OMGAY

All discussions regarding politics, religion, philosophy, science, cake and related subjects should be posted here.

Moderator: Moderators

OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Thu May 20, 2010 5:50 pm

So, this is a gay thread. I'll be posting stuff in it. Maybe someone will comment, SO LETS FIND OUT

These are the 3 parts of a show done about homophobia in Britain, hosted by Gareth Thomas, a well known Welsh rugby player who came out sometimes this last year. If it's this bad over there, think of how bad it is over here, then think about how bad it is in Malawi, where two men were just sentenced to 14 years hard labor for marrying one another.



a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby TheRaven7 » Thu May 20, 2010 6:42 pm

The problem is the Gay Identity. Rather than combat heteronormativity, the "Gay Community" has become identified as a class of people with distinct culture, lifestyle (I hate this word), and traditions. One shouldn't have to identify as a "gay person". One should be able to simply be homosexual and not "a homosexual".

Of course this is mostly the consequence of the heteronormativity, because it was the only way for gays to come out and make their presence known. I understand the purpose of Gay Pride and coming out parties and all the other pomp and circumstance, but if people aren't careful this could work against us. Too many people seem to hold on to their Stonewall mindset of fighting back. We should no longer be on the defensive. We should be pushing forward instead of fighting back. Gay Pride parades in SanFran or Folsom St are about as effective as protesting sugar on a corn farm.

This nation needs another sexual revolution, but it needs to be taken seriously this time instead of letting our generation do a face heel turn at middle age like the boomers did. Instead of acid tabs, hand out condoms. Instead of hippie crap, try pragmatism.
User avatar
TheRaven7
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:49 am
Location: welcome to inanity

Re: OMGAY

Postby Zeuter » Fri May 21, 2010 2:57 am

TheRaven7 wrote:I understand the purpose of Gay Pride and coming out parties and all the other pomp and circumstance, but if people aren't careful this could work against us.


Raven is "a homosexual"?
simply
it is enough to
your task is simple;
just
all you need is to
User avatar
Zeuter
 
Posts: 3746
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 11:07 am
Location: オランダ

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Fri May 21, 2010 9:41 am

I think he was speaking about right-minded peopler rather than identifying with queers. And as well-intentioned as your (Raven's) post is, it's a complete mess.
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby TheRaven7 » Fri May 21, 2010 10:02 am

What part do you take issue with? I'm bothered by "well-intentioned" because that usually means one is saying something opposite their intent. I don't want to believe something homophobic borne of ignorance.
User avatar
TheRaven7
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:49 am
Location: welcome to inanity

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Fri May 21, 2010 11:00 am

In this particular instance, it means that you have good intentions, you are not a homophobe by any stretch, but your post belies a misunderstanding of social movements, and the history of gay civil rights, while hitting directly on the head a couple salient points about the complete and utter disconnect between the various generations of homosexual in America.

TheRaven7 wrote:The problem is the Gay Identity. Rather than combat heteronormativity, the "Gay Community" has become identified as a class of people with distinct culture, lifestyle (I hate this word), and traditions. One shouldn't have to identify as a "gay person". One should be able to simply be homosexual and not "a homosexual".

Of course this is mostly the consequence of the heteronormativity, because it was the only way for gays to come out and make their presence known. I understand the purpose of Gay Pride and coming out parties and all the other pomp and circumstance, but if people aren't careful this could work against us. Too many people seem to hold on to their Stonewall mindset of fighting back. We should no longer be on the defensive. We should be pushing forward instead of fighting back. Gay Pride parades in SanFran or Folsom St are about as effective as protesting sugar on a corn farm.

This nation needs another sexual revolution, but it needs to be taken seriously this time instead of letting our generation do a face heel turn at middle age like the boomers did. Instead of acid tabs, hand out condoms. Instead of hippie crap, try pragmatism.


For instance, your first paragraph. Oppressed minorities have a history of creating their own culture because they are excluded from the culture of the majority. Just look at African-American culture. While it'd be nice if everyone was just okay with everything, that's not the world, and it's not reasonable to expect. The sense of lost identity and shame and anger of being different, being spat upon and discriminated against, is healed in that Gay Community you speak about while knowing little about it. Creating and belong to an identity is necessary for most people to lead a healthy functional life.

Also, did you just learn the word heteronormative?

Your next paragraph indicates you understand what I've written above, but also betrays your misunderstanding of what Pride celebrations are. In the beginning, they were acts of revolution, but they have changed over time, and their purpose is not wholly what it was. See my first paragraph to piece it together.

