implies fear of gays... primarily gay men and aims to paint opponents as mere tools of their own ignorance. It's as much a part of the problem as is unwarranted persecution or discrimination against gays.

Quote:
Homosexual sex occurs all across the animal kingdom, while the anti-gay movement is strictly a human pastime.


When it does occur... and it's not "all across"... it is an anomoly. Extremely rare, yet seized upon by militant advocates who fling it about as proof they are normal. Normal is male-female across the animal kingdom. That's why there is an animal kingdom. Including human animals.

Quote:
it's no coincidence that the staunchest modern opponents of gay rights are also the strongest institutions in favor of male domination.


Rhetoric. What so many miss is that our evolutionary development is male-dominated. Champions of normalizing gay marriage would like nothing more than to get symapthy for their "plight" by asserting homsexual urges are normal and genetically based... but would deny that the male-domination of the human race might also be seeded in the same genetics. Anything that aids their quest, including science is accepted... except when the same science doesn't support their quest... then it's not mentioned and they fall back on revolutionary rhetoric and faceless enemies of freedom for all.

Sheesh Holmes!... think about it. Even if it were proved, beyond a doubt, that male homosexuality, especially when it's not just bi-sexuality, is genetically coded in a small portion of the population how will the tradtional conservative world react to that? Right now genetic science is finding markers for disease and may possibly even give us what we need to reduce or sure severe depression, autism, predisposition to all sorts of cancers and heart conditions and other plagues. This is a Pandora's Box my friend. The unintended consequences of demanding that genetics be the point of validity for gay unions might very well be the "proof" more powerful and influential majorities need to start curing it.

Ask yourself this... if the average parental unit in Western Society could know in advance that their male child was genetically coded to be gay... and there was a relatively easy fix for it.... how many parents would choose to NOT fix it?

Is that what you want? Because sure as shit, that's exactly what you might get. And man... I don't want it.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
King of All Simians — Not a Mere Diplomat
United States
Wilmington
Select State
flag msg tools
designer
I love you.
badge
I love you.
Avatar
mb
I wish that gays in Chicago had an easy ride, but there are plenty of gay men and women around here who are just as straitjacketed as any small-town homo. Even in the confines of the uber-progressive punk rock scene which I hail from, gay women and (especially) gay men are still as subject to the conditioning that we all grew up in, and are likely to keep their light hidden. It's a wider issue than we'd like to think, based on what we see in the media.

When it comes to genetic screening and parents terminating gay kids, I hear you, but what can be done? I think there likely is a genetic marker, and I'm sure that the messed-up future you see could easily come to pass. But fuck, science is science, and I'm not gonna sweep scientific facts under the carpet to fit my ideological agenda. That's your side's job. (I'll be here all week!)

Besides, as much as I recoil from the notion of folks aborting kids 'cos of gay genes, that's not my problem and I won't make it mine. I don't have any ethical qualms about abortion for any reason; if a woman decides to terminate, that's the business of her and her doctor, and not a bit of mine.

I'll keep working to lessen antigay bias, which is the only thing that matters; if folks don't like gays, they'll keep subjecting them to oppression of all sorts, if they realize that gays are an integral part of the human family, all this worry about biology and eugenics won't matter.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Isaac Citrom
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Have to echo Tripp's experience. As a young man I was continually chased after by Gay men. If only I had a tenth the attention from women!! Several sets of keys were pushed into my hands or left in my locker. Of course, I was quite naive about it at the time. I have no doubt that it was my downtown milieu, working a lot in restaurants, that exposed me to that much more than the rest of society.

In addition to that, I clearly recall the continual aversion in the Gay community to what had become a four-letter word, family and family values. At the time we were called squares. Any notions having to do with children, getting married, settling down, suburbanism was scoffed at and ridiculed. I mention that as I am now quite surprised at this new-found love of children, marriage and family values.

Of course, however, I fully expect it to be said that I imagined the whole thing and that family life has always been a cornerstone of the Gay lifestyle. I cannot help but believe that until decades have passed with this new attitude, that this is nothing more than a cultural fad.

That said, in today's environment, scientific advances and social changes allow for Gay couples to have children. So, perhaps in the past it was a case of sour grapes on the part of the Gay community.


Adding to what Tripp and Dar said, and as I have said here previously, my reluctance to accept Gay marriage is not much at all about marriage per se. It is very much more so about making a stand against a particular social outlook; a basket of moral values with which I heartily disagree.

As has been argued not just by me, there is a package deal that comes along with Gay marriage that touches upon many other issues concerning the makeup of "family" and family life.

In another thread I once argued in relation to transgenderism. Chris suggested that I was lacking as a parent for not educating my children regarding transgenderism. He sarcastically asked whether I would wait until my kids were in college before broaching the subject. I answered:

It is not for me to "police" my children, as Chris would like, rather it is, for example, for transgendered people not to shove the concept down everyone's throat. I ought not have to be put into the position of explaining to my ten year old why a man would want to self-mutilate himself and become a woman. Rather, I prefer to leave it until college, as Chris suggested, until such time as he has the mental and social maturity to understand it rationally.

Furthermore, Chris informed us that there are a lot of resources available about the transgendered. I responded with:

I will add that the "family fiendly", as you [Chris] put it, do not look down their noses. In fact, what I find is that the "freaks", as you say, look down on us as squares and stupid. You give too much credit to such unusual ways of life in that you think people care one whit about them. I recall Chris mentioning that we should read up on the transgendered, as if it ought to be important to me and I actually should care. As we are living in a society--rightly so--that is tolerant of differences, we nonetheless expect a modicum of basic respect and consideration for the way of life of the majority.

