Homophobia

[Protocol]

Mu.



(that's all that's left after I cut the fat off the long post I wrote. it's chinese, translates roughly to "i can not answer your query because it's based on incorrect assumptions", and it's aimed at the people who are flinging ad hominems about. so there)

 

[Lina]

Originally posted by Wolff
Would you marry an infertile man?

Yes, if I loved him. We could adopt. And I fail to see how this is relevent to a discussion about homosexuality.

Originally posted by Xtokalon
Lina peddles a better than you attitude of a kind.

You and me, buddy, after school, in the parking lot.

Although, pray tell how trying to establish that some things we've decided as a society are "wrong," (i.e., hate crimes are bad), for the sake of simplifying this discussion, is an example of me peddling a "better than you attitude."

Originally posted by Veil the Sky
I also think that Belial's comment about finding 'heterosexual sex disgusting' extremely important. I don't 'hate gays' and I wouldn't beat the crap out of someone for 'being or even acting gay,' but at the same time I do find 'homosexual sex' disgusting. If I said I didn't I would be plain lying. That doesn't render me incapable of liking a gay person and it certainly doesn't mean that I hate 'gay people' that would just be emotional immaturity on my part. People IMHO often confuse their disgust for homosexual sex with a moral objection. It doesn't only happen with sexuality, it also happens with art, I'm sure you all have met people who have a genuine moral objection to heavy metal!

Very good point. But I'd say nine times out of ten, the people who say "gay sex is disgusting" haven't thought about the flip side of that, that heterosexual sex is just as disgusting to gay people. So in that sense, I tend to tense up and assume homophobia when I hear this. But you're absolutely right to point this out, and I have no problem with this comment if the person can see the flip side, as you can.

 

[Misanthrope]

I'm not saying this because I want to be a prick or to pick on you:

It sounds to me like you are harbouring a lot of anger and hatred that it's affecting the quality of your life and limiting your happiness. I hope some day you will realize that people are people and cannot be judged based on their ethnicity. I also hope that one day you will realize that being racist because you yourself are a victim of racism is not only completely hypocritical, but counter-productive because you are purposefully and actively perpetuating the sort of race-based hatred which you are so opposed to.

I know it's hard to look past the shitty things people do to you, but if you don't at least try then you'll never know contentment and unity. Also, I think that anyone who discriminates against you because of your colour is an idiot, so please do not mimic their idiocy by being an idiot racist yourself.

Instead of hating racist people, why not just pity them for being so primitive and stupid?

Satori

I understand...More than you think i do. In the past ive done such a thing but now i was just launching cheap shoots at people. When someone shows low intelligence and judgements and im tired of lie i just allow myself to go to their level and respond. Im that kind of person. Im not justifying that my mockery seems a little racist itself, But it was essencially that a mockery, bad taste one and really distasteful but i just allowed myself to go down to their level. I do that sometimes when i do not see racional thoughts, when i do i respond in a more calmly fashion and i think that is also shown in some of my message. My problem might not be racial issues, but it is certainly anger.

oh no. not another thread like this.
i didn't follow this thread for a while because it was getting out of hand.
i hope you didn't mean it the way you did (the quote in the previous post), misantrophe, for i respect you as a writer of inteligent posts. but if this is true... well, another brick in the wall. am i so antiracial because i'm german and we were brought up like this all the time (maybe too often) because of our history, or did you all forget what history should have taught you? i cannot believe it.

Read above. It was indeed a mockery. I guess i am a bad cynic if it sounds like im racially motivated. I should stay away from those angry jokes from now on

 

[Misanthrope]

Although, pray tell how trying to establish that some things we've decided as a society are "wrong," (i.e., hate crimes are bad), for the sake of simplifying this discussion, is an example of me peddling a "better than you attitude."