Lastly, I'm not even sure what this paragraph was about. We're a nation founded by puritans and frequently swamped with religious fervor in our poorer less educated regions. We could use a sexual revolution, but... acid tabs? Hippies? What?
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby TheRaven7 » Fri May 21, 2010 11:35 am

Oppressed minorities have a history of creating their own culture because they are excluded from the culture of the majority. Just look at African-American culture. While it'd be nice if everyone was just okay with everything, that's not the world, and it's not reasonable to expect. The sense of lost identity and shame and anger of being different, being spat upon and discriminated against, is healed in that Gay Community you speak about while knowing little about it. Creating and belong to an identity is necessary for most people to lead a healthy functional life.


This is completely true. The reason I criticized it is that I am unsure of what the end goal should be. My personal beliefs tend towards mainlining universal sexuality to eliminate the need for distinct "orientations".

My gut feeling is something like this:
Image

Perhaps it's too lofty a goal. Minority cultures haven't gone anywhere and show no signs of doing so in the future. This might be the case for gays. I shouldn't hope for the destruction of a culture out of selfishness.

Lastly, I'm not even sure what this paragraph was about. We're a nation founded by puritans and frequently swamped with religious fervor in our poorer less educated regions. We could use a sexual revolution, but... acid tabs? Hippies? What?


I'm saying the "sexual revolution" of the sixties was just the cruft of a cultural rebellion. If were going to have one, we need one with substance, not substance abuse.
User avatar
TheRaven7
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:49 am
Location: welcome to inanity

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Fri May 21, 2010 12:21 pm

Following up on a March announcement from the Department of Health and Human Services, the June meeting of the Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability ''will hear presentations and engage in deliberations'' on the Food and Drug Administration policy, in place in its current form since September 1985, prohibiting men who have had sex with another man ''even one time since 1977'' from donating blood.

Officials at HHS and advocacy groups said that no decision on the specifics of any change – or if there even would be any change – has been made. Unlike the FDA reviews of the policy in 2000 and 2006, however, the Advisory Committee will be free to consider non-scientific factors – like societal issues and cost-benefit analysis – in its review.

The meeting, formally announced in the Federal Register on Thursday, May 20, is to take place June 10-11 at The Universities at Shady Grove in Rockville, Maryland.

Jerry A. Holmberg, the executive secretary of the Advisory Committee, said on Thursday, ''The decision has been to review the issue. The Assistant Secretary of Health wants this to be discussed in an open forum.''

The Human Rights Campaign announced in a release that the organization will offer testimony at the meeting. Spokesman Michael Cole spoke to the additional work needed to effect any policy change, saying, ''This is a long-standing policy that will take a great deal of education to help change.''

Cole noted ''the FDA's paramount responsibility is to ensure the safety of the blood supply.'' Regarding HRC and other advocates of changing the policy, Cole said, ''We must continue working to demonstrate that broadly excluding all gay and bisexual donors for life, particularly in light of tremendous advances in HIV science since the ban was adopted, does not serve that important goal.''

The lifetime ban – called a lifetime deferral by the FDA policy – often has sparked the ire of LGBT advocates in the past and also is opposed by the three main blood donations organizations – the AABB, America's Blood Centers (ABC) and the American Red Cross.

In a 2006 statement, the three groups stated that the lifetime ban is ''medically and scientifically unwarranted.'' It should be noted, however, that they ''recommend that deferral criteria be modified and made comparable with criteria for other groups at increased risk for sexual transmission of transfusion-transmitted infections,'' which would be a one-year deferral. The recommendation, if implemented, would mean that only those men who have not had sex with another man for more than a year would be eligible to donate blood.

The meeting notice states that the topics to be addressed include: ''what are the most important factors (e.g. societal, scientific, and economic) to consider in making a policy change; is the currently available scientific information including risk assessments sufficient to support a policy change at this time; what studies, if any, are needed before implementing a policy change; what monitoring tools or surveillance activities would need to be in place before implementing a policy change; what additional safety measures, if any, are needed to assure blood safety under a revised deferral policy?''

The notice includes additional information, including a note that ''screening tests can be falsely negative during the 'window period,' defined as the interval between the time when an infected individual may transmit the disease and the time when screening tests become positive.'' In agreement with the AABB, ABC and Red Cross statement, the notice states, ''A period of deferral is needed after high-risk exposure to prevent false negative tests from 'window period' collections.''


So maybe now gay people can donate blood. This is the kind of ingrained bigotry that really only exists for queer people in America (discounting illegals because they aren't citizens).
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby TheRaven7 » Fri May 21, 2010 3:23 pm

Institutional discrimination is much more pervasive and much more damaging than any form of overt discrimination.

I remember most of the gay kids in high school just ignored the ban.

So, when is WBC going to bite off more than it can chew? You can't sue if you're dead.