The point here is not about the transgendered. It is that Gay marriage brings with it a whole other moral and social outlook that requires everyone else to change how they educate and raise their children. Indeed, the very basic definitions of marriage and gender are redefined.

Moreover, the rightness or wrongness of one view over another is still not the issue. Rather, that one is forced onto everyone else. Yes, we know that "we" are ignorant and stupid for not handing out condoms to our nine year olds and not slipping in the Pill with their Flintstones, but we choose it to be that way. It is not for a tiny segment of society to impose a change otherwise.
.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Before I reply, why is it that I never had a single guy make a pass at me when I was growing up, but it seems like some guys here couldn't enter a room without some guy coming on to them? It's just not fair...

isaacc wrote:
Of course, however, I fully expect it to be said that I imagined the whole thing and that family life has always been a cornerstone of the Gay lifestyle.


Are you competing for "most patronizing member of RSP" by any chance?

Yes, the gay movement went through a very counter-cultural period. Big shock...a group of people that perceived themselves as rejected by mainstream society rejected that society right back, including pressuring any of its members that wanted to embrace parts of that society.

The thing is, we're not talking about gay culture but about gay people. Gay enclaves may continue to hold a strong counter-cultural bent for many moons, but that doesn't change the fact that most homosexual people don't live in gay enclaves, don't write for the Advocate and are just people who happen to be homosexual. They've been partnering, building families and doing all the normal things other families do.

Now they see a chance for full participation in the legal and social ritual by which our culture defines commitment and family, and they're going for it. This isn't a new development. The only thing that is new is that it's being talked about.

Put another way, there is no "gay lifestyle" any more than there is a straight lifestyle. There are just people. You don't like it when people start throwing around the word bigot -- so don't lump all homosexuals into the urban subsection you're familiar with.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff
United States
Linden
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Social Justice Wargamer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Isaac-

I think I understand your argument, but whenever you present it, I feel like I'm missing a few critical points.

First, what makes you think that the acknowledgement of gay couples will fundamentally alter the way education is handled? I sincerely doubt that a country that allows gay marriage is suddenly going to teach young kids about the details of adult sexuality. The most "troubling" possibility I can think of is the acknowledgement of gay couples, and kids will inevitably be aware of their existence long before they hear about it in school.

Second, I can understand (though I disagree with) the argument that gay marriage fundamentally changes the definition of marriage, but how does government recognition of a lifestyle that is already ubiquitous in the culture change society's moral and social outlook? I don't think that people look to the government for those kinds of social cues.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
flag msg tools
All my sins are of omission
badge
Snob of the People
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So, if a kid has two daddies is one of them a faux pa?
17 
 Thumb up
1.06
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lynette
United States
Richland
Washington
flag msg tools
Yep, I am a girl Scientist. Come for the breasts; Stay for the brains!
badge
For as long as I shall live I will testify to love; I'll be a witness in the silences when words are not enough.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
steinley wrote:
Quote:
It's possible that one of the reasons that faux lesbians were met with approval... grudingly in some cases I'm sure... is that a common male fantasy is the F-M-F threesome.


Definitely more desired than then the M-F-M threesome.


Only by the dudes. I so want to get to do it the M-F-M way. That would be awesome and seriously I think I have earned it!
Besides Orgasmically it works better M-F-M.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Meerkat wrote:
steinley wrote:
Quote:
It's possible that one of the reasons that faux lesbians were met with approval... grudingly in some cases I'm sure... is that a common male fantasy is the F-M-F threesome.


Definitely more desired than then the M-F-M threesome.


Only by the dudes. I so want to get to do it the M-F-M way. That would be awesome and seriously I think I have earned it!
Besides Orgasmically it works better M-F-M.


I've done two M-F-Fs and they work great. Some of the best sex I've ever had. I'd love to do an M-M-F one someday, although whether it would ever happen would depend on my wife deciding she wants one.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chief Slovenly
United States
Burlington
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GAWD wrote:

The queer should stay queer ... the entire argument that queer couples are "just like" hetero couples, so they should get married too abandons the power of being an alternative.


Ah, but to use my favorite didactic Clockwork Orange lecture: where's the choice?

Gays and straights should both have the choice available to be "normal" or "outside", make mistakes or not, as they see fit. Currently only straights have legal sanction to make that choice.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
King of All Simians — Not a Mere Diplomat
United States
Wilmington
Select State
flag msg tools
designer
I love you.
badge
I love you.
Avatar
mb
bbenston wrote:
GAWD wrote:

The queer should stay queer ... the entire argument that queer couples are "just like" hetero couples, so they should get married too abandons the power of being an alternative.


Ah, but to use my favorite didactic Clockwork Orange lecture: where's the choice?

Gays and straights should both have the choice available to be "normal" or "outside", make mistakes or not, as they see fit. Currently only straights have legal sanction to make that choice.

This's my take, too. As much as I welcome queer brothers and sisters on the front line of the progressive movement, there are a lot of gay folks who aren't into the whole "tearing down this corrupt system" thing, and I don't count it as a victory to keep 'em marginalized in the name of maintaining a willing pool of conscripts.

My gay mom is entirely too conservative for my tastes (she voted for Obama yuk ), but that's her choice to make based on how her conscience takes her. I disagree with her life's goals (home, family, God), but that's why I've got my own damn life to screw up in my own way.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.