Because is dumb to think society has the answers. Is dumb to think moral concepts justify anything in life, look at what belial said years ago it was morally incorrect for a woman to work and make a living, that same moral now says is incorrect to be homosexual, and you will still look back and laugh like you look back and laugh at sexism considered ok. People who base their opinions on what is socially aceptable, what is morally correct display arrogance and a close mind because everyone who stop to think about it realizes just how many mistakes the man has done that are directly linked to morality, represing women, racism ( i think i clarified my distasteful joke by now ), sexual represion ( by the moral you go if you are not a virgin and not married you are as filthy as a gay person ) etc.

 

[Lina]

Originally posted by Misanthrope
Because is dumb to think society has the answers. Is dumb to think moral concepts justify anything in life, look at what belial said years ago it was morally incorrect for a woman to work and make a living, that same moral now says is incorrect to be homosexual, and you will still look back and laugh like you look back and laugh at sexism considered ok. People who base their opinions on what is socially aceptable, what is morally correct display arrogance and a close mind because everyone who stop to think about it realizes just how many mistakes the man has done that are directly linked to morality, represing women, racism ( i think i clarified my distasteful joke by now ), sexual represion ( by the moral you go if you are not a virgin and not married you are as filthy as a gay person ) etc.

do you honestly think i don't understand morals are subjective? in fact, i think i've written on this board several times exactly what you're quoting Belial saying.

the obvious rebuttal is that you're arguing that in the future, we will decide that it is ok to persecute gays. and obviously this won't happen -- society will move forward into tolerance, not backward into oppression.

my point seems so clear, but apparently it's not. so let me rephrase it. in the past, it was immoral for women to work. now we realize this is silly. we won't go BACK to thinking it's immoral for women to work.

it was while illustrating a similar example (racism is "bad," homophobia is "bad"), that i begged that we please not get into a trivial discussion about subjective morality. oops, too late.

 

[Misanthrope]

The simple fact that you mentioned moral and on top of that morally wrong has forever changed my opinion of you. Go back or foward all you want in your opinion, it is still running in circles without admiting that Moral is just plain stupid to even mention it as you did.

 

[moonchild]

i agree with misanthrope, nothing can be justified by morality, the past has shown that the moral of the day can just as quickly change, and the idea that morality has linear progression towards your idea of a better society is in my opinion ludicrous, lets take for example nudity, for most of human existence nudity was quite normal, there was no moral concern over the naked body, then over the last few centuries in western european countries it became morally unacceptable and animalistic, especially in the late 19th century, leading into the 20th century. Few things are more natural than the naked body yet it was deemed totally disgusting and unacceptable by the societies of the day, women had to be covered up, long skirts etc., no one complained at the time because it was the moral view of the day, but along come the "swinging" 60's and the sexual revolution kicks in, women wear mini-skirts, pornography kicks off, playboy clubs open and the moral standpoint is changed. Now thats a very simplified cycle of just one moral view but i think it shows that you cannot predict the moral of tomorrow based on that of today, people will take a moral to its limits and then rebel against it, people are fickle gawd dammit

 

[ricochet]

Homophobia sucks!

 

[Lina]

Originally posted by Lina
And moonchild, if someone's "opinion", as you insist on calling it, is morally/ethically/logically wrong, should no one clue them in? (And please, let's not argue the subjectivity of "wrong." For instance, as a society, we've accepted that racism is "wrong."

I'm posting my original comment, which caused all this commotion, since it has been twisted in ridiculous ways.

Misanthrope, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU that morals are subjective. Ok, are you listening? I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU.

Apparently, the word "wrong" can't be used around here. So can someone please come up with a synonym to denote "something bad"? Or is "bad" not allowed, either?

Because of the argument that has ensued, I can only assume you're defending homophobes. (And I know you're not, but that's how ludicrous this is.) Essentially you're saying it's ok to commit hate crimes because it's not immoral to the person committing the crime. Is this what you mean to say?

 

[astarte]

most of the times i try to be open-minded but i can't understand why can't people think for themselves. saying something is morally incorrect it's just repeating someone else's words...

didn't all this start with x-tianity? Sodom & Gomorrah?

personally, i can't let somebody else decide what i want.. i don't guide my feelings on gender... i see people not sexual differences

depending on the person, sometimes i can feel more confortable with a woman 'cause i know they might understand me better than a man and won't reject a perfect oportunity to be happy just 'cause somebody says i can't...

it's not about sex. unfortunately everybody seem to think it is... not EVERY gay is promiscuous, being bisexual doesn't mean that you want sex with everybody...

and why does it all come down to "the act" anyway?
all the posts end up seeing homosexuality as two persons of the same gender having sex...

i've never had as much problems as Belial (for example) 'cause being a lesbian is more accepted for some strange reason...
i think most of it is just macho talk...

that's my humble opinion.. aparently i'm not as smart as some people.. i didn't use big words at least

 

[moonchild]

lina i agree all these posts have been twisted and cross-analysed, mine included, and i dont even know what im posting about anymore...

cant we all just agree to differ, who the hell said we all had to have the same opinion anyway?

people are fickle gawd dammit

 

[Lina]

Originally posted by moonchild
lina i agree all these posts have been twisted and cross-analysed, mine included, and i dont even know what im posting about anymore...

we agree! we're both retarded!


is anyone else tired? i think i'm getting an ulcer.

 

[Belial]

Originally posted by astarte

and why does it all come down to "the act" anyway?
all the posts end up seeing homosexuality as two persons of the same gender having sex...

i've never had as much problems as Belial (for example) 'cause being a lesbian is more accepted for some strange reason...
i think most of it is just macho talk...

that's my humble opinion.. aparently i'm not as smart as some people.. i didn't use big words at least

Because that is all people think about when they think about sexual orientation: the act. They completely exclude all the emotions behind it (yes I do fall in love). I personally don't understand why people choose to hate gays because they don't like what we do in bed. That's just absurd (and incredibly childish), to hate someone for what they do in private.

Anyway, your other statement made me recall a piece of hate mail sent to one of my favorite gay web pages.

"Hey, all you queers can lick my ass. I only support lesbians. Lesbians are the shit. If you want to link up with a guy that wants to have two lesbians, leave a message."

I think lesbians are more acceptable because we live in a male-dominated society, and many men can handle (and even be turned on by) two women going down on each other. On the flip side, straight men are generally disgusted by two guys kissing, so gay men are much less acceptable.

I know, it's sick, but that's the way it appears to be.

 

[astarte]

Originally posted by Belial
I personally don't understand why people choose to hate gays because they don't like what we do in bed. That's just absurd (and incredibly childish), to hate someone for what they do in private.

i had written that exact same thing but i deleted before i posted, i don't know why...

sometimes people are afraid of gays 'cause they think they'll instantly hit on them (which is really self-centered if you ask me) or just afraid they might like it...

 

[luke]

You guy's don't surf the net much for porn, do you?
A whole 5 page thread about sexuality, and you've left out so many sexual orientations...
What about fetish, geriatric sex, bestiality, teen sex, gang bang, facials, ethnic, and pissings?
What about masturbation?

Where do these all fit into the scheme of nature's design?

 

[Misanthrope]

Because of the argument that has ensued, I can only assume you're defending homophobes. (And I know you're not, but that's how ludicrous this is.) Essentially you're saying it's ok to commit hate crimes because it's not immoral to the person committing the crime. Is this what you mean to say?

I think the homosexuality issue is so simple is not worth the arguments anymore. We pretty much said it already whatever it is. ( unless is childish attacks..not that i do not indulge in such attacks but what can i tell you im bored cranky and bitter ). I was directly aiming at your use of the morals, i think we share similar positions towards homosexuality but i found it hard to believe you had to resourse on morality to argue. There is no hidden truth like im homophobic or racist, im sorry to disapoint you i merely asumed the homophobic issue was so simple anyone would get it...Sorry i think i should not asume anymore

 

[Belial]

Originally posted by luke
You guy's don't surf the net much for porn, do you?
A whole 5 page thread about sexuality, and you've left out so many sexual orientations...
What about fetish, geriatric sex, bestiality, teen sex, gang bang, facials, ethnic, and pissings?
What about masturbation?

Where do these all fit into the scheme of nature's design?

Those aren't sexual orientations, those are fetishes. Sexual orientation is defined as a person's physical and emotional attachment to a certain gender (or genders in the case of bisexuals). Gang bang, facials, and the like are forms of sexual practices that are gender unspecific. They are methods of having sex that says nothing about a person's gender preference and thus they are not sexual orientations. At the most, they are fetishes.

For the sake of knowing, the sexual orientations are as follows: Heterosexual, Homosexual, Bisexual, Transgendered.

 

[Xtokalon]

Originally posted by Lina

Although, pray tell how trying to establish that some things we've decided as a society are "wrong," (i.e., hate crimes are bad), for the sake of simplifying this discussion, is an example of me peddling a "better than you attitude."

Any one who pretends to be right (which is why most people post anyway, for why post if you think what you're saying is false, right?), peddles a better than you attitude.

A better than you attitude is not per se a criticizable thing. I was not criticizing you. In fact I was defending you against Misanthrope's remarks, which were missing the fact, it seems, that you were utilizing concepts like "wrong for the sake of simplifying discussion".

But nonetheless, pursuing it because you invite me to do so, what you say can be criticized on its own grounds. Was Hitler right because in Germany everyone believed he was right? Is Hitler wrong only because the victors in history says he is wrong? It's like saying slavery was right, because everyone at the time believed it was right. Similarly, antihomosexuality is wrong because our present culture believes it is wrong. Do you seriously wish to pin the validity of your beliefs on the fluctuating currents of majority (herd) rule? Seek stronger foundations. I would suggest giving up this (Satorian) idea that there is no such thing as right or wrong, which is something you'd have to believe anyway to argue as vehemently as you soemtimes do about issues. Why argue if by you're own logic, an opponent's views are by default equally right, or equally false?

I side with veil of the sky here. Like him I am a moral realist and I don't pretend to be otherwise when I assert my views on things like racisim and such. It would be irresponsible (or frivolous) otherwise.

 

[Lina]

Originally posted by Xtokalon
But nonetheless, pursuing it because you invite me to do so, what you say can be criticized on its own grounds. Was Hitler right because in Germany everyone believed he was right? Is Hitler wrong only because the victors in history says he is wrong? It's like saying slavery was right, because everyone at the time believed it was right. Similarly, antihomosexuality is wrong because our present culture believes it is wrong. Do you seriously wish to pin the validity of your beliefs on the fluctuating currents of majority (herd) rule?

You know, it IS ok to give society some credit SOMETIMES. Yes, they're stupid most of the time, but like I asked Misanthrope, do you mean to say that we should release everyone from jail? Is it not ok to collectively come to the realization (notice I did not say "collectively decide") that indiscriminate murder would lead to chaos? Similarly, we've come to the REALIZATION, because of advances in science, that homosexuality is indeed very natural and not just some deviant fetish. These are factual realizations, not to be confused with unfounded rhetoric.

It's like saying slavery was right, because everyone at the time believed it was right.

And I would also point out that what started this whole thing was moonchild claiming that homophobic views were merely "opinions" worthy of my respect. It seems your post should be directed at moonchild. It's the fact that the dimmer members of our society are allowed to refuse to acknowledge what science has taught us about homosexuality that these hateful views are considered valid "opinions."


And you're absolutely correct in saying that anyone posting here thinks they're right. Which is what I went yelling to my boyfriend after your comment. But you didn't say that at all when you were singling me out.

 

[Belial]

Sadistik. What monster have you created?