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbe ... mID=140446
User avatar
TheRaven7
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:49 am
Location: welcome to inanity

Re: OMGAY

Postby Zeuter » Sun May 23, 2010 8:57 am

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/c ... ger_after/

Melli exploding in indignant rage in T minus 5.
simply
it is enough to
your task is simple;
just
all you need is to
User avatar
Zeuter
 
Posts: 3746
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 11:07 am
Location: オランダ

Re: OMGAY

Postby Half + Seven » Sun May 23, 2010 11:25 am

TheRaven7 wrote:Gay Pride parades in SanFran or Folsom St are about as effective as protesting sugar on a corn farm.


We have a huge one here in Austin (that's right, Texas), it's in 10 days as a matter of fact. I've been every year for the past 10 years and I'm not gay. It's just really really fun.
Half + Seven
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Sun May 23, 2010 2:18 pm

Zeut, I don't know how you could read that story and not feel outraged, regardless of sexual orientation.

This is an excerpt from a summary of a report done on UK asylum laws regarding gays

Stonewall wrote:Consensual acts between same-sex adults are criminalised in 80 member states of the United Nations and homosexuality results in the death penalty in six of these countries. In many countries lesbian, gay and bisexual people face execution, torture, rape and murder from people in their own community or from their government....

People who face the threat of this type of persecution can seek sanctuary in the UK but many are not granted protection because of fundamental errors of judgement and presumptions made by UK Border Agency (UKBA) staff and judges about sexual orientation.

Stonewall has published the report No going back: Lesbian and gay people and the asylum system (2010), which is based on interviews with asylum-seekers and UK Border Agency decision-makers. It found almost systemic homophobia in our asylum system resulting in legitimate lesbian, gay and bisexual asylum seekers regularly being refused sanctuary.

The report revealed that officials rely on inaccurate information and outdated ideas about gay people and admit that they don’t know how to question them appropriately. As a result lesbians and gay men who’ve been raped, tortured and threatened with death are being returned to their countries – in many cases to face further persecution.

The report details how lesbian, gay and bisexual people seeking asylum experience significant and specific disadvantages as a direct consequence of their sexual orientation. In summary:

* Lesbian and gay asylum-seekers feel a deep sense of shame and stigma about being gay and have rarely, if ever, spoken openly about it for fear of persecution. They also have a profound fear of authority figures because of the persecution they face in their home countries.

* UKBA staff are trained to look for inconsistencies in the stories of claimants. This approach disproportionately affects lesbian and gay people who struggle to talk about the persecution that they see as being ‘caused’ by their sexual orientation. The trauma they’ve experienced affects the way they remember and recount details of what has happened to them.

* The UKBA penalises gay people if they are not immediately open about their sexual orientation. If a case reaches the appeal court, judges are also reluctant to accept that individuals have found it difficult to disclose at the first opportunity why they are seeking asylum.

* UKBA staff and judges often assume that a person can only be lesbian or gay if they have engaged consistently and exclusively in same-sex sexual activity. Questions focus on sexual activity and asylum-seekers are expected to share explicit sexual experiences.

* Officials ignore the fact that many lesbian and gay people are persecuted because they are perceived to be ‘different’, not because they have engaged openly in explicit homosexual activity. They lack confidence and knowledge on issues relating to sexual orientation and so fail to enable lesbian and gay people to talk about their experiences.

* UKBA staff and judges often conclude that gay people can return to their home country and no longer be at risk if they are ‘discreet’ about their sexual activity or identity. This approach has been condemned by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

* Gay applicants are often refused asylum because UKBA policy and guidance and case law are incorrectly applied. This leads to legitimate applications failing.

* UKBA staff rely on guidance and reports which are factually incorrect. A lack of information about what it is like to be gay in some countries is erroneously taken as evidence that gay people do not face persecution in those countries.

* UKBA staff do not have access to information on the experiences of lesbians. Issues concerning forced marriage, honour killings and marital rape are not acknowledged to be relevant to lesbians.

* Many lesbian and gay asylum-seekers are ‘fast-tracked’, meaning that they are detained and their case determined quickly. Often they are incarcerated in hostile and homophobic environments, significantly increasing the barriers they already face in talking about their experiences.

* UKBA staff are under great pressure to meet demanding targets and heavy caseloads and this disproportionately impacts on complex gay cases. Shorter timescales for a case make it less likely that gay people will be able to talk openly, leading to incorrect decisions being made.
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby TheRaven7 » Sun May 23, 2010 6:12 pm

If you look at the list(s) on Wikipedia you'll notice about half of said countries exclude lesbians in some way.

It's so easy to fail to muster outrage when acts become so commonplace you become numb to it. It still boggles my mind that anyone's automatic reaction could be to disown or kick out their children. How does that even work? Your neighbor comes over and says "hey where's Billy" and you say "Oh, we kicked him out cuz he's a fag"? Or do you make something up like "we sent him to boarding school"?

I think the best course of action is to wait until you're financially independent if coming out puts you in immediate danger. That or set up some other support system. Although in this case "Scott" is a douchebag for betraying trust. It's people like him and Perez Hilton that have to announce to the entire world any time they learn of someone's hidden sexuality regardless of the consequences that makes coming out difficult for so many people in unfortunate circumstances everywhere. Not only did he call the kid's mother, but apparently someone that spread the rumor around school as well? Fuck him with the mother's firepoker.
User avatar
TheRaven7
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:49 am
Location: welcome to inanity

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Tue May 25, 2010 1:36 pm

Yeah, Scott is a bag of dicks, and not the good kind.

There's a Don't Ask Don't Tell compromise in the works, I'll post more later when I'm not so tired.
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby Myth » Wed May 26, 2010 12:22 am

Melli, I have something I really want to throw down with you about, but I'm afraid if I continue to do this something bad will happen to our eLationship. But I really want to bring it up, so may I do so safely, without having to worry about weird hostility?
User avatar
Myth
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:44 am
Location: Pleasing 83% of the population 74% of the time.

Re: OMGAY

Postby windigo » Wed May 26, 2010 2:13 pm

weird hostility? here? nnnooooo.....
User avatar
windigo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1563
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:23 am

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Thu May 27, 2010 8:00 am

Myth wrote:Melli, I have something I really want to throw down with you about, but I'm afraid if I continue to do this something bad will happen to our eLationship. But I really want to bring it up, so may I do so safely, without having to worry about weird hostility?


Go for it, I'm on a remarkably even keel these days =). Besides, if I could maintain a cordial relationship with Rana, renc and Ragnarok, I should be able to manage it with you.
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby Myth » Thu May 27, 2010 8:48 am

I have a real problem with the hypocrisy in being critical of Boxer Hockey and its repetitious queer jokes and parodies, and then the posting to facebook some time earlier of that Asperger's parody, and treating it like it's funny.
User avatar
Myth
 
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:44 am
Location: Pleasing 83% of the population 74% of the time.

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Thu May 27, 2010 11:43 am

The Asperger's thing was satirical and farcical. It was written in a direct reaction to Parenthood which has an overwhelmingly dramatic and unrealistic depiction of a child with Aspergers. Nowhere in the video does it depict any sort of serious commentary on Aspergers or autism, instead it mocks the degree to which mainstream media treats the topic, because most people with mild aspergers and autism are quite functional, and it's one of those people who is a good friend of mine who showed me the video in the first place.

In Boxer Hockey, the characters treat the word gay as an insult. It is used to mock other characters, and deride their masculinity. It doesn't reach the levels of parody even with that bear strip and it's "hey gay stuff is funny wink wink nudge nudge" instead there's just a constant low level form of homophobia. Now it could have achieved greatness playing on the homophobia of frat/bros/jocks with their homoerotic shenanigans, instead it just maintains a level of saying "oh that's gay." There is no sympathetic gay presentation in the story, and despite a Scott Pilgrim-esque disregard for realism homosexuality is never presented as anything other than a negative quality.
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby Cassiel » Thu May 27, 2010 11:58 am

The word "gay" is an insult. So is the word "dick." That doesn't mean that if I call someone a dick I'm dickaphobic.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Thu May 27, 2010 12:19 pm

Cassiel wrote:The word "gay" is an insult. So is the word "dick." That doesn't mean that if I call someone a dick I'm dickaphobic.


And this has what to do with the price of rice in persia? OMG LOL I was just about to write that "religions don't call for the eradication of dicks" but then I remember circumcision and that was kind of funny. But seriously, that's the kind of thing I'd expect Raven to write, not you.
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby WatermelonMan » Thu May 27, 2010 12:41 pm

I wonder if all the happy people got upset when other people started to use gay to mean homosexual. They probably thought they were just expressing their fear of happiness.
Image
WatermelonMan
 
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: OMGAY

Postby Cassiel » Thu May 27, 2010 12:47 pm

I don't really care what you expect. You're wrong, and this misguided and hilariously superficial crusade is getting old.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: OMGAY

Postby Dr.Mellifluous » Thu May 27, 2010 12:54 pm

Cassiel wrote:I don't really care what you expect. You're wrong, and this misguided and hilariously superficial crusade is getting old.


Riiiiiight. So where do you wanna start throwing down? Because you're actually in the wrong here, and coming off as decidedly ignorant to boot.
a particle is a thing in itself. a wave is a disturbance in something else. waves themselves are probably not disturbed.
User avatar
Dr.Mellifluous
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:30 am
Location: Pornosophically Philotheologising

Re: OMGAY

Postby Cassiel » Thu May 27, 2010 1:03 pm

Perhaps you would find another website more forgiving of your descent into intellectual mediocrity.
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5087
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Next

Return to The Bloody Stump

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron