PDA

View Full Version : Acceptance of homosexuality being encouraged in schools.. OH NOES


Pages : [1] 2

Miss Atomic Bomb
Mar 27th, 2011, 03:52 PM
http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/homosexual-propaganda-taught-schoolchildren-young-five

Disgusting.

http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_school/education_for_all/primary_schools/default.asp

Chris 84
Mar 27th, 2011, 03:57 PM
of course its disgusting.

the bnp has no place in society and should be banned. if they aren't inciting racial hatred, they are inciting hatred based on sexuality. they are pure filth.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Mar 27th, 2011, 03:58 PM
of course its disgusting.

the bnp has no place in society and should be banned. if they aren't inciting racial hatred, they are inciting hatred based on sexuality. they are pure filth.

Yep, since they have no recent controversial stories about Muslims, they decided to chew on this. I don't understand how one can encourage someone to be gay.

Helen Lawson
Mar 27th, 2011, 03:58 PM
The world was so much simpler when I was in gradeschool in the 1920s. There was no such thing as homosexuals and Blacks went to other schools. And if you were a gal like me, you had only five options-nurse, hooker, housewife, teacher, or superstar actress. There's a lot to say for limited options.

Helen Lawson
Mar 27th, 2011, 04:00 PM
Muslims lived in the desert when I was a girl.

Helen Lawson
Mar 27th, 2011, 04:02 PM
Can someone tell me why Ann Coulter calls them Mooselums? WTF.

The Dawntreader
Mar 27th, 2011, 04:27 PM
Can someone tell me why Ann Coulter calls them Mooselums? WTF.

Like Barbara Walters and 'The Vooo'.

Gdsimmons
Mar 27th, 2011, 05:14 PM
Its freakin 2011 and people are still so close minded?? Thats a damn shame.

Ferg
Mar 27th, 2011, 05:23 PM
Helen :hysteric:

Mina Vagante
Mar 27th, 2011, 06:19 PM
Why do you have an account on the BNP website Brad ? :scared:

Darop.
Mar 27th, 2011, 07:25 PM
Call me intollerant all you want, but when I see guys acting even more femininely than girls, I just cringe.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 27th, 2011, 07:56 PM
Call me intollerant all you want, but when I see guys acting even more femininely than girls, I just cringe.

That's your right to hold that view. What is not your right is to discriminate against such people because of your personal bias.

Nicolás89
Mar 27th, 2011, 08:07 PM
That's your right to hold that view. What is not your right is to discriminate against such people because of your personal bias.

:yeah:

égalité
Mar 27th, 2011, 08:09 PM
OH NOES :speakles:

égalité
Mar 27th, 2011, 08:11 PM
Call me intollerant all you want, but when I see guys acting even more femininely than girls, I just cringe.

So now you're an arbiter of what's masculine and what's feminine?

Dave.
Mar 27th, 2011, 08:14 PM
Doesn't matter if you're in the BNP or an extreme Muslim group, homosexuality is something everyone can agree on. :hearts: :inlove: :worship:

Helen Lawson
Mar 27th, 2011, 08:52 PM
Barbara Walters has a well-known lisp and many of her words are off. Ann Coulter has no problems with speaking except "Mooselims."

Optima
Mar 27th, 2011, 10:02 PM
Call me intollerant all you want, but when I see guys acting even more femininely than girls, I just cringe.

Gender is a performance, duh.

Darop.
Mar 27th, 2011, 10:59 PM
That's your right to hold that view. What is not your right is to discriminate against such people because of your personal bias.

I do not discriminate against them by no means.
I make fun of "cheerleader" girls who are very "like.... OHHH MY GAWD!!", because they make me cringe. Boys who act that way make me cringe for the same reason, and if they didn't, it'd mean that I'd be trying so hard to be anti-discriminatory, that I'd be discriminatory :p

So now you're an arbiter of what's masculine and what's feminine?

I never said I was the arbiter of what is masculine and what is feminine. I am using the common connotation of these terms, not because I'm a slave to stereotypes, but because it is the best way to express what I'm saying and how I feel about this.

I almost always agree with what you have to say about homosexuality et al., but sometimes you go a bit over the top. I'm all for complete sexual freedom (and freedom of personality independently from gender, I hope you get my point) and I don't discriminate against anyone. But you also have to take it easy, accept that some people may not get along with other types of people.

Random example, you might dislike people who are, say, narcisistic, for whatever reason; that's your own choice and liking, I'm not going to go about trying to force you to change your opinion, and I'm not going to sarcastically ask you if you are now the arbiter of narcisism.

Certinfy
Mar 27th, 2011, 11:52 PM
Interesting.

Randy H
Mar 28th, 2011, 01:18 AM
Call me intollerant all you want, but when I see guys acting even more femininely than girls, I just cringe.

Sometimes what we "hate" in others, is what we hate in ourselves.

shap_half
Mar 28th, 2011, 01:40 AM
Doesn't matter if you're in the BNP or an extreme Muslim group, homosexuality is something everyone can agree on. :hearts: :inlove: :worship:

:hearts:

delicatecutter
Mar 28th, 2011, 02:21 AM
I don't know how the BNP is allowed to exist in Britian. Are they like super Christian or something? Otherwise, I don't understand what their issue is with homosexuality.

Kart
Mar 28th, 2011, 09:36 AM
What are you doing reading the BNP website ?

Kart
Mar 28th, 2011, 09:39 AM
The world was so much simpler when I was in gradeschool in the 1920s. There was no such thing as homosexuals and Blacks went to other schools. And if you were a gal like me, you had only five options-nurse, hooker, housewife, teacher, or superstar actress. There's a lot to say for limited options.

Which option did you go for ?

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 10:45 AM
Sometimes what we "hate" in others, is what we hate in ourselves.

Haha. No, that freudian crap doesn't work this time. I'm very comfortable with my sexuality, so the "repressed homosexual homophobe" card doesn't work on me.

I hate gender and sexuality stereotypes PERIOD. So it annoys me to see a male taking on the stereotypical traits of a woman as well. And honestly, back to the original thread article, I really don't see how dressing boys up like girls has anything at all to do with homosexuality or it's acceptance in society.
Sure, they'll have fun because they like dressing up, whether it be putting on a dress, a kimono or a hijab. I just hope they don't end up thinking that transexuals and transvestites do what they do "just for fun".

ampers&
Mar 28th, 2011, 11:09 AM
Darop, I agree with everything you've said in this thread.

Randy H
Mar 28th, 2011, 12:35 PM
Haha. No, that freudian crap doesn't work this time. I'm very comfortable with my sexuality, so the "repressed homosexual homophobe" card doesn't work on me.

I hate gender and sexuality stereotypes PERIOD. So it annoys me to see a male taking on the stereotypical traits of a woman as well. And honestly, back to the original thread article, I really don't see how dressing boys up like girls has anything at all to do with homosexuality or it's acceptance in society.
Sure, they'll have fun because they like dressing up, whether it be putting on a dress, a kimono or a hijab. I just hope they don't end up thinking that transexuals and transvestites do what they do "just for fun".

There are a lot of people comfortable with their own sexuality, that doesn't make them comfortable with everyone else's as you've clearly demonstrated.

Your previous comment itself was a derogatory comment based on what you said you hate - a stereotype. If you don't like them, then perhaps you need to look deeper into your own views and past what you think are the qualities of a man and a woman. I'm relieved you haven't thrown in that you're "staight acting" yet at least.

Bottom line for me is that I don't like when anyone is ingenuine and not true to themselves. That applies to all spectrums, not just one group of people - Let people be free to explore themselves without judgment :)

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 01:22 PM
There are a lot of people comfortable with their own sexuality, that doesn't make them comfortable with everyone else's as you've clearly demonstrated.

Your previous comment itself was a derogatory comment based on what you said you hate - a stereotype. If you don't like them, then perhaps you need to look deeper into your own views and past what you think are the qualities of a man and a woman. I'm relieved you haven't thrown in that you're "staight acting" yet at least.

Bottom line for me is that I don't like when anyone is ingenuine and not true to themselves. That applies to all spectrums, not just one group of people - Let people be free to explore themselves without judgment :)

Thank you for proving exactly what I meant with stereotypes. When did I ever say that I don't like people of a certain sexuality? Did I say I disliked effeminate homosexual men? NO. I said, guys who act more (stereotypically) femininely than even girls make me cringe. I never said they had to be gay, they could fuck animals for all I care. I think distinction between sexual preferences and demeanor is fundamental, and many people misconceive it.

I agree 100% that people MUST explore themselves without judgement by others, but also without judgement from themselves, in a certain sense. I see well beyond the classic traits of man and woman. The guys I am refering to obviously don't, because they just close themselves into a stereotype they've seen being portrayed time and time again. They are not original, they are not authentic in any way, and they are enforcing the distinction between what is perceived as masculine and what is perceived as feminine. They just act like you would expect a (stereo)typical teenage girl to act.

I'm having a hard time explaining myself.... I'll try with an example. This guy, and everyone who acts similarly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUMjJcHpX10 (http://www.youtube.com/user/ITSFAMOUSRICHARD#p/search/0/mUMjJcHpX10)

no clue if he fucks girls or guys, I don't care to be honest. Fact is, I really doubt he's experimented enough with his personality to find out who he REALLY, AUTHENITCALLY is. Maybe he has, but what a coincidence that his authentic self is the EXACT stereotype of a ditsy 16 year old blonde girl and that there are countless other people who ALSO are authentically like that. It seems to me like it's just one big act, and for me he is portraying stereotypes, and indirectly helping people create stereotypes of what is feminine and masculine.

Of course, I don't mean to hate on this poor guy, same thing goes for the (many) people like him.

Apoleb
Mar 28th, 2011, 01:32 PM
Darop makes a very good point in general. And the point doesn't have to be about homosexual men or women at all. There are straight men who are so conscious of their masculinity and try at every turn to showcase some macho "flavor" and it's something that goes beyond mere posturing to stuff more dangerous (i.e even domestic violence and criminal behavior). The same thing also about straight women (hyper feminine that she acts like she's disgusted by a drop of blood or something). In general, I'm always skeptical about extreme personality traits and social conditioning and pressure can drive people one way or the other for some sort of personality ideal. Homosexual men or women can fall to those same ideals.

Of course, there's really no "correct" way of how people should act or behave. But it's always good to be mindful of the social currents that drive people to act in certain ways and why are they there and whether we need to change them.

Apoleb
Mar 28th, 2011, 01:41 PM
I don't know how the BNP is allowed to exist in Britian. Are they like super Christian or something? Otherwise, I don't understand what their issue is with homosexuality.

They inherited the legacy of the early-mid 20th century fascist parties in Europe. The family was a crucial element of the ideology and homosexuals represent a "threat" to the nation since they don't help the nation reproduce and stuff like that. The hate is partly driven through Christianity but really at its core it's driven by ultra-nationalist ideology.

I guess this is a reminder of what the BNP and other far-right movements are really about. Currently, Front National is leading the polls in France! They are using a mainstream anger against Muslims to drive their popularity upwards. But does anyone really think that they just hate Muslims and have lost contacts with their roots? They are most likely still authoritarian Jew-hating white supremacists which is why the trend in Europe atm is really dangerous.

Barbara Walters has a well-known lisp and many of her words are off. Ann Coulter has no problems with speaking except "Mooselims."It's actually a more correct pronunciation of the term. In Arabic, it's pronounced "Mooslim". Some people also don't use the word "Muslim" but "Moslem". I guess Ann is putting her Cornell education into use. :p

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 02:13 PM
Darop makes a very good point in general. And the point doesn't have to be about homosexual men or women at all. There are straight men who are so conscious of their masculinity and try at every turn to showcase some macho "flavor" and it's something that goes beyond mere posturing to stuff more dangerous (i.e even domestic violence and criminal behavior). The same thing also about straight women (hyper feminine that she acts like she's disgusted by a drop of blood or something). In general, I'm always skeptical about extreme personality traits and social conditioning and pressure can drive people one way or the other for some sort of personality ideal. Homosexual men or women can fall to those same ideals.

Of course, there's really no "correct" way of how people should act or behave. But it's always good to be mindful of the social currents that drive people to act in certain ways and why are they there and whether we need to change them.

Yes, that's pretty much exactly what I meant, just wasn't able to be so brief and swift :p

ampers&
Mar 28th, 2011, 02:14 PM
Bakla and Tomboy culture in the Philippines are other good examples of the damaging impacts of hyper feminineness and gendered stereotypes and how they stifle and morph the gay male and female psyche (people in general, really). I seriously wonder why more studies haven't been done on gays in the Philippines. Seriously mind blowing the roles they play and how they're treated here.

Randy H
Mar 28th, 2011, 03:18 PM
Thank you for proving exactly what I meant with stereotypes. When did I ever say that I don't like people of a certain sexuality? Did I say I disliked effeminate homosexual men? NO. I said, guys who act more (stereotypically) femininely than even girls make me cringe. I never said they had to be gay, they could fuck animals for all I care. I think distinction between sexual preferences and demeanor is fundamental, and many people misconceive it.

I agree 100% that people MUST explore themselves without judgement by others, but also without judgement from themselves, in a certain sense. I see well beyond the classic traits of man and woman. The guys I am refering to obviously don't, because they just close themselves into a stereotype they've seen being portrayed time and time again. They are not original, they are not authentic in any way, and they are enforcing the distinction between what is perceived as masculine and what is perceived as feminine. They just act like you would expect a (stereo)typical teenage girl to act.

I'm having a hard time explaining myself.... I'll try with an example. This guy, and everyone who acts similarly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUMjJcHpX10 (http://www.youtube.com/user/ITSFAMOUSRICHARD#p/search/0/mUMjJcHpX10)

no clue if he fucks girls or guys, I don't care to be honest. Fact is, I really doubt he's experimented enough with his personality to find out who he REALLY, AUTHENITCALLY is. Maybe he has, but what a coincidence that his authentic self is the EXACT stereotype of a ditsy 16 year old blonde girl and that there are countless other people who ALSO are authentically like that. It seems to me like it's just one big act, and for me he is portraying stereotypes, and indirectly helping people create stereotypes of what is feminine and masculine.

Of course, I don't mean to hate on this poor guy, same thing goes for the (many) people like him.

I understand to a degree what you are saying, and truthfully I think we are closer to the same page than we may think - The context of the thread was based on tolerance of homosexuality, so using the example of an effeminite man does suggest speaking about gay men with feminine qualities whether you intended that or not. I apologize if that was not what your intention was.

We are on the same page about one being true to themselves, and I don't disagree that there are some people whose "personality" appears to be perceived more on how they think they are supposed to be, rather than who they really are. Having said that, I think perhaps you made the issue more complicated with the example you used, rather than using a broader statement that reflected your distaste for *anyone* trying to portray something they are not.

Part of me just likes to play Devil's Advocate anyway - It's amazing how quickly some will criticize another for being "fake" or acting to a stereotype, when the truth is that we are all guilty of it in different forms and to different degrees.

Randy H
Mar 28th, 2011, 03:27 PM
Darop makes a very good point in general. And the point doesn't have to be about homosexual men or women at all. There are straight men who are so conscious of their masculinity and try at every turn to showcase some macho "flavor" and it's something that goes beyond mere posturing to stuff more dangerous (i.e even domestic violence and criminal behavior). The same thing also about straight women (hyper feminine that she acts like she's disgusted by a drop of blood or something). In general, I'm always skeptical about extreme personality traits and social conditioning and pressure can drive people one way or the other for some sort of personality ideal. Homosexual men or women can fall to those same ideals.

Of course, there's really no "correct" way of how people should act or behave. But it's always good to be mindful of the social currents that drive people to act in certain ways and why are they there and whether we need to change them.

Agreed - I think it is important for us to sometimes take a step back and think about why someone acts a certain way. Some people grow up in an environment where they are encouraged to truly be themselves. Other people never find acceptance from their family and their peers, and fall into a trap of being any kind of character that will be tolerated and accepted by those around them. Kind of a sad thought isn't it?

Often time as much "blame" is on us, the people who encourage stereotype, or in contrast, frown upon a stereotype and discourage people from exploring different things within themselves in fear of judgment (or in some countries, much worse).

Last comment I'll make on the subject, as it's kind of lead us away from what the original topic was meant to be :lol:

Dave.
Mar 28th, 2011, 03:37 PM
There are a lot of people comfortable with their own sexuality, that doesn't make them comfortable with everyone else's as you've clearly demonstrated.

Your previous comment itself was a derogatory comment based on what you said you hate - a stereotype. If you don't like them, then perhaps you need to look deeper into your own views and past what you think are the qualities of a man and a woman. I'm relieved you haven't thrown in that you're "staight acting" yet at least.

Bottom line for me is that I don't like when anyone is ingenuine and not true to themselves. That applies to all spectrums, not just one group of people - Let people be free to explore themselves without judgment :)

Great post.


Thank you for proving exactly what I meant with stereotypes. When did I ever say that I don't like people of a certain sexuality? Did I say I disliked effeminate homosexual men? NO. I said, guys who act more (stereotypically) femininely than even girls make me cringe. I never said they had to be gay, they could fuck animals for all I care. I think distinction between sexual preferences and demeanor is fundamental, and many people misconceive it.

I agree 100% that people MUST explore themselves without judgement by others, but also without judgement from themselves, in a certain sense. I see well beyond the classic traits of man and woman. The guys I am refering to obviously don't, because they just close themselves into a stereotype they've seen being portrayed time and time again. They are not original, they are not authentic in any way, and they are enforcing the distinction between what is perceived as masculine and what is perceived as feminine. They just act like you would expect a (stereo)typical teenage girl to act.

Somehow I don't think heterosexual guys in general feel pressured by a 'heterosexual stereotype' of acting effiminate. Such a stereotype does exist for gay men however. I don't think you can fault individuals themselves for adapting certain personality traits and I certainly don't think you're in any position to judge whether or not it's 'authentic' or if they've 'expolored themselves' enough to your standards.

Perhaps I could better understand what you're saying if there was the same contempt for what a typically considered masculine traits and gay men who adapt those. But I'm not sensing that from your posts, especially not the tone of your first post in this thread.

Dominic
Mar 28th, 2011, 04:00 PM
I'm having a hard time explaining myself.... I'll try with an example. This guy, and everyone who acts similarly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUMjJcHpX10 (http://www.youtube.com/user/ITSFAMOUSRICHARD#p/search/0/mUMjJcHpX10)


Who said he is acting or potraying anything? Maybe he's like that naturally. That being said, it's too bad he acts like that, cause he actually has cute facial features but his behavior made me nauseous.

kwilliams
Mar 28th, 2011, 04:44 PM
The BNP members are out of their minds. I can't believe they have ANY supporters at all.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 28th, 2011, 05:36 PM
Boys who act that way make me cringe for the same reason, and if they didn't, it'd mean that I'd be trying so hard to be anti-discriminatory, that I'd be discriminatory.

Or It could also mean you're an individual who doesn't judge personality traits you aren't comfortable with.

Anyway, my main point in this thread is, anyone is entitled to feel the way they do about gays, effeminate men or whomever. As long as it stops when that bias discriminates against such people.

I don't care if people feel gays are going to hell, or cringe when they see them or whatever. I DO care, when such people feel that because of their personal bias, gays shouldn't be able to adopt, marry, file joint tax returns, enjoy survivor benefits etc.

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 06:03 PM
Who said he is acting or potraying anything? Maybe he's like that naturally. That being said, it's too bad he acts like that, cause he actually has cute facial features but his behavior made me nauseous.

I take that possibility into consideration in my post.

Or It could also mean you're an individual who doesn't judge personality traits you aren't comfortable with.

Anyway, my main point in this thread is, anyone is entitled to feel the way they do about gays, effeminate men or whomever. As long as it stops when that bias discriminates against such people.

I don't care if people feel gays are going to hell, or cringe when they see them or whatever. I DO care, when such people feel that because of their personal bias, gays shouldn't be able to adopt, marry, file joint tax returns, enjoy survivor benefits etc.

Exactly. I'm not saying they shouldn't be able to talk, vote and aggregate nor that we should put them all in gas chambers. Same way I don't feel that way with anyone I don't get along with, for whatever reason.

Somehow I don't think heterosexual guys in general feel pressured by a 'heterosexual stereotype' of acting effiminate. Such a stereotype does exist for gay men however. I don't think you can fault individuals themselves for adapting certain personality traits and I certainly don't think you're in any position to judge whether or not it's 'authentic' or if they've 'expolored themselves' enough to your standards.

Perhaps I could better understand what you're saying if there was the same contempt for what a typically considered masculine traits and gay men who adapt those. But I'm not sensing that from your posts, especially not the tone of your first post in this thread.

Sorry but I don't really understand your post. I can't fault individuals for adapting certain personality traits just because society tells them "you're gay so you have to act effeminate"? Why not? I'm not saying they are absolutely horrible people and that the deserve to be hung, I'm just saying that most of the time (not always) I have nothing to share with them because they're not able to authentically define themselves so they just act like girls so they can feel socially defined: "this is my role, this is who I am, now I'm happy, no more questions asked". I don't enjoy relationships with people who I think are slaves to social groupings. I don't see how there's a problem with that.

And, to clarify, at no time did I see that people MUST explore themselves to my standards. I said that if someone acts like a stereotype, it's very probable that they haven't explored themselves at all.

Dave.
Mar 28th, 2011, 07:15 PM
Sorry but I don't really understand your post. I can't fault individuals for adapting certain personality traits just because society tells them "you're gay so you have to act effeminate"? Why not? I'm not saying they are absolutely horrible people and that the deserve to be hung, I'm just saying that most of the time (not always) I have nothing to share with them because they're not able to authentically define themselves so they just act like girls so they can feel socially defined: "this is my role, this is who I am, now I'm happy, no more questions asked". I don't enjoy relationships with people who I think are slaves to social groupings. I don't see how there's a problem with that.

And, to clarify, at no time did I see that people MUST explore themselves to my standards. I said that if someone acts like a stereotype, it's very probable that they haven't explored themselves at all.


It's usually a little more complicated than that. Like Randy-H suggested, alot of the time it's the only way one can find acceptance. In other cases it could be a way of (over)expressing themselves after earlier years of repressing it.

I'm just skeptical about blaming the victims of stereotypes. It is more to do with having them imposed on them rather than them creating them. I don't think gay guys should have any more responsibility or onus on them to reverse stereotypes than anyone else tbh. They are society's problem and have got to be overcome by everyone.

What's more unproductive is when 'straight-acting' gay guys are upheld as heroes for 'doing their bit' to reverse stereotypes (and are often seen as more attractive). And what's more, I don't see the same suspicion of straight guys and girls who conform to mainstream and celebrated stereotypes that they are not being authentic. It's just the effeminate guys that are the fake ones.

shap_half
Mar 28th, 2011, 07:18 PM
Bakla and Tomboy culture in the Philippines are other good examples of the damaging impacts of hyper feminineness and gendered stereotypes and how they stifle and morph the gay male and female psyche (people in general, really). I seriously wonder why more studies haven't been done on gays in the Philippines. Seriously mind blowing the roles they play and how they're treated here.

It's me again! Where you go to talk about the Philippines, I follow.

Regarding gay men in my homeland:

This is indeed a very strange phenomenon in the Philippines. (Most) Filipinos are very kind and hospitable people, but they are also incredibly religious. As a result, when it comes to homosexuality, there is a big divide. Like everywhere else in the world, of course there is a wide range of gay men in the Philippines, but the most visible and widely accepted are the feminine ones who dress up as women. There are hardly any masculine gay men in the media and entertainment industry. You are mostly exposed to trannies who serve as humorous points of interest. They don't portray a sexual being.

When people go to the Philippines, because of how prevalent these trannies are, people assume that there is a very liberal respect towards gay men when in fact, there's not. Filipinos, not only still tease and poke fun at these men, but they don't want these men to behave like traditionally masculinely and still engage with other men in a sexual way.

I think this has a lot to do with the way younger gay men rear themselves. They don't have other types of gay men to look up to.

It's quite fascinating, and I'm afraid I'm not doing a particularly thorough job of explaining my observations. But I agree that there should definitely be a sociological and anthropological study on this, because there's a lot of things going on -- from social, emotional, economical, spiritual, familial -- that informs the situation.

miffedmax
Mar 28th, 2011, 07:26 PM
Well, that's in part because if you're straight and fit the stereotype you don't get picked on. The problem for straights is the opposite--if your a straight who doesn't fit the stereotype--a girl who's most comfortable in jeans instead of skirts, or chasing a soccer ball instead of the latest sale at Macy's, guys who would rather draw with charcoal that draw cheers on the sports field. Those are the straights who have their qualifications as "straights" questions and are ridiculed.

Anyway, back to the main point, the BNP are idiots.

shap_half
Mar 28th, 2011, 07:26 PM
And, to clarify, at no time did I see that people MUST explore themselves to my standards. I said that if someone acts like a stereotype, it's very probable that they haven't explored themselves at all.

Similarly, if someone who behaves unlike a stereotype, it's just as likely that they haven't explore themselves at all. How do you know? And how do you determine who is more genuinely who they are? In some ways behavior is a decision. You see how people act and you can decide if you want to act like or unlike them. So there has to have been some form of exploration.

shap_half
Mar 28th, 2011, 07:33 PM
What's more unproductive is when 'straight-acting' gay guys are upheld as heroes for 'doing their bit' to reverse stereotypes (and are often seen as more attractive). And what's more, I don't see the same suspicion of straight guys and girls who conform to mainstream and celebrated stereotypes that they are not being authentic. It's just the effeminate guys that are the fake ones.

Because the general standard is still for men to behave like "stereotypical men" and for women to behave like "stereotypical women." People still champion for these antiquated views of gender-based behavioral patterns, and use them to determine what's best.

And more importantly, it's the effeminate gay guys (and butch lesbians) who are often at the forefront of pushing for acceptance and equality. While most "straight-acting" gay guys are in the closet, marrying and having kids and hiding behind their ability to pass for "normal," it's these flamboyantly, stereotypical guys who are increasing visibility and who are fighting, and some of whom are dying in, the fight.

Scotso
Mar 28th, 2011, 07:40 PM
There's a lot going on in here. :o

I think everyone judges other people based on their behaviors, whether you admit to it or not. So criticizing one person for the particular things that turns them off in people is a bit ridiculous... because everyone does it with regards to something. No one is required to like anyone else or to like a certain aspect of people. Being offended that someone acts overly feminine (which I agree with Darop is played up to a large degree to the point of being annoying) doesn't make you a bad person any more than shuffling away from someone who smells awful does.

I'm sorry, but it's my personal opinion that the guy in the video Darop posted was not born with the inclination to act that way.

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 07:48 PM
It's usually a little more complicated than that. Like Randy-H suggested, alot of the time it's the only way one can find acceptance. In other cases it could be a way of (over)expressing themselves after earlier years of repressing it.

I'm just skeptical about blaming the victims of stereotypes. It is more to do with having them imposed on them rather than them creating them. I don't think gay guys should have any more responsibility or onus on them to reverse stereotypes than anyone else tbh. They are society's problem and have got to be overcome by everyone.

What's more unproductive is when 'straight-acting' gay guys are upheld as heroes for 'doing their bit' to reverse stereotypes (and are often seen as more attractive). And what's more, I don't see the same suspicion of straight guys and girls who conform to mainstream and celebrated stereotypes that they are not being authentic. It's just the effeminate guys that are the fake ones.

I'm not blaming them for anything, simply stating that I have nothing to talk about/share with prissy guys whose main cares are haveěing gucci bags, getting their "nails did", and screaming like banshees because Lady Gaga told them being gay is cool, nor do I feel the need to flaunt my sexuality in everyone's face in every moment like some do.

As for the last part of your post, as I said in a previous post, I also mostly don't get along with girls who act that way as well.

Though I hate them term "straight-acting", because it makes it seem like an act, I can understand why the term is used and why they are appreciated. Before I continue what I am about to say, consider this following condition:
I think you cannot achieve social acceptance of homosexuals in society unless you recognize the existence of stereotypes in society and try to work with them; I seriously think this is the starting point, because you can't revolutionize all of society just to make homosexuality be accepted, you've got to work with it, as it already exists. If you expect all of society to abandon existing stereotypes for homosexuality to be accepted, you're delusional.
I appreciate the figure of the "straight acting" gay, because he shows the general population that not all gay guys act the same way, that some are just "normal guys" (I repeat, seen by you average joe, I am not personally saying others are abnormal) you toss a football around with or go drink beers with: your average joe can easily relate to this person, and sooner or later stop caring who he brings into his bed.
The main problem, I think, is that gays are seen are superficial dickheads whose main concerns are losing weight and having fabulous hair: most guys of the same sex cannot relate to this, hence the social marginalization. This, for me, is the cause of gay-hate, not so much that they like putting their penises in other mens' orifices.


Sorry to the OP, went way off topic.

shap_half
Mar 28th, 2011, 08:15 PM
I'm not blaming them for anything, simply stating that I have nothing to talk about/share with prissy guys whose main cares are haveěing gucci bags, getting their "nails did", and screaming like banshees because Lady Gaga told them being gay is cool, nor do I feel the need to flaunt my sexuality in everyone's face in every moment like some do.

So if you see me screaming like a banshee carrying my Gucci bag while having a private conversation with my friend about some guy I slept with, you'll assume we don't have anything in common yet here we are in the same tennis forum.

Far it be for me to tell you to stop judging, but behavior (whether affected or otherwise) can only reveal so much.

pov
Mar 28th, 2011, 08:25 PM
the bnp has no place in society and should be banned. [......]
they are pure filth.
You're sounding just like them. Advocating banning something you don't agree with and find threatening.

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 08:27 PM
So if you see me screaming like a banshee carrying my Gucci bag while having a private conversation with my friend about some guy I slept with, you'll assume we don't have anything in common yet here we are in the same tennis forum.

Far it be for me to tell you to stop judging, but behavior (whether affected or otherwise) can only reveal so much.

I repeat: I do not discriminate, meaning that I do not avoid people based on how I perceive them without knowing them. But, experience has taught me how these sort of things end up. It's useless to state you don't have prejudices of any sort. It's natural, and it's a direct consequence of experience, as long as the prejudice is based on your experience and not on anything else.

pov
Mar 28th, 2011, 08:49 PM
It's useless to state you don't have prejudices of any sort. It's natural, and it's a direct consequence of experience, as long as the prejudice is based on your experience and not on anything else.

I don't know if it is natural but most people definitely do have prejudices. Of course it depend on what definition you're using:

a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge
b : an instance of such judgment or opinion
c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics
--------

The key thing to me is what behavior does a person's prejudices motivate them to do.

égalité
Mar 28th, 2011, 09:19 PM
I do not discriminate against them by no means.
I make fun of "cheerleader" girls who are very "like.... OHHH MY GAWD!!", because they make me cringe. Boys who act that way make me cringe for the same reason, and if they didn't, it'd mean that I'd be trying so hard to be anti-discriminatory, that I'd be discriminatory :p



I never said I was the arbiter of what is masculine and what is feminine. I am using the common connotation of these terms, not because I'm a slave to stereotypes, but because it is the best way to express what I'm saying and how I feel about this.

I almost always agree with what you have to say about homosexuality et al., but sometimes you go a bit over the top. I'm all for complete sexual freedom (and freedom of personality independently from gender, I hope you get my point) and I don't discriminate against anyone. But you also have to take it easy, accept that some people may not get along with other types of people.

Random example, you might dislike people who are, say, narcisistic, for whatever reason; that's your own choice and liking, I'm not going to go about trying to force you to change your opinion, and I'm not going to sarcastically ask you if you are now the arbiter of narcisism.

I'm not asking you to change your opinion. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I'm just saying it's kind of rude to label the actions of self-identifying males as feminine just because they coincide with some completely arbitrary definition of what's masculine and what's feminine. That's my opinion. :D

Moveyourfeet
Mar 28th, 2011, 10:14 PM
The main problem, I think, is that gays are seen are superficial dickheads whose main concerns are losing weight and having fabulous hair: most guys of the same sex cannot relate to this, hence the social marginalization. This, for me, is the cause of gay-hate, not so much that they like putting their penises in other mens' orifices.

Hi Darop,

I hear what you are saying but on the above quoted part of your post, I feel you are wrong.
The people who are staunchly opposed to homosexuals do so on the basis of religion and their personal bias rooted in large part due to socialization from a very young age.

Randy H
Mar 28th, 2011, 10:51 PM
I said I wasn't going to carry on, but since the topic has clearly shifted anyway I will continue for now.

There's a lot going on in here. :o

I think everyone judges other people based on their behaviors, whether you admit to it or not. So criticizing one person for the particular things that turns them off in people is a bit ridiculous... because everyone does it with regards to something. No one is required to like anyone else or to like a certain aspect of people. Being offended that someone acts overly feminine (which I agree with Darop is played up to a large degree to the point of being annoying) doesn't make you a bad person any more than shuffling away from someone who smells awful does.

I'm sorry, but it's my personal opinion that the guy in the video Darop posted was not born with the inclination to act that way.

Sure we all judge others, we all do, and it is near impossible to avoid whether we mean to or not. The difference comes down to whether we choose to accept ignorance, or whether we are willing to take a step back from our initial judgments and look deeper than face value.

Shuffling away from someone who smells may suggest I dislike the odour they have, it doesn't mean I am offended by who they are as a person.

Randy H
Mar 28th, 2011, 11:04 PM
I'm not blaming them for anything, simply stating that I have nothing to talk about/share with prissy guys whose main cares are haveěing gucci bags, getting their "nails did", and screaming like banshees because Lady Gaga told them being gay is cool, nor do I feel the need to flaunt my sexuality in everyone's face in every moment like some do.

As for the last part of your post, as I said in a previous post, I also mostly don't get along with girls who act that way as well.

Though I hate them term "straight-acting", because it makes it seem like an act, I can understand why the term is used and why they are appreciated. Before I continue what I am about to say, consider this following condition:
I think you cannot achieve social acceptance of homosexuals in society unless you recognize the existence of stereotypes in society and try to work with them; I seriously think this is the starting point, because you can't revolutionize all of society just to make homosexuality be accepted, you've got to work with it, as it already exists. If you expect all of society to abandon existing stereotypes for homosexuality to be accepted, you're delusional.
I appreciate the figure of the "straight acting" gay, because he shows the general population that not all gay guys act the same way, that some are just "normal guys" (I repeat, seen by you average joe, I am not personally saying others are abnormal) you toss a football around with or go drink beers with: your average joe can easily relate to this person, and sooner or later stop caring who he brings into his bed.
The main problem, I think, is that gays are seen are superficial dickheads whose main concerns are losing weight and having fabulous hair: most guys of the same sex cannot relate to this, hence the social marginalization. This, for me, is the cause of gay-hate, not so much that they like putting their penises in other mens' orifices.


Sorry to the OP, went way off topic.

"Straight-acting" is exactly what it is - acting. If you (I don't mean "you" specifically) have to act in order to earn praise from your peers, or feel good about yourself at the end of the day, then you're no different to the over-the-top effeiminate guy that is holding onto his idea of a gay stereotype that makes his friends laugh. What's the difference?? Nothing, except that one of those stereotypes likes to parade itself as better than the other when it's such hypocrisy.

If you're a man, and you sleep with men, that's pretty gay if you ask me. Try all you want to be "straight", but you've kinda missed the one fundamental part of what those labels represent. The term straight-acting screams self-loathing, and I feel sorry for those individuals who have been made to feel that they can only accept themselves or be accepted by others by making a constant point of mentioning that they're just "one of the guys".

My experience is that most people who are offended by a gay stereotype are offended because they themselves have been bullied, labelled, stereotyped into that category by someone who was too ignorant to get to know them and realize that there is much more to them than a label. Unfortunately, they direct it back onto other gay men, rather than directing it to the ignorant people who are the real source of negativity.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 28th, 2011, 11:16 PM
"Straight-acting" is exactly what it is - acting. If you (I don't mean "you" specifically) have to act in order to earn praise from your peers, or feel good about yourself at the end of the day, then you're no different to the over-the-top effeiminate guy that is holding onto his idea of a gay stereotype that makes his friends laugh. What's the difference?? Nothing, except that one of those stereotypes likes to parade itself as better than the other when it's such hypocrisy.

If you're a man, and you sleep with men, that's pretty gay if you ask me. Try all you want to be "straight", but you've kinda missed the one fundamental part of what those labels represent. The term straight-acting screams self-loathing, and I feel sorry for those individuals who have been made to feel that they can only accept themselves or be accepted by others by making a constant point of mentioning that they're just "one of the guys".

My experience is that most people who are offended by a gay stereotype are offended because they themselves have been bullied, labelled, stereotyped into that category by someone who was too ignorant to get to know them and realize that there is much more to them than a label. Unfortunately, they direct it back onto other gay men, rather than directing it to the ignorant people who are the real source of negativity.

Fantastic post.
(And your sig is perfect as well).

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 11:27 PM
"Straight-acting" is exactly what it is - acting. If you (I don't mean "you" specifically) have to act in order to earn praise from your peers, or feel good about yourself at the end of the day, then you're no different to the over-the-top effeiminate guy that is holding onto his idea of a gay stereotype that makes his friends laugh. What's the difference?? Nothing, except that one of those stereotypes likes to parade itself as better than the other when it's such hypocrisy.

If you're a man, and you sleep with men, that's pretty gay if you ask me. Try all you want to be "straight", but you've kinda missed the one fundamental part of what those labels represent. The term straight-acting screams self-loathing, and I feel sorry for those individuals who have been made to feel that they can only accept themselves or be accepted by others by making a constant point of mentioning that they're just "one of the guys".

My experience is that most people who are offended by a gay stereotype are offended because they themselves have been bullied, labelled, stereotyped into that category by someone who was too ignorant to get to know them and realize that there is much more to them than a label. Unfortunately, they direct it back onto other gay men, rather than directing it to the ignorant people who are the real source of negativity.

I think people who use the term mean "acting" as in "having a certain demeanor" not in the other sense. I'm quite sure the term was not born independently, but born antithetically to the common idea of "effeminate homosexual man". All those who didn't find themselves in what is conceived as the common gay mentality labelled themselves "straight acting" to distance themselves from the other group. "Straight acting" doesn't mean they try their hardest to seem straight, it means they act like normal (as in majoritarian) straight guys do. I don't see why people analyze the grammatical-etymological meaning of "straight acting" instead of just getting what people who use the term are trying to explain. I don't think it's that hard to understand.

As I said before, I don't use this term nor particularly appreciate it - but I understand why it came to be born.

Randy H
Mar 28th, 2011, 11:39 PM
I think people who use the term mean "acting" as in "having a certain demeanor" not in the other sense. I'm quite sure the term was not born independently, but born antithetically to the common idea of "effeminate homosexual man". All those who didn't find themselves in what is conceived as the common gay mentality labelled themselves "straight acting" to distance themselves from the other group. "Straight acting" doesn't mean they try their hardest to seem straight, it means they act like normal (as in majoritarian) straight guys do. I don't see why people analyze the grammatical-etymological meaning of "straight acting" instead of just getting what people who use the term are trying to explain. I don't think it's that hard to understand.

People who use the term use it to distance themselves from effeminate gays, to straight people, so that they can feel that they are accepted by them. Otherwise, they wouldn't feel the need to use any term at all, they would be themselves without seeing a need to clarify the degree of masculine/feminine qualities they have.

No different to the flamboyant man that flaunts being gay, the "straight-acting" man feels the need to constantly make himself feel better and look better to ignorant people by distancing themselves.

I don't walk down the street screaming that I am a gay man, and I don't go walking down the street telling everyone "I sleep with men, but don't worry, I can drink beer and watch sports so don't hate me like you hate the ones who don't." I am not concerned with how people choose to perceive me, which is why I am not offended or put off by gay stereotypes. They are what they are - Those who are ignorant will think what they want, those who choose to get to know me as a human being will figure out that I am not about being a stereotype, nor am I about trying to prove to someone that it's okay to like me as long as I don't fit a stereotype that makes them uncomfortable.

Darop.
Mar 28th, 2011, 11:51 PM
People who use the term use it to distance themselves from effeminate gays, to straight people, so that they can feel that they are accepted by them. Otherwise, they wouldn't feel the need to use any term at all, they would be themselves without seeing a need to clarify the degree of masculine/feminine qualities they have.

No different to the flamboyant man that flaunts being gay, the "straight-acting" man feels the need to constantly make himself feel better and look better to ignorant people by distancing themselves.

I don't walk down the street screaming that I am a gay man, and I don't go walking down the street telling everyone "I sleep with men, but don't worry, I can drink beer and watch sports so don't hate me like you hate the ones who don't." I am not concerned with how people choose to perceive me, which is why I am not offended or put off by gay stereotypes. They are what they are - Those who are ignorant will think what they want, those who choose to get to know me as a human being will figure out that I am not about being a stereotype, nor am I about trying to prove to someone that it's okay to like me as long as I don't fit a stereotype that makes them uncomfortable.

I agree with you, but try to zoom out and not think so specifically from your point of view. That's why I don't necessarily like the term, yet understand it's "birth".
And I don't think guys use the term when they actually meet people and while they're interacting with them, as in "Hi, nice to meet you! I'm a straight acting gay guy." I doubt that. Also, I think behind the term "straight acting" there's the description not only of a certain demeanor, but also of a certain lifestyle.

Well, I've gone waaaay off topic and anyways have to leave now :p Have a good night :wavey:

pov
Mar 29th, 2011, 12:03 AM
"Straight-acting" is exactly what it is - acting. If you (I don't mean "you" specifically) have to act in order to earn praise from your peers, or feel good about yourself at the end of the day, then you're no different to the over-the-top effeiminate guy that is holding onto his idea of a gay stereotype that makes his friends laugh. What's the difference?? Nothing, except that one of those stereotypes likes to parade itself as better than the other when it's such hypocrisy.

There's a couple different meanings to "straight-acting" - the obvious one being to act as if one isn't exclusively sexually attracted to people of the same gender. Another meaning is one that was invented by homosexuals which is just the day-to-day non-sexual behavior that many people show. Lke not affecting a lisp or cultivating body movements that are specifically designed to set one apart from what one thinks of as a "heterosexual vibe." Many, perhaps most, males who naturally have mannerisms that are not the masculine norms are heterosexual.

debby
Mar 29th, 2011, 12:23 AM
I agree with Darop and no, I am not against homo people AT ALL.

I mean... I mean, there was a guy at highschool, he punched me at the nose (still dunno why, the worse thing is that everyone urged him to do so), I had to go home. My mum was furious, she went to see him... he started crying in front of everyone saying "that's because everyone fucking thinks I am a fucking gay ! I am not !" bullshit.

At that moment, he was kinda feminine, but not over the top. I even took his defense (but got punched :lol: whatever).

In 2009, for my summer job, I have to work with him... Gosh, now he accepted his homosexuality, he is wayyyyyy too feminine... he rolls his ass when he is walking, he has a high voice (he didn't talk like that at all before, I have known him for ages), he is giggling like a girl...

and see, I was having lunch with some workmates (two girls) including him... one day, he took with him his kit of make up and fake eyelashes :tape: :tape: Even I don't have that much make-up. It was really TOO MUCH.

I don't see why he is doing that. Just act "normal" (I don't like this term anyway) , for god's sake ! Of course, he can be feminine, but not that much unless he wants to change his gender.

I don't know if some will get what I mean....

Scotso
Mar 29th, 2011, 12:45 AM
Shuffling away from someone who smells may suggest I dislike the odour they have, it doesn't mean I am offended by who they are as a person.

Just as Darop not liking when guys act a certain way doesn't mean he is judging them as a person... just how they act. I think that's the same general thing.

Randy H
Mar 29th, 2011, 01:08 AM
Just as Darop not liking when guys act a certain way doesn't mean he is judging them as a person... just how they act. I think that's the same general thing.

I never said anything about judging them as a person (though I disagree with your comment there anyway), I said I am not offended by them. You threw in the word offended as a comparison, not judgment. Two different things.

dybbuk
Mar 29th, 2011, 04:08 AM
There's a lot going on in here. :o

I think everyone judges other people based on their behaviors, whether you admit to it or not. So criticizing one person for the particular things that turns them off in people is a bit ridiculous... because everyone does it with regards to something. No one is required to like anyone else or to like a certain aspect of people. Being offended that someone acts overly feminine (which I agree with Darop is played up to a large degree to the point of being annoying) doesn't make you a bad person any more than shuffling away from someone who smells awful does.

I'm sorry, but it's my personal opinion that the guy in the video Darop posted was not born with the inclination to act that way.

That's a completely inane comment. Of course he wasn't born that way. Neither were "straight acting" gays born to be "straight acting," behavior is complex and has a lot to do with surroundings and personal choice. The fem gay guy likely was heavily influenced by the stereotypes of how a gay man should act, and the other likewise influenced by their society's perception of how men in general should act.

Those same straight acting guys would be considered entirely feminine in other societies for not hunting to feed their plethora of off-springs. Masculinity and femininity vary so greatly from culture to culture and then from sub-culture to sub-culture; so why hold up the one you were (presumably) born with as the standard for these gay men? The way you act is undoubtedly as artificial in some ways as theirs is.

Dominic
Mar 29th, 2011, 04:20 AM
I never said anything about judging them as a person (though I disagree with your comment there anyway), I said I am not offended by them. You threw in the word offended as a comparison, not judgment. Two different things.

I don't think Darop said anything about being offended, he basically said he finds it annoying, I'm a gay man and I find it super annoying too.

delicatecutter
Mar 29th, 2011, 04:30 AM
I'm just one who lives and lets live. Everyone is entitled to act however they want if that's how they want to express himself. I know from experience some gay guys have had to repress their sexuality for soo long that when they finally do come out, they really do flame out in spectacular fashion. With one boy in partiuclar I fooled around with I totally preferred the closeted version of him but it was not my place to tell him who to be or how to act.

Oh and I've been told us gays who aren't so straight-acting have it better because it's apparently oh so agonizing that people can't tell you're gay and don't believe you it when you say you are.

Scotso
Mar 29th, 2011, 04:50 AM
That's a completely inane comment. Of course he wasn't born that way. Neither were "straight acting" gays born to be "straight acting," behavior is complex and has a lot to do with surroundings and personal choice. The fem gay guy likely was heavily influenced by the stereotypes of how a gay man should act, and the other likewise influenced by their society's perception of how men in general should act.

Those same straight acting guys would be considered entirely feminine in other societies for not hunting to feed their plethora of off-springs. Masculinity and femininity vary so greatly from culture to culture and then from sub-culture to sub-culture; so why hold up the one you were (presumably) born with as the standard for these gay men? The way you act is undoubtedly as artificial in some ways as theirs is.

Is that not exactly what I said, albeit much less verbosely? :help:

dybbuk
Mar 29th, 2011, 04:58 AM
Is that not exactly what I said, albeit much less verbosely? :help:

No? I see nothing in any of your posts in this thread that say anything like what I said in my post. Your posts are defending the right to judge how people act. Did I miss an entire post of yours or what? :confused: And implicit is the idea that the fem guy's act is somehow different than the more natural actions of masculine guys. I'm befuddled how you think our posts are even similar to be honest. My whole point is it's throwing stones out of glass houses to be offended by and to criticize the artificiality of someone's personality, when all our personalities are in some sense fake.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 29th, 2011, 05:08 AM
I can say confidently that based on online websites (you know the kind), straight acting means 'can't be overtly identified as gay by straight people'.

One may not look deeper into that, but the real meaning behind that is that there is a bias against being easily identified as gay. I mean if there were no bias, why would one identify themselves as that?

A lot of homosexuals are unaware of the ingrained bias they have against homosexuality just through acculturation. It bears a similar resemblance to blacks who are racist against blacks/self-hating as a result of growing up in an atmosphere of racism and discrimination.

Darop.
Mar 29th, 2011, 02:20 PM
Just as Darop not liking when guys act a certain way doesn't mean he is judging them as a person... just how they act. I think that's the same general thing.

Yes, thank you.

I don't think Darop said anything about being offended, he basically said he finds it annoying, I'm a gay man and I find it super annoying too.

Yes, thank you.

I'm just one who lives and lets live. Everyone is entitled to act however they want if that's how they want to express himself. I know from experience some gay guys have had to repress their sexuality for soo long that when they finally do come out, they really do flame out in spectacular fashion. With one boy in partiuclar I fooled around with I totally preferred the closeted version of him but it was not my place to tell him who to be or how to act.

Oh and I've been told us gays who aren't so straight-acting have it better because it's apparently oh so agonizing that people can't tell you're gay and don't believe you it when you say you are.

I'm not live and let die. I never said these people should be excluded from society, just that they annoy me. Like some people are annoyed by loud people, others by obnoxious people, others by conceited people, others by overly dramatic people, so on and so on. Actually, these 4 adjectives I just used can be applied to many "flamers", so there you go. :p

Also, what do you mean with "flame out in spectacular fashion"? Since when does being gay necessarily have anything to do with being a flamer? Is being a flamer the only way to express their sexuality and be comfortable with being gay? If that's the case, I'll stop considering myself gay and start considering myself "a man who is sexually attracted to other men".


I can say confidently that based on online websites (you know the kind), straight acting means 'can't be overtly identified as gay by straight people'.

One may not look deeper into that, but the real meaning behind that is that there is a bias against being easily identified as gay. I mean if there were no bias, why would one identify themselves as that?

A lot of homosexuals are unaware of the ingrained bias they have against homosexuality just through acculturation. It bears a similar resemblance to blacks who are racist against blacks/self-hating as a result of growing up in an atmosphere of racism and discrimination.

No, I have no bias against easily being identified as being gay. If I had a chip in my body that made my sexual attraction clearly visibile I'd have no problem with it. I have a bias against being identified as most people imagine a gay person to be, ie a flamer; not because I think it is morally wrong or that they'll burn in hell, simply because that is not a lifestyle or a way of being I consider to be a part of myself in any way. I don't think the racial comparison has anything to do with it, that's a whole different case.




Those same straight acting guys would be considered entirely feminine in other societies for not hunting to feed their plethora of off-springs. Masculinity and femininity vary so greatly from culture to culture and then from sub-culture to sub-culture; so why hold up the one you were (presumably) born with as the standard for these gay men? The way you act is undoubtedly as artificial in some ways as theirs is.

Well, if I lived in a remote tribal clan village in Africa I'd refer to those standards. Since I don't, I'll refer to the social surrounding and culture I live in.


I don't really know if I can explain my point of view any better than I have. I'm sorry some of you can't wrap their minds around the point I'm trying to get at, but to each their own I guess. :wavey:

Mina Vagante
Mar 29th, 2011, 03:09 PM
What I don't understand is why people care so much ? Some guys are very feminine, some guys are very masculine... So what?

Get over it, everyone is different and people can act however they want to. It's not harming you in any way, so just focus on your own life...

Dave.
Mar 29th, 2011, 03:22 PM
I'm not blaming them for anything, simply stating that I have nothing to talk about/share with prissy guys whose main cares are haveěing gucci bags, getting their "nails did", and screaming like banshees because Lady Gaga told them being gay is cool, nor do I feel the need to flaunt my sexuality in everyone's face in every moment like some do.

So it is a gay thing then? If someone acts the way you described (i.e. a "ditsy 16y/o girl"), they are flaunting their sexuality in your face?


Though I hate them term "straight-acting", because it makes it seem like an act, I can understand why the term is used and why they are appreciated. Before I continue what I am about to say, consider this following condition:
I think you cannot achieve social acceptance of homosexuals in society unless you recognize the existence of stereotypes in society and try to work with them; I seriously think this is the starting point, because you can't revolutionize all of society just to make homosexuality be accepted, you've got to work with it, as it already exists. If you expect all of society to abandon existing stereotypes for homosexuality to be accepted, you're delusional.
I appreciate the figure of the "straight acting" gay, because he shows the general population that not all gay guys act the same way, that some are just "normal guys" (I repeat, seen by you average joe, I am not personally saying others are abnormal) you toss a football around with or go drink beers with: your average joe can easily relate to this person, and sooner or later stop caring who he brings into his bed.

So the so-called effeminate gay guys like the ones you've described are only acting that way, to the disservice of the overall gay community. Yet "straight-acting" gay guys are not acting. They are genuine authentic people who have expolored themselves to the max. They can't be acting because this is what "normal" men behave like anyway. Right.

You might hold up the straight acting gay guy are breaking down gay stereotypes but you are criticising feminine guys who are breaking down gender stereotypes. :confused: You might find one much more annoying than the other but kicking a football and drinking beer is no more productive in breaking down these barriers than wearing gucci and getting your nails done. Anyway we are making alot of generalisations and there is alot of room in between those, and there is no reason why somebody can't do both.



The main problem, I think, is that gays are seen are superficial dickheads whose main concerns are losing weight and having fabulous hair: most guys of the same sex cannot relate to this, hence the social marginalization. This, for me, is the cause of gay-hate, not so much that they like putting their penises in other mens' orifices.

I think it's more down to homophobic attitudes instilled in society rather than what you say. And even if it was that way, that is no more acceptable. What straight guys can relate with shouldn't matter more than anyone else. Gay guys shouldn't have to prove anything to straight guys, and pandering to them in this way is certainly not the path to acceptance of gays.

It's not in the best taste to reduce gay hate to being a case of certain personality traits and interests when it's something that goes much deeper than that. I admit typical gay stereotypes don't help the cause but that in itself is wrong because there is no reason why a 'typical' gay guy cannot be friends with a 'typical' straight guy. The idea that a gay guy can find acceptance with straight guys if they reject all the things that are widely (and even wrongly) associated with being gay doesn't leave us in any better a position.

ampers&
Mar 29th, 2011, 03:52 PM
It's me again! Where you go to talk about the Philippines, I follow.

Regarding gay men in my homeland:

This is indeed a very strange phenomenon in the Philippines. (Most) Filipinos are very kind and hospitable people, but they are also incredibly religious. As a result, when it comes to homosexuality, there is a big divide. Like everywhere else in the world, of course there is a wide range of gay men in the Philippines, but the most visible and widely accepted are the feminine ones who dress up as women. There are hardly any masculine gay men in the media and entertainment industry. You are mostly exposed to trannies who serve as humorous points of interest. They don't portray a sexual being.

When people go to the Philippines, because of how prevalent these trannies are, people assume that there is a very liberal respect towards gay men when in fact, there's not. Filipinos, not only still tease and poke fun at these men, but they don't want these men to behave like traditionally masculinely and still engage with other men in a sexual way.

I think this has a lot to do with the way younger gay men rear themselves. They don't have other types of gay men to look up to.

It's quite fascinating, and I'm afraid I'm not doing a particularly thorough job of explaining my observations. But I agree that there should definitely be a sociological and anthropological study on this, because there's a lot of things going on -- from social, emotional, economical, spiritual, familial -- that informs the situation.
Yes, we should definitely talk about this more one day. Maybe in another thread. :lol:
-----

SMH @ a lot of the gays in this thread. Yeah, the homophobia (internal and external) radars on this forum are definitely extremely hyperactive. :sobbing:

I wouldn't blame you for tapping out on this subject Darop. But good on you for trying anyway.

Mistress of Evil
Mar 29th, 2011, 05:09 PM
Oh gosh, all this drama :rolleyes: Being gay is not something so special/unique, I mean its like being brown-eyed instead of blue-eyed. :shrug: Sexual preferences has very little to do with personality ;) fucking with boys is not that much of a deal/factor in the process of developing as a person :) I'd not want any special treatment because I feel "normal", being gay is not making me any different from my hetero boyfriends and girlfriends so I do not want to be exposed to any kind of special attention. :wavey:

Apoleb
Mar 29th, 2011, 05:36 PM
Just a few notes on this discussion:

1) It's totally fair in my view for some gays to have a preference for more masculine gay men (aka "straight-acting"), and I'm talking here about relationship/sexual preference. After all, one does identify as gay/straight based on some feature preference.

2) When it comes to how some gay people act, I think the criticism is not inherently wrong or bad. There are valid issues with stereotypical identifications that can reveal more broad social characteristics/features. However, that does not mean we should not treat each other with respect and understanding, and I think that's the bottom line.

I can also can have trouble relating with extremely effeminate men, and most of the time it strikes me as a caricature. But I guess we should make an effort to get over those hunches when we treat people.

Optima
Mar 29th, 2011, 05:38 PM
Jesus, some of ya'll just need to read Judith Butler. The end.

Darop.
Mar 29th, 2011, 06:22 PM
Yes, we should definitely talk about this more one day. Maybe in another thread. :lol:
-----

SMH @ a lot of the gays in this thread. Yeah, the homophobia (internal and external) radars on this forum are definitely extremely hyperactive. :sobbing:

I wouldn't blame you for tapping out on this subject Darop. But good on you for trying anyway.

Yes, the moment has come for me to duck out. But it's really too bad, apart from the first post in which I was expressing my personal taste in individuals, in most of the others I was just going on (or trying to go on) objectively, mostly on how I think gays are perceived and why I think gays are still not fully socially accepted and how I dislike the gay = effeminate stereotypical equation, but people here just seem to take everything as a personal attack. When I tried to explain why I thought your average person could appreciate the "straight acting gay", others made it seem as if I'd praised that figure as a messiah.

As I've said to some posters on here, though I am gay, it's hard to relate to most gay TF members. They are subtly extremely aggressive and their "homophobia radars" are always on 1000%, and put on "search and destroy" mode. As soon as they sniff the slightest scent of what they perceive to be homophobia, they're on you like a pack of hounds as if you personally offended them. It's like the gay mafia or something like that. Get over yourselves. Ok, you're here you're queer, and we're all used to it. Now settle down and learn how to not be offended by every small thing, stop being so egocentrical and learn to have an objective discussion. I really doubt this intrasigence will get you anywhere if you're objective is not being prejudiced because of your homosexuality.

Most of you seem to be quite extremist on the whole gay issue. I'm just happy not all gay people are like this. See you all around :wavey:

Apoleb
Mar 29th, 2011, 06:41 PM
I mean, there was a guy at highschool, he punched me at the nose (still dunno why, the worse thing is that everyone urged him to do so)

I'm a little surprised that this gem went overlooked. :tears:

debby :hug:

Dave.
Mar 29th, 2011, 07:28 PM
It's fine that you cringe at certain people, Darop. But to suggest it's anything more than your own personal annoyance at them, and linking it to some issue with stereotypes and criticising people you don't know for not living up to some standard of authenticity, or not having explored themselves enough, whilst suggesting gay guys who act like 'normal men' who those poor straight guys can relate with is the way forward for gay acceptance is where I disagreed, and leads me to reciprocate your own advice - Get over yourself.

I am happy not all gays are as conceding and willing to play down things like homophobia, else we'd have gotten nowhere. :) But at least we had the discussion, which is better than other posters who just make snide sarcastic comments without posting in it themselves.

debby
Mar 29th, 2011, 08:15 PM
I'm a little surprised that this gem went overlooked. :tears:

debby :hug:

Lol I am so over it now :lol: he was not the only one anyway.

But yeah hum look, he justified himself as a victim because he had some manners... not even disturbing at that moment. He cried for that, because it was his own way of behaving, he could not control it. I was OK, I forgave him.

Then, years later, I saw him again, I realized he finally accepted his homosexuality... but why did he need to have much more manners ? To act even way girlier ? God, has he forgotten his teen years ? It is not good. I thought it would have lectured him that not everyone is okay with homosexuality, especially acting like a girl. (for the latter one, I could understand a bit :tape: I was so embarrassed to see he brought fake eyelashes... we were working in a factory 9 hours per day.... :tape: it is the same about girls who put on high heels when we are going to walk a lot with the class for instance).

I would never punch him because I am unhappy, or because he annoys me acting too girly. Never. But I don't get why some gay people are over the top, know it but keep behaving like that ?! Why ?
Why would it be a good behaviour if it is "forced", like a caricature ?

Certinfy
Mar 29th, 2011, 08:31 PM
On this topic I'm not gay but when in school I always got the impression that my teachers always hinted that being gay was totally wrong and stuff like that, just they never actually said it :shrug: At the time it kind of hurt as I wasn't really sure about myself though.

Apoleb
Mar 29th, 2011, 08:43 PM
Lol I am so over it now :lol: he was not the only one anyway.

But yeah hum look, he justified himself as a victim because he had some manners... not even disturbing at that moment. He cried for that, because it was his own way of behaving, he could not control it. I was OK, I forgave him.

From what I understood it was a way for him to prove his masculinity and that he's not gay in front of his friends through aggressive behavior. But why did he pick on you? Or were you the default punching bag of the class.

Also keep in mind that domestic cases happens sometimes for that same exact reason by heterosexual men. It's one way for them live up to a certain ideal of manhood and control.


Then, years later, I saw him again, I realized he finally accepted his homosexuality... but why did he need to have much more manners ? To act even way girlier ? God, has he forgotten his teen years ? It is not good. I thought it would have lectured him that not everyone is okay with homosexuality, especially acting like a girl. (for the latter one, I could understand a bit :tape: I was so embarrassed to see he brought fake eyelashes... we were working in a factory 9 hours per day.... :tape: it is the same about girls who put on high heels when we are going to walk a lot with the class for instance).

I would never punch him because I am unhappy, or because he annoys me acting too girly. Never. But I don't get why some gay people are over the top, know it but keep behaving like that ?! Why ?
Why would it be a good behaviour if it is "forced", like a caricature ?It's because gay people get confused about their identity. There are very few gay role models and up until recently homosexual people weren't very visible, if at all. I think most of us are brought up in those rigid categories since we're young (if you're a boy you act this way. if you're a girl you act that way), and when gay teenagers see that they don't fit in one category because they aren't really attracted to the opposite sex, they automatically try to fit into the other, the opposite extreme, since it already provides a well defined template of a personality and behavior. It doesn't help when society already had stereotyped gay people in a certain way.

It's also a kind of rebellion. You go to the extreme as a way of rejecting the model you've been brought up with.

I think all of us struggled with that at one moment. That's the bad thing about rigid gender roles. Even heterosexual people can be victims; those that can't really fit the stereotypes, and those that do fit but still have to prove to themselves and everybody else how "manly" and "womanly" they are.

It's why we should be understanding. But we always have to keep in mind that it's very troubling to even draw this line between "authentic" and "fake/pressurized personality". Who's to say that some gay men who act very femininely are not being true to themselves and is there anything wrong with it?

Randy H
Mar 29th, 2011, 08:57 PM
I don't think Darop said anything about being offended, he basically said he finds it annoying, I'm a gay man and I find it super annoying too.

My comment was not directed toward anything Darop said, I was replying to Scotso, who used the word offended.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 29th, 2011, 10:26 PM
It's fine that you cringe at certain people, Darop. But to suggest it's anything more than your own personal annoyance at them... whilst suggesting gay guys who act like 'normal men' who those poor straight guys can relate with is the way forward for gay acceptance is where I disagreed, and leads me to reciprocate your own advice - Get over yourself.

I echo this sentiment.

I am happy not all gays are as conceding and willing to play down things like homophobia, else we'd have gotten nowhere.

Precisely. You wouldn't believe the email I received from my congressman when I emailed him about challenging DOMA.
There is a huge effort going on now by people who are willing to put themselves out there to finally get full equality under the law for gays. It's not about appealing to middle America or your regular straight guy. If you think so, you will wait FOREVER!
At the end of the day, many of these 'straight-acting' gays will enjoy the work of relatively few people who put themselves, on the line and out there, and I am extremely grateful for them and proud to be one as well.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Mar 29th, 2011, 10:34 PM
Little Dave has grown up from being a 'straight' boy and is killing this thread :bowdown:

Nicolás89
Mar 29th, 2011, 11:33 PM
Just as Darop not liking when guys act a certain way doesn't mean he is judging them as a person... just how they act. I think that's the same general thing.

I think that what everyone is refuting is that what Darop and society see as an act is not an act at all, is what people aunthentically is and for that they should be respected.

Dominic
Mar 30th, 2011, 12:31 AM
I think that what everyone is refuting is that what Darop and society see as an act is not an act at all, is what people aunthentically is and for that they should be respected.

Sure, but it can be annoying as hell.

Scotso
Mar 30th, 2011, 02:13 AM
I think that what everyone is refuting is that what Darop and society see as an act is not an act at all, is what people aunthentically is and for that they should be respected.

No, the guy in the video was putting on an act. It's his own subset of society that's helped him craft it, but it's still an act.

DaMamaJama87
Mar 30th, 2011, 02:27 AM
I guess it might be a choice to act that way after all. ;)

Optima
Mar 30th, 2011, 02:41 AM
I guess it might be a choice to act that way after all. ;)

Lord, you have to go and fuck everything up.

égalité
Mar 30th, 2011, 03:24 AM
I guess it might be a choice to act that way after all. ;)

lololololz fine. that's fine. if someone came out today with proof that homosexuality were a choice, it would STILL be a perfectly valid way of life. now go back to the swamp you crawled out of plz.

DaMamaJama87
Mar 30th, 2011, 03:32 AM
lololololz fine. that's fine. if someone came out today with proof that homosexuality were a choice, it would STILL be a perfectly valid way of life. now go back to the swamp you crawled out of plz.

Don't take offence. It's just interesting to see how even here, people agree that many kinds of these behaviours were a result of the environment and personal choices. That's all. :wavey:

Personally, I don't think homosexuals choose to have their compulsions, they just choose to act on them.

égalité
Mar 30th, 2011, 03:34 AM
Don't take offence. It's just interesting to see how even here, people agree that many kinds of these behaviours were a result of the environment and personal choices. That's all. :wavey:

Personally, I don't think homosexuals choose to have their compulsions, they just choose to act on them.

Which makes them exactly the same as heterosexuals then... :scratch:

DaMamaJama87
Mar 30th, 2011, 03:38 AM
Which makes them exactly the same as heterosexuals then... :scratch:

They are exactly the same, except for that affliction. That's been my point all along. If they seek the appropriate help, they can manage their disorder as well.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 30th, 2011, 03:43 AM
Which makes them exactly the same as heterosexuals then... :scratch:

Don't encourage him. You can't have sensible dialog on this issue with him.

DaMamaJama87
Mar 30th, 2011, 03:48 AM
Don't encourage him. You can't have sensible dialog on this issue with him.

Yes, let's all go to the echo chamber where we won't be bothered by any dissenting voices :lol:

Dominic
Mar 30th, 2011, 04:10 AM
They are exactly the same, except for that affliction. That's been my point all along. If they seek the appropriate help, they can manage their disorder as well.

:lol: Why would gay ppl want help? I mean how does having sex with a person of the same gender harm anyone or anything? That's like you telling me, oh you need help because you have brown hair, with the appropriate help, you can make it blond.

shap_half
Mar 30th, 2011, 05:12 AM
:lol: Why would gay ppl want help? I mean how does having sex with a person of the same gender harm anyone or anything? That's like you telling me, oh you need help because you have brown hair, with the appropriate help, you can make it blond.

But why blond? With the appropriate help, you can just have no hair and offend no one.

shap_half
Mar 30th, 2011, 05:23 AM
I find it fascinating that so many gay men here find overly effeminate gay men to be annoying or hard to relate to. Yet champion the straight-acting gays. No wonder the fight for equality goes nowhere.

Betten
Mar 30th, 2011, 06:09 AM
I find it fascinating that so many gay men here find overly effeminate gay men to be annoying or hard to relate to. Yet champion the straight-acting gays. No wonder the fight for equality goes nowhere.

I believe the reason these 'straight-acting'gay men (where are the women in this?) are annoyed by the more feminine types, is the belief that the latter are not as easily accepted by the straight majority. The 'straight-acting' men may or may not have issues with them themselves, but generally they see the effeminate men as the reason for the (overall) negative perception of homosexuality that still exists: straight people see these girly men in the media, during parades and so on, and they consequently lump all homosexuals together as girly fairies. Which doesn't really help to breed acceptance of homosexuality, and is annoying for those who are more demure. I can see their frustration when it's always the ultra-expressive, effeminate, loud and brash types getting all the attention, and them only wanting to say 'I'm not like that'.

Boreas
Mar 30th, 2011, 07:36 AM
Darop probably just wanted to say that if he wanted to have sex with someone who looks feminine, he'd choose the prettier version, which is - a WOMAN.

I don't blame him - also like men who look like men and I don't need to pull their pants down to see what they are.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Mar 30th, 2011, 08:22 AM
Not the same book, but an excerpt from a german one, explaining homosexuality.

http://artsybury.tumblr.com/post/3985178918/childrens-book-explaining-homosexuality

nevetssllim
Mar 30th, 2011, 09:14 AM
I find it fascinating that so many gay men here find overly effeminate gay men to be annoying or hard to relate to. Yet champion the straight-acting gays. No wonder the fight for equality goes nowhere.

I don't think it's that fascinating because it's the same at the other end of the spectrum with straight people not being able to relate to alpha-males/girly girls and other assorted stereotypes. It's different strokes for different folks and all that.

Kworb
Mar 30th, 2011, 11:19 AM
Please. Effeminate gay men are not the reason gays aren't accepted. You put two "masculine" men in a crowd and have them kiss and half of the straights will be just as disgusted. By blaming effeminate gay men for how society treats you, you are directing your rage at your own allies.

It reminds me of some of the feedback to Kurt's character on Glee, where gays were saying he "had it coming" (the bullying) because he's "such a stereotype and so annoying". I mean, what the fuck? You expect tolerance from others for wanting to sleep with other men but you can't tolerate someone who does not conform to his gender stereotype? It is self-loathing when you start empathising with the anti-gay crowd because you yourself have issues with some of your own kind.

You can find effeminate gay men annoying, fine. You don't have to be friends with them. But don't start all that shit about "if they weren't here, society would have an easier time accepting us". Tell that to all the "normal" gays who were put into camps and killed by the Nazis, all the "normal" gays bashed to death over the years, all the "normal" gays who are persecuted by their government, all the "normal" gays who can't get married or join the military or raise children, all the "normal" gays who will always be seen as an abomination no matter how deep their voice is or how big their biceps are. The gays aren't the problem.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 30th, 2011, 02:36 PM
Yes, let's all go to the echo chamber where we won't be bothered by any dissenting voices :lol:

In your PM to me about a weeks ago, you said you were putting me on ignore.
That was YOU blocking out dissenting voices.

Yet here you are, once again making a fool of yourself. You know the drill: shut up and sit down.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 30th, 2011, 02:41 PM
Darop probably just wanted to say that if he wanted to have sex with someone who looks feminine, he'd choose the prettier version, which is - a WOMAN.

I don't blame him - also like men who look like men and I don't need to pull their pants down to see what they are.

This is not the point of contention in this thread. I don't believe anyone has stated that one should be sexually attracted to effeminate men or has a problem with those who aren't.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 30th, 2011, 02:50 PM
I believe the reason these 'straight-acting'gay men (where are the women in this?) are annoyed by the more feminine types, is the belief that the latter are not as easily accepted by the straight majority. The 'straight-acting' men may or may not have issues with them themselves, but generally they see the effeminate men as the reason for the (overall) negative perception of homosexuality that still exists: straight people see these girly men in the media, during parades and so on, and they consequently lump all homosexuals together as girly fairies. Which doesn't really help to breed acceptance of homosexuality, and is annoying for those who are more demure. I can see their frustration when it's always the ultra-expressive, effeminate, loud and brash types getting all the attention, and them only wanting to say 'I'm not like that'.

Appelfien,
First of all, it is the loud 'girly fairies' that have been a major force in getting gay rights to where it is today.

Secondly, straight people who do not like gays, will not like straight-acting gays. They may be able to talk to you since it is not overt, but when it matters e.g voting on same-sex marriage, survivor benefits, joint tax returns, they will vote against you. But who cares right? As long as they are comfortable enough to drink a beer with you :weirdo:

Thirdly, If you are so repulsed by the 'girly fairies' you see at parades, why not start a group of 'demure' :tape: gays and partner with HRC and do some public outreaches for the cause? No, you would rather sit at home and criticize those who are putting themselves out there while you reap the benefits of their work.
Please.

Dominic
Mar 30th, 2011, 03:13 PM
Secondly, straight people who do not like gays, will not like straight-acting gays. They may be able to talk to you since it is not overt, but when it matters e.g voting on same-sex marriage, survivor benefits, joint tax returns, they will vote against you. But who cares right? As long as they are comfortable enough to drink a beer with you :weirdo:

Thirdly, If you are so repulsed by the 'girly fairies' you see at parades, why not start a group of 'demure' :tape: gays and partner with HRC and do some public outreaches for the cause? No, you would rather sit at home and criticize those who are putting themselves out there while you reap the benefits of their work.
Please.

I think there is a couple things you don't understand in this debate, nobody is saying that the "straight acting" (let'S call 'em normal to save some time) gays get it easier or have more rights or whatever. It's a cultural thing, for the average Joe who maybe hasn't been in contact with many gay ppl, his idea of them is probably what he has seen in a parade on tv, or of someone at his school who is sooo obviously gay and over the top. And to him, in general that's a repulsive image, something he can't relate to at all. Now if every straight guy in the world thinks gay guys are aliens, obviously that doesn't help at all the gay and lesbian cause.

Alot of straight guys actually don't know that there are gay ppl who are not fairies, who are more similar to them. For example when I announced some of my friends that I was gay and had a boyfriend, some of them were like WOW I'm really surprised, I didn't know there were gays like that. and that they used to be homophobes but not anymore.

Darop.
Mar 30th, 2011, 05:07 PM
I really just wanted to stay out of this whole thread and hope that it would die out/take on a new course, but I really can't not intervene when words are being put in my mouth which I never even came close to saying.





Please. Effeminate gay men are not the reason gays aren't accepted. You put two "masculine" men in a crowd and have them kiss and half of the straights will be just as disgusted. By blaming effeminate gay men for how society treats you, you are directing your rage at your own allies.

It reminds me of some of the feedback to Kurt's character on Glee, where gays were saying he "had it coming" (the bullying) because he's "such a stereotype and so annoying". I mean, what the fuck? You expect tolerance from others for wanting to sleep with other men but you can't tolerate someone who does not conform to his gender stereotype? It is self-loathing when you start empathising with the anti-gay crowd because you yourself have issues with some of your own kind.

You can find effeminate gay men annoying, fine. You don't have to be friends with them. But don't start all that shit about "if they weren't here, society would have an easier time accepting us". Tell that to all the "normal" gays who were put into camps and killed by the Nazis, all the "normal" gays bashed to death over the years, all the "normal" gays who are persecuted by their government, all the "normal" gays who can't get married or join the military or raise children, all the "normal" gays who will always be seen as an abomination no matter how deep their voice is or how big their biceps are. The gays aren't the problem.


Firstly, I'm not trying to explain why in each circumstance gays are discriminated against, I was trying to find the source of the base prejudice against gays, of which all the extremists examples you cited are just a symptom (people disgusted by man kissing in public, political persecution, etc... etc...), so please, don't bring in all the drama of gays being killed by Nazis as if I'm some gay hater or gay beater.

The example of the guy you talk about who got beat up or whatever is a perfect example. Bullying is NEVER a good thing, but I think it doesn't take a genius to understand that the key characteristic that got him the beating was being ANNOYING, not gay. Which is still a horrible thing, but doesn't make it any different than all the other bullying that goes on in middle/high school which is quite inevitable and which many people, not just gay guys, go through at some point or another. The problem is when after a while, people start associating annoying to being gay.

And allies? People of my own kind? What are you talking about? What is being gay? A cult, a political lobby, a contractual organization? The fact that I like penises just as they do, doesn't make them my "allies" or "of my own kind", just as I don't feel I'm an ally to someone who was brown hair or green eyes like me.
Self-loathing and sympathizing with the anti-gays? Absolutely not. And that's a big assumption to make.

Appelfien,
First of all, it is the loud 'girly fairies' that have been a major force in getting gay rights to where it is today.

Secondly, straight people who do not like gays, will not like straight-acting gays. They may be able to talk to you since it is not overt, but when it matters e.g voting on same-sex marriage, survivor benefits, joint tax returns, they will vote against you. But who cares right? As long as they are comfortable enough to drink a beer with you :weirdo:

Thirdly, If you are so repulsed by the 'girly fairies' you see at parades, why not start a group of 'demure' :tape: gays and partner with HRC and do some public outreaches for the cause? No, you would rather sit at home and criticize those who are putting themselves out there while you reap the benefits of their work.
Please.

Do you really think that all gay advocates are flamers? Wow, that's a pretty big assumption and generalization. "Reap the benefits of others' work"?? What are you talking about? So what, gays who don't go on the streets demanding the right to marry are freeloaders? So what, do you want to take away the right to vote from all women who weren't suffragettes?

Secondly, the middle part of your post is absolutely without base. I'm not trying to be cocky or anything, but I was able to change many peoples' social and political opinion on gays. Most of their reactions were "wow, I thought all gays spent most of their time worrying about how they look, gossiping, judging, badmouthing others and thinking only about themselves."
I'm not happy they use to think this way, nor did I say "oh yeah, that is so true!". Most of the times I got a little angry and told them to stop generalizing. But fact is, for one reason or another, MOST PEOPLE THINK LIKE THAT! So stop being a bunch of idealists and face the facts!

I'm not saying we should "get rid" of flamers as I've been accused of! I just regret the fact that they are the mainstream symbol of homosexuality, because they are very dissimilar from me and many gays like me. And it's NOT fun being identified with people who you really have nothing to do with.


I think there is a couple things you don't understand in this debate, nobody is saying that the "straight acting" (let'S call 'em normal to save some time) gays get it easier or have more rights or whatever. It's a cultural thing, for the average Joe who maybe hasn't been in contact with many gay ppl, his idea of them is probably what he has seen in a parade on tv, or of someone at his school who is sooo obviously gay and over the top. And to him, in general that's a repulsive image, something he can't relate to at all. Now if every straight guy in the world thinks gay guys are aliens, obviously that doesn't help at all the gay and lesbian cause.

Alot of straight guys actually don't know that there are gay ppl who are not fairies, who are more similar to them. For example when I announced some of my friends that I was gay and had a boyfriend, some of them were like WOW I'm really surprised, I didn't know there were gays like that. and that they used to be homophobes but not anymore.

YES! Is it that hard to understand? I don't get it...

Kworb
Mar 30th, 2011, 05:36 PM
I think there is a couple things you don't understand in this debate, nobody is saying that the "straight acting" (let'S call 'em normal to save some time) gays get it easier or have more rights or whatever. It's a cultural thing, for the average Joe who maybe hasn't been in contact with many gay ppl, his idea of them is probably what he has seen in a parade on tv, or of someone at his school who is sooo obviously gay and over the top. And to him, in general that's a repulsive image, something he can't relate to at all. Now if every straight guy in the world thinks gay guys are aliens, obviously that doesn't help at all the gay and lesbian cause.

Alot of straight guys actually don't know that there are gay ppl who are not fairies, who are more similar to them. For example when I announced some of my friends that I was gay and had a boyfriend, some of them were like WOW I'm really surprised, I didn't know there were gays like that. and that they used to be homophobes but not anymore.
Oh yeah all those poor homophobes just haven't met a normal gay guy to show them the error of their ways. If it weren't for all those repulsive alien flamers then there wouldn't be so many homophobes and the battle for gay rights would've been won long ago.

The example of the guy you talk about who got beat up or whatever is a perfect example. Bullying is NEVER a good thing, but I think it doesn't take a genius to understand that the key characteristic that got him the beating was being ANNOYING, not gay.
He and others like him get bullied because they're "******s" or perceived as such. Again you are implying that the intolerance towards them is somehow their own fault. The key characteristic that got him the beating is that there are kids with intolerant homophobic parents who instill these values into their offspring and who unleash these values at their school. It's the general societal view that gays and feminine guys are "gross" and "wrong" and that it's okay to demean them.

Most of these feminine gays ARE born that way. They are who they are. So because you and the world's homophobes are repulsed by them, are they the ones in the wrong for being BORN a certain way or are you and the homophobes at fault for how you CHOOSE to perceive and treat them?

delicatecutter
Mar 30th, 2011, 05:41 PM
I also don't understand why anyone would "choose" to act a way that would result in them being constantly bullied, mocked, and despised.

Darop.
Mar 30th, 2011, 05:42 PM
Oh yeah all those poor homophobes just haven't met a normal gay guy to show them the error of their ways. If it weren't for all those repulsive alien flamers then there wouldn't be so many homophobes and the battle for gay rights would've been won long ago.


He and others like him get bullied because they're "******s" or perceived as such. Again you are implying that the intolerance towards them is somehow their own fault. The key characteristic that got him the beating is that there are kids with intolerant homophobic parents who instill these values into their offspring and who unleash these values at their school. It's the general societal view that gays and feminine guys are "gross" and "wrong" and that it's okay to demean them.

Most of these feminine gays ARE born that way. They are who they are. So because you and the world's homophobes are repulsed by them, are they the ones in the wrong for being BORN a certain way or are you and the homophobes at fault for how you CHOOSE to perceive and treat them?

Srsly. I don't know if you're doing it on purpose, or you didn't even read what I wrote. We're not even talking about the same thing. I say the sky is blue, you answer saying that dogs bark. Oh well.

shap_half
Mar 30th, 2011, 05:43 PM
Darop probably just wanted to say that if he wanted to have sex with someone who looks feminine, he'd choose the prettier version, which is - a WOMAN.

I don't blame him - also like men who look like men and I don't need to pull their pants down to see what they are.

Except I don't think he mentioned sex at all.

Dominic
Mar 30th, 2011, 06:14 PM
Oh yeah all those poor homophobes just haven't met a normal gay guy to show them the error of their ways. If it weren't for all those repulsive alien flamers then there wouldn't be so many homophobes and the battle for gay rights would've been won long ago.


He and others like him get bullied because they're "******s" or perceived as such. Again you are implying that the intolerance towards them is somehow their own fault. The key characteristic that got him the beating is that there are kids with intolerant homophobic parents who instill these values into their offspring and who unleash these values at their school. It's the general societal view that gays and feminine guys are "gross" and "wrong" and that it's okay to demean them.

Most of these feminine gays ARE born that way. They are who they are. So because you and the world's homophobes are repulsed by them, are they the ones in the wrong for being BORN a certain way or are you and the homophobes at fault for how you CHOOSE to perceive and treat them?

Yah, to be honest it seems like you don't read much of what we are saying. Who said I was defending homophobes? When I see someone acting in a homophobic way or saying homophobic stuff, more often than not I will confront them, and sometimes not in a very nice way. And maybe I'm wrong about that but I personally think that to be a homophobe you have to be either stupid or really really ignorant (and even then you can be ignorant and not be homophobic) anyway basically I think homophobes are crap lol to put it simple.

All I said is that some straight guys perceive gays as aliens (NOT ME) and that if they were in contact or if they saw more normal acting gays on tv or in the media or around them or whatever, that perception would probably change. Am I saying that I hate flamers and that they should change their behavior just to please ignorant straight guys?? NO! I just live in the real world and am describing reality.

And I'm guessing that Darop was right about that boy. I'm a gay man and I've been out of the closet for a while and have never gotten bullied in my life. And nobody said flamers were wrong in any way!? why do you keep coming back with that!? All we have been saying is that their behavior can make it harder for close minded ppl to accept them. Do I think any of this is cool? big fat NO!

Betten
Mar 30th, 2011, 06:46 PM
What GoDokic and Darop said.

Miss Atomic Bomb
Mar 30th, 2011, 06:51 PM
if someone came out today with proof that homosexuality were a choice, it would STILL be a perfectly valid way of life

Yep

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_li0k0kuMdi1qftq6x.gif

Kworb
Mar 30th, 2011, 07:27 PM
I appreciate the figure of the "straight acting" gay, because he shows the general population that not all gay guys act the same way, that some are just "normal guys" (I repeat, seen by you average joe, I am not personally saying others are abnormal) you toss a football around with or go drink beers with: your average joe can easily relate to this person, and sooner or later stop caring who he brings into his bed.
The main problem, I think, is that gays are seen are superficial dickheads whose main concerns are losing weight and having fabulous hair: most guys of the same sex cannot relate to this, hence the social marginalization. This, for me, is the cause of gay-hate

All I said is that some straight guys perceive gays as aliens (NOT ME) and that if they were in contact or if they saw more normal acting gays on tv or in the media or around them or whatever, that perception would probably change.

I can read just fine. This is the bullshit I'm replying to. Posts that clearly point at effeminate gays as the cause of homophobia.

People aren't all stupid. They know "regular guys" can be gay. The overly feminine homosexual is only a small minority of the gay population. You will just have to deal with the fact that many people are disgusted by you, because of what you are, and not because of the stereotypes that are associated with the label.

Saying "oh the homophobes would change if they just got to know the right kind of homosexual" is empathising with them. You try to reason why they could possibly hate you and conclude it must be because of the aspect of your sexuality that you yourself are repulsed by, namely the ones who have the same sexuality and are effeminate. But there is no justification for homophobia. It is simple bigotry. And bigotry does not disappear overnight. It will take many decades, many generations for attitudes to change. And we need all kinds of gays at the forefront for this change to happen, not just the "normal" ones. Because we're not truly tolerant unless we tolerate everyone.

Nicolás89
Mar 30th, 2011, 08:51 PM
They are exactly the same, except for that affliction. That's been my point all along. If they seek the appropriate help, they can manage their disorder as well.

:sobbing: Like that kind of "help" has always been so effective.

shap_half
Mar 30th, 2011, 09:19 PM
I don't think it's that fascinating because it's the same at the other end of the spectrum with straight people not being able to relate to alpha-males/girly girls and other assorted stereotypes. It's different strokes for different folks and all that.

Are you seriously making this comparison?

Talula
Mar 30th, 2011, 09:26 PM
I have just this week seen the most wonderful movie: A Single Man. Directed by Tom Ford who I fancy like mad - he of course is gay and I'm a straight girl. Anyway, for all of you afraid of homosexuality please watch this movie. It is beautiful, and Colin Firth is wonderful in it, along with Julianne Moore. There is a wonderful scene where Firth talks to his students (he is a teacher) about discrimination and invisibility - and this scene applies to anyone as he does not mention homosexuality. As he says, we are all minorities.

Anyway do watch it if you can, it's stunning and thought provoking and very moving. Just have some tissues to hand!

delicatecutter
Mar 30th, 2011, 09:28 PM
I saw A Single Man about a month ago. It was pretty good and I feel like Julianne Moore didn't get the accolades she deserved for her role. I wasn't a huge fan of the ending though. :(

Moveyourfeet
Mar 30th, 2011, 09:30 PM
Now if every straight guy in the world thinks gay guys are aliens, obviously that doesn't help at all the gay and lesbian cause.

Alot of straight guys actually don't know that there are gay ppl who are not fairies, who are more similar to them. For example when I announced some of my friends that I was gay and had a boyfriend, some of them were like WOW I'm really surprised, I didn't know there were gays like that. and that they used to be homophobes but not anymore.

LOL. So your friends were homophobes when they thought all gays were queens. Then your butch self showed up and then your friends realized not all gays are queens and stopped being homophobes. Got it.
Quick question: What is their current attitude towards 'fairies'?

but I think it doesn't take a genius to understand that the key characteristic that got him the beating was being ANNOYING, not gay.

You are so off. People are bullied, ostracized, picked on etc for being different than the norm in a fundamental way. Not because they are annoying.

Do you really think that all gay advocates are flamers?

Of course not. That's how I know for a fact that not being a flamer doesn't change homophobic attitudes. I'm one of them. Like GoDokic, when I came out, most ppl didn't know I was gay. I'm naturally masculine, big deal.
I have had a congressman tell me to my face that my boyfriend and I are a threat to the traditional American family and that he must assuredly will NOT represent my cause to challenge DOMA.
Organizations like Focus on the Family, National Organization for Marriage don't care to distinguish between gays that like American football or those that like Gucci bags.

Secondly, the middle part of your post is absolutely without base. I'm not trying to be cocky or anything, but I was able to change many peoples' social and political opinion on gays. Most of their reactions were "wow, I thought all gays spent most of their time worrying about how they look, gossiping, judging, badmouthing others and thinking only about themselves."

I doubt that you changed any homophobe's social opinion and here's why:
You haven't changed their attitude towards gays that fit that stereotype. You have merely shown them a personal example of someone that doesn't fit that stereotype. Therefore, that person still harbors the same sentiments he had for a segment of the gay population.
Secondly, if these are the kind of people that actually take the time to go out and vote against proposed laws that would grant equality to gays, then you've definitely done nothing to change their view. These people don't vote against gays because of stereotypes. Main reason is religion and their 'traditional values'. 2 butch guys adopting a baby don't fit in those values.

Do you not see that even if all gays were flaming queens, they are still human and deserving of equal rights? Wouldn't you agree that this message is a better one to send? Treat everyone equal, even the ones that 'annoy' you, because one's natural demeanour is not grounds for that person to be bullied or discriminated against?

I'm not saying we should "get rid" of flamers as I've been accused of! I just regret the fact that they are the mainstream symbol of homosexuality, because they are very dissimilar from me and many gays like me. And it's NOT fun being identified with people who you really have nothing to do with.

If someone wants to identify you based on a stereotype, that's their problem not yours. There's nothing you can do about it other than just be yourself.

Moveyourfeet
Mar 30th, 2011, 09:35 PM
I can read just fine. This is the bullshit I'm replying to. Posts that clearly point at effeminate gays as the cause of homophobia.

People aren't all stupid. They know "regular guys" can be gay. The overly feminine homosexual is only a small minority of the gay population. You will just have to deal with the fact that many people are disgusted by you, because of what you are, and not because of the stereotypes that are associated with the label.

Saying "oh the homophobes would change if they just got to know the right kind of homosexual" is empathising with them. You try to reason why they could possibly hate you and conclude it must be because of the aspect of your sexuality that you yourself are repulsed by, namely the ones who have the same sexuality and are effeminate. But there is no justification for homophobia. It is simple bigotry. And bigotry does not disappear overnight. It will take many decades, many generations for attitudes to change. And we need all kinds of gays at the forefront for this change to happen, not just the "normal" ones. Because we're not truly tolerant unless we tolerate everyone.

So many gems in this post. Bravo!

Apoleb
Mar 30th, 2011, 09:44 PM
So many extremes in this discussion. :yawn:

Darop didn't say that fem guys are undeserving of equal rights, or that they have no role to play. But that "straight-acting" homos help gay rights and the over-visibility of fem guys can hurt gay movement. In that, he's 100% right. It doesn't matter if this is fair or not, but people tend to relate more with those who are like them. It doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about the rights of all kinds of gay people. But I also disagree about his assessment of homophobia. What I said above plays a role, but it is not the major role.

Second, I think we should be wary and critical of all kinds of gender roles that gay people and not just accept them blindly.

debby
Mar 30th, 2011, 10:43 PM
From what I understood it was a way for him to prove his masculinity and that he's not gay in front of his friends through aggressive behavior. But why did he pick on you? Or were you the default punching bag of the class.

Also keep in mind that domestic cases happens sometimes for that same exact reason by heterosexual men. It's one way for them live up to a certain ideal of manhood and control.

Oh yeah, I didn't figure things the way you just did. To prove his masculinity. I don't know. Actually it was so weird... As I was too nice to people and the only one to be deaf at school, they picked on me to be the punching bag of the class.
I remember I told them I had to stay with them to get lunch at school because my dad had just had a heartattack and had to undergo a heart surgery. I was upset, and my "friends" tried to make me fall on the floor, they asked the gay guy to steal my food and to make fun of my deafness... Enough was enough, so I slapped him, others told him to punch him, he did, and everyone fought with him. So weird.

I know it is only ONE example, but that's a weird behaviour I can see in some gay people... they are conflicted. These some gay people claim they are victims, they have huge manners, and stuff, but then they make fun of others. That's kinda crazy.

You see, on GM, everyone made fun of Wozniacki for her way of dressing up, besides she is a woman, but we can't say anything about these some gay people's girly manners ? Why ?

It's because gay people get confused about their identity. There are very few gay role models and up until recently homosexual people weren't very visible, if at all. I think most of us are brought up in those rigid categories since we're young (if you're a boy you act this way. if you're a girl you act that way), and when gay teenagers see that they don't fit in one category because they aren't really attracted to the opposite sex, they automatically try to fit into the other, the opposite extreme, since it already provides a well defined template of a personality and behavior. It doesn't help when society already had stereotyped gay people in a certain way.

So true. And so sad. We should act like we like, but "normally"... not in a embarrassing way. When I am drunk, I would like to go outside nude and screaming I AM FUC.KING DRUNK ! :lol: but I don't do that.
Even sober, I want to do some weird things, but I don't.
And sometimes they are right, sometimes they are not (like I wanted to go in an air-castle for children lol or something like that, it is my dream to act like a little girl sometimes :lol: ).

And that's the same about manners. It is very difficult to determine, and that's what you are saying next :

It's also a kind of rebellion. You go to the extreme as a way of rejecting the model you've been brought up with.

I think all of us struggled with that at one moment. That's the bad thing about rigid gender roles. Even heterosexual people can be victims; those that can't really fit the stereotypes, and those that do fit but still have to prove to themselves and everybody else how "manly" and "womanly" they are.

It's why we should be understanding. But we always have to keep in mind that it's very troubling to even draw this line between "authentic" and "fake/pressurized personality". Who's to say that some gay men who act very femininely are not being true to themselves and is there anything wrong with it?

I totally agree.

Thing is that it is too obvious for people. Like that guy I am talking about, I have been knowing him for years, so I know he was not natural. Heck soemtimes he acted naturally, it shocked some girls at work, he was talking with his true voice, and was walking like men.

Nicolás89
Mar 30th, 2011, 10:58 PM
So many extremes in this discussion. :yawn:

....

Second, I think we should be wary and critical of all kinds of gender roles that gay people and not just accept them blindly.

Yep, you should add yourself in the "extremes" group. I mean you need to be critical with EVERYBODY, that's the exact opposite of letting everyone just be.

Apoleb
Mar 30th, 2011, 11:02 PM
Yep, you should add yourself in the "extremes" group. I mean you need to be critical with EVERYBODY, that's the exact opposite of letting everyone just be.

"Critical" as in thinking critically, not criticizing. And I didn't refer to any person, but to a certain social trend. So fail post.

On top, if we just act like stupid automaton without analyzing anything and letting things "just be", why even target homohobia or sexism? :help:

Nicolás89
Mar 30th, 2011, 11:32 PM
"Critical" as in thinking critically, not criticizing. And I didn't refer to any person, but to a certain social trend. So fail post.

On top, if we just act like stupid automaton without analyzing anything and letting things "just be", why even target homohobia or sexism? :help:

Are you always this serious?

I stand by my post, why we need to OVER-analyze every aspect of human behaviour? some things are just simplier than we think and that's what I meant by letting things just be, I obviously won't let homophobia or any kind of bigotry just be anywhere around me.

Anyways I don't see anywhere in my post me saying we should "act like stupid automaton", I guess you need it to put it that way since you naturally take things to an EXTREME specially in this thread.

Darop.
Mar 31st, 2011, 01:05 AM
So many extremes in this discussion. :yawn:

Darop didn't say that fem guys are undeserving of equal rights, or that they have no role to play. But that "straight-acting" homos help gay rights and the over-visibility of fem guys can hurt gay movement. In that, he's 100% right. It doesn't matter if this is fair or not, but people tend to relate more with those who are like them. It doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about the rights of all kinds of gay people. But I also disagree about his assessment of homophobia. What I said above plays a role, but it is not the major role.

Second, I think we should be wary and critical of all kinds of gender roles that gay people and not just accept them blindly.

I completely agree. I'm not saying ALL homophobes dislike gays just because of their stereotype (there are the crazy christians etc. after all), but the ones I have met do. And I objectively understand that, without necessarily agreeing with them. Mainstream society doesn't enjoy the person they can't relate to in any way. That's absolutely wrong, but what are you going to do about it? I'd love for society to be 100% rational and acceptant but it's not, so we've got to work with that without just wishing it'd be. That being said, I hope people won't now say that I consider myself "straight acting" because I wanted to be socially accepted. I act how I feel I want to act, period; and honestly don't give a crap about how other people rate me. If I felt like being a flamer, I would be.

The main reason I got upset about this whole issue is that most of the gay guys on TF aren't able to objectively observe mainstream society as it is, without making idealistic conjectures, or wishfully hoping that society would be in a certain way it never will be.

As for the "flamers" I PERSONALLY state that the way they act doesn't much have to do with what/who I am, but they are completely free to act how they want and for whatever reason, but I understand how mainstream society can not accept them, though I'm not happy about this fact. But keep being your authentic selves and acting how you feel you want to act, don't give a damn about what people say about you.

I'm so tired of using the word "mainstream" :o

Dominic
Mar 31st, 2011, 01:22 AM
LOL. So your friends were homophobes when they thought all gays were queens. Then your butch self showed up and then your friends realized not all gays are queens and stopped being homophobes. Got it.
Quick question: What is their current attitude towards 'fairies'?



You are so off. People are bullied, ostracized, picked on etc for being different than the norm in a fundamental way. Not because they are annoying.


I don't know actually I've never been with them and fairies at the same time in a situation where they could actually interact much with them, but they're alot more open minded and some of them even came to gay clubs with me.

And as I've said before, I disagree with the last part of your post, as personally, I've never been bullied in my life and have been out of the closet for a while.

Dominic
Mar 31st, 2011, 01:45 AM
I can read just fine. This is the bullshit I'm replying to. Posts that clearly point at effeminate gays as the cause of homophobia.

People aren't all stupid. They know "regular guys" can be gay. The overly feminine homosexual is only a small minority of the gay population. You will just have to deal with the fact that many people are disgusted by you, because of what you are, and not because of the stereotypes that are associated with the label.

Saying "oh the homophobes would change if they just got to know the right kind of homosexual" is empathising with them. You try to reason why they could possibly hate you and conclude it must be because of the aspect of your sexuality that you yourself are repulsed by, namely the ones who have the same sexuality and are effeminate. But there is no justification for homophobia. It is simple bigotry. And bigotry does not disappear overnight. It will take many decades, many generations for attitudes to change. And we need all kinds of gays at the forefront for this change to happen, not just the "normal" ones. Because we're not truly tolerant unless we tolerate everyone.

You seem a bit close-minded yourself actually, you should realize not everyone lives in your world, in some fields of society, ALOT of ppl don't even know one gay person, for example I know a guy who works in mecanics (let's face it he's likely not to have a gay man as a colleague), and the only image of gays he had ever had before knowing me was from tv (like mentionned before parades and stuff). For some ppl, "gay" is truly an abstract concept and they have their own image in there head of what a gay person is. And it's not always a positive one.

You have to make the difference between "empathising with homophobes" and describing reality. It is very sad, but an ignorant close minded straight guy will have less disgust for someone like me than for a very effeminate gay guy. And I'm not just saying this randomly, I'm talking about my own experience, what ppl I know have actually told me, and how ppl's behavior is different with someone like me and with a "flamer". And like I have already said a million times, NO I don't think it's cool and YES I think everyone should be accepted and respected no matter how effeminate they are, but that is not the way it is currently in our world.

And if ppl in general had more examples like Ricky Martin for instance, (rather than Perez Hilton or Chris Crocker) I do think there would be more acceptance.

Randy H
Mar 31st, 2011, 02:30 AM
They are exactly the same, except for that affliction. That's been my point all along. If they seek the appropriate help, they can manage their disorder as well.

Did Jesus tell you that? :lol:

delicatecutter
Mar 31st, 2011, 03:07 AM
They are exactly the same, except for that affliction. That's been my point all along. If they seek the appropriate help, they can manage their disorder as well.

Can you advise me how to manage my disorder please? I've tried everything and nothing seems to work. :(

égalité
Mar 31st, 2011, 03:13 AM
They are exactly the same, except for that affliction. That's been my point all along. If they seek the appropriate help, they can manage their disorder as well.

Okay. You are actively and brazenly refusing to believe the honest testimony of dozens of gay people in this thread and in other threads. I understand that you grew up learning certain things about gay people (albeit from straight people), but when we inform you that your beliefs about us are incorrect, you have the choice to be an adult and learn from your mistakes or to stubbornly plug your ears and go "la la la" while the rest of us attempt to lay out the truth for you. It's pretty sad to see a grown, educated person choosing the latter.

Dominic
Mar 31st, 2011, 03:15 AM
DaMama whatever is probably joking, No real human being can believe that :lol:

shap_half
Mar 31st, 2011, 04:35 AM
And if ppl in general had more examples like Ricky Martin for instance, (rather than Perez Hilton or Chris Crocker) I do think there would be more acceptance.

This actually offends me.

Because Ricky Martin isn't as queenie as Perez Hilton?
Yeah, except Ricky Martin hid in the closet for years and years and years. If my example of a gay man is someone who suppressed who he was so he can pursue a semi-successful music career only to come out in a book to make more money after years of teasing the general public, then fuck that. It's easy to come out when you no longer need the financial backing of a career that needs you to cater to the fantasies of people you don't know. Flaming or not, I'd prefer to look up to a gay man who is able to live as who he is.

The main reason I got upset about this whole issue is that most of the gay guys on TF aren't able to objectively observe mainstream society as it is, without making idealistic conjectures, or wishfully hoping that society would be in a certain way it never will be.

I think that a few of you on this thread have proven that we can't go around wishing and hoping for mainstream society to change for the better when there are gay men who obviously understand the struggle and still go around bullying "queenie" gays. And before I get shit for saying bullying, I do think there is an overly critical shade to accusing people of being a product of their own idea of what a stereotypical gay should be like while exulting the characteristics of "straight-acting" gays as better for getting accepted because they were able to escape acting like a stereotype. So instead, we should hope for more straight-acting men in the limelight (ie Ricky Martin) so we can make in roads for acceptance.

And the reality of the situation is that most of the people who got the gay movement as far along as it has are these queens most of you seem to feel so detached from.

I personally don't watch the gay parades. The last time it was in New York, I was in a beer garden watching the World Cup. So I don't assume to understand the kind of pride other people have to be so publicly celebratory of their sexuality, but as someone who has experience some shit for being gay, I'm kinda embarrassed by this conversation. I don't remember who said something about gay people and a cult and that being gay is not enough to connect you to another person, which I get. But what about that feeling of dread and fear that comes with realizing your sexuality and what that could possibly mean for you should you choose to live your life as a gay man? I can't say that this moment has been difficult for everyone or that even everyone struggled with it, but I can imagine that coming to terms with being gay was not the all-time most amazing moment of every gay man's life. This struggle and that moment of uncertainty are possibly the lowest common denominators for everyone here should prevent people from being as divisive as they've been. It is gross.

I know no one has explicitly said it, but most people are making it very clear that they think being able to pass themselves off as "normal" because they're "straight acting" is better.

delicatecutter
Mar 31st, 2011, 04:45 AM
I must spread rep around before giving it to shap_half again. :(

So much I want to add, but I suck at being articulate. :o

Stamp Paid
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:22 AM
I like queens, I have two good friends who are queens.
Theyre so shady tho :o

delicatecutter
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:24 AM
Do you mean drag queens? When have they been brought into this thread? :sobbing:

Dominic
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:26 AM
This actually offends me.

Because Ricky Martin isn't as queenie as Perez Hilton?
Yeah, except Ricky Martin hid in the closet for years and years and years. If my example of a gay man is someone who suppressed who he was so he can pursue a semi-successful music career only to come out in a book to make more money after years of teasing the general public, then fuck that. It's easy to come out when you no longer need the financial backing of a career that needs you to cater to the fantasies of people you don't know. Flaming or not, I'd prefer to look up to a gay man who is able to live as who he is.



I think that a few of you on this thread have proven that we can't go around wishing and hoping for mainstream society to change for the better when there are gay men who obviously understand the struggle and still go around bullying "queenie" gays. And before I get shit for saying bullying, I do think there is an overly critical shade to accusing people of being a product of their own idea of what a stereotypical gay should be like while exulting the characteristics of "straight-acting" gays as better for getting accepted because they were able to escape acting like a stereotype. So instead, we should hope for more straight-acting men in the limelight (ie Ricky Martin) so we can make in roads for acceptance.



Dude I was talking about mannerism and personality in general not all his godamn life story, which I don't even know. If you don't realize that the vast majority of ppl would prefer identifying to someone like Ricky Martin than Chris Crocker, then you got a serious problem. And also you really have no clue what the word bully means.

You too seem to have some serious lack in reading skills, I never accused anyone of being a product of their own idea of what a stereotypical gay guy is, although some ppl probably are. Why can't you believe that? And what is wrong with saying more straight acting gay guys are generally more easy to relate to for straight guys. It's just plain logic and it's what I've noticed from my own experience in life. I went to this frat guy party with my friend the other day and everyone there knew I was gay and I made friends with all of them and some of them even asked for my number to do stuff again with me. Can you seriously say that In your opinion, if I went there with booty shorts painted fingernails, a pink tanktop and started talking in a high voice about clothes and my hair all night long (not that I see anything wrong with that personaly), I would have received the exact same treatment?

The answer is HELL NO. Yes believe it or not, some ppl are close minded and judge others on superficial stuff like their appearance and general interests, All I did in my other posts was a general observation of the real world, which seemingly you don't live in. Did I say I was cool with all of that and that it was ok that those ppl acted like that. NO it fact I said several times emphatically that I thought it sucked. But you and some others can't seem to read that part.

And btw I never try to past myself as straight, anywhere I go, I don't hide my sexuality and I never even had an unpleasant comment about it. What does that tell ya?

Stamp Paid
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:38 AM
Do you mean drag queens? When have they been brought into this thread? :sobbing:No not drag queens, just queens.
Ms Jay is a drag queen. Mr Jay is a queen. A very slight yet very clear difference. :lol:

Betten
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:55 AM
I saw A Single Man about a month ago. It was pretty good and I feel like Julianne Moore didn't get the accolades she deserved for her role. I wasn't a huge fan of the ending though. :(

I haven't seen that film yet. I planned on buying the DVD, but it wasn't available, even though they had a poster and all hanging on the walls :sobbing:

DaMama whatever is probably joking, No real human being can believe that :lol:

I wouldn't be too sure about that :(

Betten
Mar 31st, 2011, 06:08 AM
This actually offends me.

Because Ricky Martin isn't as queenie as Perez Hilton?
Yeah, except Ricky Martin hid in the closet for years and years and years. If my example of a gay man is someone who suppressed who he was so he can pursue a semi-successful music career only to come out in a book to make more money after years of teasing the general public, then fuck that. It's easy to come out when you no longer need the financial backing of a career that needs you to cater to the fantasies of people you don't know. Flaming or not, I'd prefer to look up to a gay man who is able to live as who he is.

Yes, probabably as easy as it is to have to hide your true sexuality years and years. I don't care for Ricky Martin, but him struggling with his homosexuality for years before finally coming out and being at peace with himself can be just as inspiring as other famous gay men. The reasons people struggle to come out with their homosexuality are not unlike those of Martin's: career, doubt, shame. People who are still in the closet can identify with those feelings and take courage in the fact that other people feel the same. The fact that he did eventually come out (and still is a succesful performer) is encouraging.

delicatecutter
Mar 31st, 2011, 11:46 AM
No not drag queens, just queens.
Ms Jay is a drag queen. Mr Jay is a queen. A very slight yet very clear difference. :lol:

It's so confusing to me. :tears:

Miss Atomic Bomb
Mar 31st, 2011, 12:05 PM
It's so confusing to me. :tears:

Its easy -

Young_fucker (:hug:) = Queen
Dodoferosh (:kiss:) = Drag queen

DaMamaJama87
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:14 PM
Did Jesus tell you that? :lol:

If you give your life to Jesus, you could have conversations with him too;)

Can you advise me how to manage my disorder please? I've tried everything and nothing seems to work. :(

I know you mean this as a joke but look up any of the homosexual ministries in your area if you are serious about getting help.

Okay. You are actively and brazenly refusing to believe the honest testimony of dozens of gay people in this thread and in other threads. I understand that you grew up learning certain things about gay people (albeit from straight people), but when we inform you that your beliefs about us are incorrect, you have the choice to be an adult and learn from your mistakes or to stubbornly plug your ears and go "la la la" while the rest of us attempt to lay out the truth for you. It's pretty sad to see a grown, educated person choosing the latter.
I am not disbelieving anything said here. I am only disagreeing with some opinions and I always give my reasons for disagreement.

delicatecutter
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:29 PM
If you give your life to Jesus, you could have conversations with him too;)

What do you and Jesus talk about?

Dominic
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:37 PM
I think the DaMamaJama87 character is meant as a show to entertain ppl, you know kinda like Sweetchleo was :D

delicatecutter
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:41 PM
I think the DaMamaJama87 character is meant as a show to entertain ppl, you know kinda like Sweetchleo was :D

Well then shouldn't he/she actually be entertaining then?

Dominic
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:46 PM
Well then shouldn't he/she actually be entertaining then?

well personally, every single one of his posts makes me laugh :lol:

The Dawntreader
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:49 PM
well personally, every single one of his posts makes me laugh :lol:

Or maybe you're just laughing at the wrong things.

delicatecutter
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:51 PM
well personally, every single one of his posts makes me laugh :lol:

Funny how one man's laughter is another man's rage.

Dominic
Mar 31st, 2011, 05:59 PM
Or maybe you're just laughing at the wrong things.

Oh so what am I meant to do? cry my ass off or punch my computer screen every time I see a retarded comment like that? Wow great idea! That's the attitude to adopt with homophobes!

Stamp Paid
Mar 31st, 2011, 06:29 PM
Its easy -

Young_fucker (:hug:) = Queen
Dodoferosh (:kiss:) = Drag queenLmao :lol:

Whitehead's Boy
Mar 31st, 2011, 06:56 PM
or to stubbornly plug your ears and go "la la la" while the rest of us attempt to lay out the truth for you.

But that's the modus operandi of Christians who've been brainwashed since birth, any piece of evidence they encounter is interpreted according to their worldview. Whatever gays will say, there's always the "they must all manipulated by Satan, or lying, or mentally insane" card, or whatever their deluded mind can come up with. The only way to make her change her mind is if she gives up her toxic worldview. Or else she'll never "get" it.

Back to the topic, if there would more Ricky Martin and less Perez Hilton, of course there would be less homophobia. Just like if there would be more Asians using whitening creams and havin Asian eyelid surgery, and more black people suffering from vitiligo, there would be less racism. If homosexuality is "invisible", then it's like it doesn't exist, and hence it cannot be a target. Or rather, it's no longer an "interesting" target for bullies. What most bigots are uncomfortable with is primarily difference. If all gays are "straight-acting", there's no difference.

young_gunner913
Apr 1st, 2011, 04:42 AM
Its easy -

Young_fucker (:hug:) = Queen
Dodoferosh (:kiss:) = Drag queen

That's right you peasant. Worship me. :hearts:

Miss Atomic Bomb
Apr 1st, 2011, 10:53 AM
That's right you peasant. Worship me. :hearts:

We'll see who the peasant really is after Monday's match with the REAL queen of Stockton.

DaMamaJama87
Apr 2nd, 2011, 12:09 AM
What do you and Jesus talk about?

life. :)

FleetSeb
Apr 2nd, 2011, 08:31 AM
"Straight-acting" is exactly what it is - acting. If you (I don't mean "you" specifically) have to act in order to earn praise from your peers, or feel good about yourself at the end of the day, then you're no different to the over-the-top effeiminate guy that is holding onto his idea of a gay stereotype that makes his friends laugh. What's the difference?? Nothing, except that one of those stereotypes likes to parade itself as better than the other when it's such hypocrisy.

If you're a man, and you sleep with men, that's pretty gay if you ask me. Try all you want to be "straight", but you've kinda missed the one fundamental part of what those labels represent. The term straight-acting screams self-loathing, and I feel sorry for those individuals who have been made to feel that they can only accept themselves or be accepted by others by making a constant point of mentioning that they're just "one of the guys".

My experience is that most people who are offended by a gay stereotype are offended because they themselves have been bullied, labelled, stereotyped into that category by someone who was too ignorant to get to know them and realize that there is much more to them than a label. Unfortunately, they direct it back onto other gay men, rather than directing it to the ignorant people who are the real source of negativity.

Sorry but just had to pipe up when I read this, was going to just read the thread but this went too far.

I'm sorry but isn't it just as bad to judge gay people for having personalities that are similar to 'straight stereotypes' as it is to judge them for being 'effeminate'

I like being 'one of the guys' not because I want some sort of acceptance but because funnily enough I get along with them. I like playing rugby and enjoy the banter of it all because I play it with a lot of great friends and I really enjoy the sport. There's no sense of it being about acceptance. Equally I enjoy hanging out with girls and going shopping or chatting about guys or whatever. But hey at the same time I also have guy friends who I watch Glee with and girl friends who I play sport with. Ultimately I just do what I want to and hang out with who I like, if that's 'straight acting' then i really couldn't care what label is put on it.

So you know what I agree with some of the arguments here that I find extreme masculine or extreme feminine personalities tiresome. I, personally, think (and this is just an opinion) that most people's personalities would naturally fall somewhere along the spectrum between what is perceived as masculine or feminine, but that some individuals, through pressure from conforming to society or the views of those around them, often subconsciously, push themselves to one extreme or the other. I think this is unfortunate that they feel the need (at some level) to act like that. But ultimately it's their choice and I'm not gonna judge them for that. Either way I don't think that guys who have 'straight' personalities have some sort of inherent self-loathing. They might just have that sort of personality but hey they also sleep with men, that's the long and the short of it.

Kworb
Apr 2nd, 2011, 12:27 PM
I doubt anyone has a problem with gays that don't ping anyone's gaydar. I don't even have a problem with gay guys trying to come across as straight as possible. That is their choice and if they are comfortable with it, so be it. The only problem is when they start criticizing other gay guys for not doing the same thing.

young_gunner913
Apr 2nd, 2011, 12:37 PM
We'll see who the peasant really is after Monday's match with the REAL queen of Stockton.

I won via walkover. Suck on that. :nerner:

Dominic
Apr 2nd, 2011, 02:34 PM
I doubt anyone has a problem with gays that don't ping anyone's gaydar. I don't even have a problem with gay guys trying to come across as straight as possible. That is their choice and if they are comfortable with it, so be it. The only problem is when they start criticizing other gay guys for not doing the same thing.

OMG that is not nice indeed, who did that?

InsideOut.
Apr 2nd, 2011, 04:26 PM
Yes, let's all go to the echo chamber where we won't be bothered by any dissenting voices :lol:

Please, we don't let the mentally compromised vote either, for a reason. :rolleyes:

And :spit: at your continual display of stupidity. This doesn't come anywhere close to you claiming that Kim frantically buying seaweed was a well-informed decision though. :haha:

stevos
Apr 2nd, 2011, 04:28 PM
I see this thread has turned into DaMamaJama87 spreading his/her ridiculous views again, but I found the earlier conversation really interesting.
I just wanted to say that I think it's pretty hard for us, as individuals, to look at someone and really understand the reasons why someone acts "feminine" or "masculine", lay claim to them just giving into stereotypes or other stupid ideas. It sounds exactly like the arguments surrounding homosexuality itself! Do you really think so many men act "feminine" (quotes to emphasize the extremely subjective nature of these gender roles) just out of some need for attention or because they want to be a stereotype?

I used to assume every straight man who acted masculine was just trying too hard. but I realized that certain "masculine" traits, might just be how someone feels and therefore prefers to project themselves. I know I have lots of lesbian and gay friends who have many attributable masculine traits, along with feminine ones, and everyone falls at different points on the spectrum.

The way Darop specifically used feminine men as his point of displeasure I think speaks to this infantilized femininity, and sure it might be annoying, but the discomfort seems to go beyond that. No one's saying you have to socialize or enjoy those people, but laying claim to WHY they act that way seems pretty fascist to me. (Fascist not as in Hitler, but as in assuming you can explain and categorize difference according to your own views.)

Why not get to know each individual person who may or may not outwardly show feminine or masculine traits, and determine for each how they feel the desire to display those traits. I'm willing to bet each one has many different reasons.

Darop.
Apr 2nd, 2011, 05:45 PM
I see this thread has turned into DaMamaJama87 spreading his/her ridiculous views again, but I found the earlier conversation really interesting.
I just wanted to say that I think it's pretty hard for us, as individuals, to look at someone and really understand the reasons why someone acts "feminine" or "masculine", lay claim to them just giving into stereotypes or other stupid ideas. It sounds exactly like the arguments surrounding homosexuality itself! Do you really think so many men act "feminine" (quotes to emphasize the extremely subjective nature of these gender roles) just out of some need for attention or because they want to be a stereotype?

I used to assume every straight man who acted masculine was just trying too hard. but I realized that certain "masculine" traits, might just be how someone feels and therefore prefers to project themselves. I know I have lots of lesbian and gay friends who have many attributable masculine traits, along with feminine ones, and everyone falls at different points on the spectrum.

The way Darop specifically used feminine men as his point of displeasure I think speaks to this infantilized femininity, and sure it might be annoying, but the discomfort seems to go beyond that. No one's saying you have to socialize or enjoy those people, but laying claim to WHY they act that way seems pretty fascist to me. (Fascist not as in Hitler, but as in assuming you can explain and categorize difference according to your own views.)

Why not get to know each individual person who may or may not outwardly show feminine or masculine traits, and determine for each how they feel the desire to display those traits. I'm willing to bet each one has many different reasons.

Fascist?? What the hell? Apart from my initial personal statement, I then went on trying to objectively find a cause to such behaviour without judging. So is every sociologist a fascist? Is every psychologist a fascist? If you don't agree with my opinions just say so, explain why and we can start a constructive debate, you don't have to accuse me of something as horrible as being a fascist. And please don't use that word so blatantly out of context, it's extremely offensive.

Also, I hope you understand as I've previously stated in this thread, though I personally often can't relate to "feminine" men, that isn't my "point of displeasure": they're free to act however they want for whatever reason. The issues I was talking about were others, but I won't go on repeating them ad nauseam.

Darop.
Apr 2nd, 2011, 05:49 PM
I doubt anyone has a problem with gays that don't ping anyone's gaydar. I don't even have a problem with gay guys trying to come across as straight as possible. That is their choice and if they are comfortable with it, so be it. The only problem is when they start criticizing other gay guys for not doing the same thing.

While before I had doubts, now I am SURE you didn't read what anyone said in this thread.

Apoleb
Apr 2nd, 2011, 07:29 PM
So is every sociologist a fascist? Is every psychologist a fascist?

Good points. We can all ask "why" people behave the way that they do, but it doesn't mean we have to generalize over all situations. It serves to indicate more dominant factors than others.

Kworb
Apr 2nd, 2011, 07:43 PM
OMG that is not nice indeed, who did that?
Numerous people in here called them disgusting or nauseating, criticized their alleged decision to embrace a certain stereotype and then went on to explain why they are doing a disservice to the gay community.

stevos
Apr 2nd, 2011, 07:49 PM
Fascist?? What the hell? Apart from my initial personal statement, I then went on trying to objectively find a cause to such behaviour without judging. So is every sociologist a fascist? Is every psychologist a fascist? If you don't agree with my opinions just say so, explain why and we can start a constructive debate, you don't have to accuse me of something as horrible as being a fascist. And please don't use that word so blatantly out of context, it's extremely offensive.

Also, I hope you understand as I've previously stated in this thread, though I personally often can't relate to "feminine" men, that isn't my "point of displeasure": they're free to act however they want for whatever reason. The issues I was talking about were others, but I won't go on repeating them ad nauseam.

The way I was using the term fascist, yes you could argue a lot of psychology as we know it is somewhat fascist. I know the word is stigmatized, but it's just the most useful word I can think of. It's not about judging or not judging, but sorry I don't think your views were expressed in a "sociologist"'s way of typing. As someone who is in sociology, your views seemed mainly to stem from your initial gut-wrench disturbance with a kind of behaviour you deemed "feminine", and you also tried to explain it using some bullshit ideas about people being pushed into it to fit a stereotype or to be accepted.

Apoleb
Apr 2nd, 2011, 08:10 PM
The way I was using the term fascist, yes you could argue a lot of psychology as we know it is somewhat fascist. I know the word is stigmatized, but it's just the most useful word I can think of. It's not about judging or not judging, but sorry I don't think your views were expressed in a "sociologist"'s way of typing. As someone who is in sociology, your views seemed mainly to stem from your initial gut-wrench disturbance with a kind of behaviour you deemed "feminine", and you also tried to explain it using some bullshit ideas about people being pushed into it to fit a stereotype or to be accepted.

Are you trying to say that we can never make general claims about human behavior? Or that the factors pinpointed in this thread are invalid? If so, yes, that pretty much kills psychology and any scientific field that attempts to explain human behavior (including sociology). I don't think that's a very tenable claim. Not that general claims and explanations have to generalize over all individuals: they just point out to causative factors that interact with many other causative factors in a particular individual.

delicatecutter
Apr 2nd, 2011, 08:41 PM
What does "being a fascist" even mean in the context of this discussion?

stevos
Apr 2nd, 2011, 09:39 PM
Are you trying to say that we can never make general claims about human behavior? Or that the factors pinpointed in this thread are invalid? If so, yes, that pretty much kills psychology and any scientific field that attempts to explain human behavior (including sociology). I don't think that's a very tenable claim. Not that general claims and explanations have to generalize over all individuals: they just point out to causative factors that interact with many other causative factors in a particular individual.

Umm, no. I'm saying that you can never make a claim that is infallible, and most often claims come from an extremely subjective viewpoint. Sociology/anthropology/psychology all desire to make strong claims about human behaviour, but most of these views are fallible. I realize what I'm saying isn't popular, maybe I'm reading too much post-structuralism, but I really don't think that you can just make generalizations so easily. Of course some things make sense. But I think criticisms of femininity in men, and generalizations about behaviour in stigmatized communities (gay/queer communities, etc) are so often coming from internalized homophobia, or just really rudimentary ideas of what "femininity" and "masculinity" are.
The problem is that most gay people appropriate these same ideas too.

So yeah, that's my thought. I like what you said earlier about how generalizations made by psychologists or sociologists are often given power over other causative factors, or forces. And I'm sure there are good claims to be made by these things. However, I think everything said by Darop and such in this thread have come nowhere near good claims. Gay people, or "feminine men" actually, are really a multiplicity of different subjects who really don't fit into one category, in my opinion.

stevos
Apr 2nd, 2011, 09:42 PM
What does "being a fascist" even mean in the context of this discussion?

Ugh. A word has more meaning than the one context you've heard it in before, you know.

Stamp Paid
Apr 2nd, 2011, 09:55 PM
I know its pejorative, but I didnt know that characterizing a person's argument as 'fascist' was so reprehensible :lol:

debby
Apr 2nd, 2011, 10:39 PM
this thread : :help:

Dominic
Apr 2nd, 2011, 10:51 PM
Gay people, or "feminine men" actually, are really a multiplicity of different subjects who really don't fit into one category, in my opinion.

I don't know what thread you've been reading but I didn't see anyone disagreeing with that.

Dominic
Apr 2nd, 2011, 11:05 PM
Numerous people in here called them disgusting or nauseating, criticized their alleged decision to embrace a certain stereotype and then went on to explain why they are doing a disservice to the gay community.

The first part of your post is REALLY an exageration and/or misinterpretation, as for the last part, wether you and I want it or not, gay men acting super feminine and flamboyant aren't exactly helping to break the stereotypes and stigmatization.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 12:25 AM
Sorry but just had to pipe up when I read this, was going to just read the thread but this went too far.

I'm sorry but isn't it just as bad to judge gay people for having personalities that are similar to 'straight stereotypes' as it is to judge them for being 'effeminate'

I like being 'one of the guys' not because I want some sort of acceptance but because funnily enough I get along with them. I like playing rugby and enjoy the banter of it all because I play it with a lot of great friends and I really enjoy the sport. There's no sense of it being about acceptance. Equally I enjoy hanging out with girls and going shopping or chatting about guys or whatever. But hey at the same time I also have guy friends who I watch Glee with and girl friends who I play sport with. Ultimately I just do what I want to and hang out with who I like, if that's 'straight acting' then i really couldn't care what label is put on it.

So you know what I agree with some of the arguments here that I find extreme masculine or extreme feminine personalities tiresome. I, personally, think (and this is just an opinion) that most people's personalities would naturally fall somewhere along the spectrum between what is perceived as masculine or feminine, but that some individuals, through pressure from conforming to society or the views of those around them, often subconsciously, push themselves to one extreme or the other. I think this is unfortunate that they feel the need (at some level) to act like that. But ultimately it's their choice and I'm not gonna judge them for that. Either way I don't think that guys who have 'straight' personalities have some sort of inherent self-loathing. They might just have that sort of personality but hey they also sleep with men, that's the long and the short of it.

I think you misinterpreted the point of the post you replied to - My comments were not judging or insulting masculinity by any means, my response was to the term "straight-acting". It's a word that drives me crazy, because I feel that gay men should be able to exude their own masculinity without it being called "straight-acting". No judgment at all against masculinity, more a wish that we not have to associate it as something that only a heterosexual man can be.

I like you, have friends of all gender, sexuality, religion, race - I enjoy my friendships with different people because we all have different things that bring us together in spite of our differences. Likewise, we all have our differences in spite of the things we have in common at face value. I am a gay male, and bottom line is that I am proud of who I am as a person above my sexual preferences or anything else that is a facet of what makes me who I am. My friends and my family know me well enough to know that I am a lot more than just a gay man, and those who do not are not of any particular concern to my day to day life.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 12:34 AM
If you give your life to Jesus, you could have conversations with him too;)

You call it talking to Jesus, most of us refer to it as schizophrenia - But hey, whatever works for you ;)

stevos
Apr 3rd, 2011, 12:37 AM
I don't know what thread you've been reading but I didn't see anyone disagreeing with that.

The first part of your post is REALLY an exageration and/or misinterpretation, as for the last part, wether you and I want it or not, gay men acting super feminine and flamboyant aren't exactly helping to break the stereotypes and stigmatization.

THIS (your second post) is what I was referring to, you're the one disagreeing with that.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 12:56 AM
The first part of your post is REALLY an exageration and/or misinterpretation, as for the last part, wether you and I want it or not, gay men acting super feminine and flamboyant aren't exactly helping to break the stereotypes and stigmatization.

Like I have previously stated, perhaps if we had the attitude of teaching and helping those who are ignorant we would be serving ourselves much better than placing blame on people who are simply choosing to live their lives and express themselves the way they do.

I would hope that no one should ever feel they have to behave differently in order to please someone else - Isn't that a battle almost all gay men struggle with as they come to terms with their sexuality? So many live in silence, in fear or persecution from the people who are supposed to love them unconditionally, and yet we have some gay men expecting that others just start acting more masculine so that it serves you better from being categorized with them. Doesn't that sound crazy?

I'm not looking to break down stereotypes by being something I am not, nor am I looking to break them down by conforming to something that ignorant people are "okay" with. That doesn't stop ignorance or hatred, it just sends the message that it's better to simply conform to someone else's idea of what is normal or acceptable. I would much rather aim to better educate people who are simply too narrow-minded to think beyond the small box that they know.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 01:50 AM
The way I was using the term fascist, yes you could argue a lot of psychology as we know it is somewhat fascist. I know the word is stigmatized, but it's just the most useful word I can think of. It's not about judging or not judging, but sorry I don't think your views were expressed in a "sociologist"'s way of typing. As someone who is in sociology, your views seemed mainly to stem from your initial gut-wrench disturbance with a kind of behaviour you deemed "feminine", and you also tried to explain it using some bullshit ideas about people being pushed into it to fit a stereotype or to be accepted.

The chronological order in which I posted claims/opinions in this thread doesn't necessarily coincide with their causal order. You have no clue which came before the other, so please don't make such claims.

And I think you make a much bigger generalization than I ever have in this thread just by using the term fascist. And I guess according to you pretty much all human sciences are "fascist", as they all tend to explain an array of unique and different situations on the basis of a basic model. How dare they! :rolleyes:

hingisGOAT
Apr 3rd, 2011, 02:09 AM
As a gay male, here's my two cents:

Any guy that "acts" (keyword) a particular way, be it straight or gay, is behaving in a manner that can be described as either pathetic or genuinely sad, depending on the context -- although insofar as younger gays (teens) are concerned I'd say this behavior is genuinely sad :sad: mostly because they are probably not mentally and emotionally developed enough to know any better.

miffedmax
Apr 3rd, 2011, 02:25 AM
Meanwhile, back on the original topic, my son's NJHS group is in New York where their young, impressionable minds will be exposed to my brother's rampant homosexuality along with his unique connections to the city's arts and theater scenes. It's too horrible to contemplate. :rolleyes:



(yes, there was some sarcasm there).

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 03:26 AM
THIS (your second post) is what I was referring to, you're the one disagreeing with that.

How on earth is saying that "gay guys acting feminine or flamboyant aren't breaking any stereotypes" disagreeing with this statement "Gay people, or "feminine men" actually, are really a multiplicity of different subjects who really don't fit into one category, in my opinion."? Do you know what a stereotype is? It's basically an oversimplified conception, or generalization of alot of different ppl, that's made up by society in general, NOT BY ME. I definitely agree with the latter statement.

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 03:30 AM
Like I have previously stated, perhaps if we had the attitude of teaching and helping those who are ignorant we would be serving ourselves much better than placing blame on people who are simply choosing to live their lives and express themselves the way they do.

I would hope that no one should ever feel they have to behave differently in order to please someone else - Isn't that a battle almost all gay men struggle with as they come to terms with their sexuality? So many live in silence, in fear or persecution from the people who are supposed to love them unconditionally, and yet we have some gay men expecting that others just start acting more masculine so that it serves you better from being categorized with them. Doesn't that sound crazy?

I'm not looking to break down stereotypes by being something I am not, nor am I looking to break them down by conforming to something that ignorant people are "okay" with. That doesn't stop ignorance or hatred, it just sends the message that it's better to simply conform to someone else's idea of what is normal or acceptable. I would much rather aim to better educate people who are simply too narrow-minded to think beyond the small box that they know.

Hmm ok, so where exactly did we disagree in all of that? Although, alot of us already have that attitude you mentionned in the beginning, and all I can say is this is not a perfect world, there are always gonna be hopeless assholes. But I've not once disagreed with any of what you just said in any post in this thread. All I did is describe the actual reality, which is different than some of you seem to think.

ampers&
Apr 3rd, 2011, 06:17 AM
I know its pejorative, but I didnt know that characterizing a person's argument as 'fascist' was so reprehensible :lol:Reprehensible, no. But definitely extreme given the state of this debate. Sure it can have more than one meaning, but you can't throw around that term without a pretty good argument to support it.
------

Oh, and Stephen LOL @ the bad rep. Yes, I really agree with everything Darop has said in this thread. I am capable of adding more of course but I find that he and Apoleb are already doing a great job in this thread as my views are already similar to theirs.

BartoLiNa
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:39 AM
The chronological order in which I posted claims/opinions in this thread doesn't necessarily coincide with their causal order. You have no clue which came before the other, so please don't make such claims.

Hey, to be honest I thought it was a little odd that in a thread about homophobia (quite extreme homophobia in the case of the BNP) you came in and made a post about how feminine gay men make you cringe. It seemed totally random and out of place in a thread like this so I think that is what may have annoyed people initially. Don't get me wrong I don't doubt your arguments for believing the way you do and I know many people (gay or straight) feel the same.

I personally believe the only thing we can expect of gay people is for them to be themselves, and that includes the extremely feminine gay men just as much as it does the masculine ones. I think putting a value on how acceptable gay individuals are based on how feminine they are (or aren't) sends out the wrong message, particularly to young gay people. The people who think that gay men are all queens seem to be in a small minority in my experience.

Expat
Apr 3rd, 2011, 01:52 PM
See there is a lot of pressure for gay guys to conform to a certain standard from the heterosexual community. But one thing I see missing in this thread is that there is a lot of pressure in conforming to a certain standard from within the gay community also.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 01:55 PM
Hmm ok, so where exactly did we disagree in all of that? Although, alot of us already have that attitude you mentionned in the beginning, and all I can say is this is not a perfect world, there are always gonna be hopeless assholes. But I've not once disagreed with any of what you just said in any post in this thread. All I did is describe the actual reality, which is different than some of you seem to think.

You have described reality to an extent, but then you go and throw in a statement like "more straight men would be accepting if there were more guys who acted like Ricky Martin than Perez Hilton".

There are many straight men who don't relate much with gay men - But they still accept their right to be who they are without prejudice. A homophobe is still a homophobe if he can "tolerate" (not accept) you because you act masculine, but would want nothing to do with you if you acted otherwise. That's not acceptance, that is tolerance based upon their limited conditions because it suits what they are comfortable with. It's like guys who say "lesbians are hot, and gay guys are okay as long as I don't have to see them walking down the steet holding hands".

Do your straight guy friends who "accept" you, hang out with you and your boyfriend together? Are they "cool" with you showing public affection with one another?

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 02:41 PM
You have described reality to an extent, but then you go and throw in a statement like "more straight men would be accepting if there were more guys who acted like Ricky Martin than Perez Hilton".

There are many straight men who don't relate much with gay men - But they still accept their right to be who they are without prejudice. A homophobe is still a homophobe if he can "tolerate" (not accept) you because you act masculine, but would want nothing to do with you if you acted otherwise. That's not acceptance, that is tolerance based upon their limited conditions because it suits what they are comfortable with. It's like guys who say "lesbians are hot, and gay guys are okay as long as I don't have to see them walking down the steet holding hands".

Do your straight guy friends who "accept" you, hang out with you and your boyfriend together? Are they "cool" with you showing public affection with one another?

They absolutely have no problems with that, and if they did, I'd probably slug them (verbally :lol: ) and no longer be their friends. And I did not say more gays should act like Ricky Martin, I said there would probably be more acceptance if straight guys had seen more examples like Ricky Martin rather than someone like Chris Crocker.

And in my opinion, it goes beyond tolerance. As I've said a few times before, alot of straight guys don't know any gays and have no clue that there as many differences among the gay men than there are among straight men. Every single person is unique. A big part of them, believe it or not, think that all gays are feminine, speak in a high voice, wear make-up, women's clothes and are basically superficial sluts. I'm just saying, if more of them had more examples like Ricky Martin (someone who is not like what I described before), in their life or in the media or whatever they might realize that gay men come in all sizes and shapes and some of them are not that different from them, and some of them are, but that's still ok, and thus stop stereotyping.

And I'm saying that cause that is exactly what happened with my friends after I've told them I was gay, they weren't just nice to me, they basically changed their oversimplified ideas of a gay person.

stevos
Apr 3rd, 2011, 03:13 PM
And I'm saying that cause that is exactly what happened with my friends after I've told them I was gay, they weren't just nice to me, they basically changed their oversimplified ideas of a gay person.

So basically, you're very proud of yourself for showing your friends that gay people can be "normal"? Or not what they expected?
That's great, but you pretty much make your views obvious when you keep putting value on how well a gay person can make straight people comfortable, essentially. I just think that having the end goal of having straight people be cool with you, and still be intolerant of "typical gays" is really not doing anything to combat homophobia other than make those guys cool with one homosexual, but still have that hierarchy of comfortable-to-straight-people behaviour versus "gay" behaviour.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 05:13 PM
Hey, to be honest I thought it was a little odd that in a thread about homophobia (quite extreme homophobia in the case of the BNP) you came in and made a post about how feminine gay men make you cringe. It seemed totally random and out of place in a thread like this so I think that is what may have annoyed people initially. Don't get me wrong I don't doubt your arguments for believing the way you do and I know many people (gay or straight) feel the same.


Though I could have right away explained a bit better, it was not irrelevant, referring to the part in which the dress boys up in dresses. I really don't see how dressing guys up in dresses (which, no matter how "open minded" you are, is something women classically do in our society) has anything at all to do with the acceptance of homosexuals. It would make sense, maybe, if they were trying to encourage acceptance of transgender or people with GID, but this is not the case, and I don't see any link between homosexuals and people with these kind of syndromes. (Now, no one come out and say I hate on these people because I called transgender and GID syndromes: I'm using the term scientifically as in "a series of symptoms".)

It would be like organizing a convention of acceptance of japanese people, then giving everyone cameras and telling them to take pictures of everything they see. It's an automatic, stereotypical association which makes no sense at all.

They absolutely have no problems with that, and if they did, I'd probably slug them (verbally :lol: ) and no longer be their friends. And I did not say more gays should act like Ricky Martin, I said there would probably be more acceptance if straight guys had seen more examples like Ricky Martin rather than someone like Chris Crocker.

And in my opinion, it goes beyond tolerance. As I've said a few times before, alot of straight guys don't know any gays and have no clue that there as many differences among the gay men than there are among straight men. Every single person is unique. A big part of them, believe it or not, think that all gays are feminine, speak in a high voice, wear make-up, women's clothes and are basically superficial sluts. I'm just saying, if more of them had more examples like Ricky Martin (someone who is not like what I described before), in their life or in the media or whatever they might realize that gay men come in all sizes and shapes and some of them are not that different from them, and some of them are, but that's still ok, and thus stop stereotyping.

And I'm saying that cause that is exactly what happened with my friends after I've told them I was gay, they weren't just nice to me, they basically changed their oversimplified ideas of a gay person.

:yeah:

So basically, you're very proud of yourself for showing your friends that gay people can be "normal"? Or not what they expected?
That's great, but you pretty much make your views obvious when you keep putting value on how well a gay person can make straight people comfortable, essentially. I just think that having the end goal of having straight people be cool with you, and still be intolerant of "typical gays" is really not doing anything to combat homophobia other than make those guys cool with one homosexual, but still have that hierarchy of comfortable-to-straight-people behaviour versus "gay" behaviour.

For me, homophobia = disliking/hating/prejudicing people based on who they decide to kiss, have sex with, or holds hands with and NOTHING ELSE, ONLY based on that. The part I highlighted of what you wrote really tells me that you keep making the assumption that homosexual = effeminate. If GoDokic's friends are able to accept him but not the "typical gays", it's obvious that they aeren't homophobes, just people who can't relate to certain social group (effeminate men). Are they saying that they are horrible people? No,just that they can't relate to them. Big deal. That's society for you. Each person has determined social groups they can't relate to, you probably/surely have some as well, for whatever reason. I don't see how this is "intollerance".

No one, for the umpteenth time, has ever in this thread encouraged intollerance towards them.

Nor do I think people who have gone against me and GoDokic are suddenly the "paladins of tollerance."
I am not at all a religious man, and I sincerely personally dislike the teachings of the roman catholic chuch, and absolutely despise the vatican (and I live in Italy). But come on, Randy's signature is basically ridiculzing and banalazing a whole religion and all those who believe in it, most not just for the stupid aspects his signature highlights. Wow, such tollerance and understanding! If only I could learn from you. I'd find nothing wrong with that signature coming from any other person. But when it comes from someone who scouts intollerance in every nook and cranny, that's pretty effed up.

What if I had a signature saying "look at those gays running around, spending hours at the salon and every afternoon shopping, obsessing about their bodies, talking only about the cocks they suck, spending every night in gays discos and being constantly promiscuous. Yet they want to be accepted by society!". You'd be pretty pissed off, and don't say you wouldn't. Talk about generalization, stereotypes and oversimplification.

Did I hear someone say "double standards"?

Kworb
Apr 3rd, 2011, 05:42 PM
You're the one who brought up effeminate men in a thread that was only about acceptance of homosexuality. Only because you think homophobia has everything to do with effeminate men. You are BLAMING them for the existence of homophobia, and then you say you're not intolerant of them but only describing reality as it is.

NO. People have a problem with HOMOSEXUALITY. The Bible does not say "the feminine men are an abomination." It talks about HOMOSEXUALITY. Guys have been dressing like women "for fun" for centuries, all in the name of entertainment. No problem. Guys kissing each other? BIG PROBLEM. The issue is HOMOSEXUALITY.

Why are there hardly any OUT pro athletes? Why is it a HUGE DEAL to have any gay kiss on American television? Between "masculine" guys? Is it because people are disgusted by feminine men? Or are they disgusted by gays?

Open your eyes.

égalité
Apr 3rd, 2011, 05:49 PM
Though I could have right away explained a bit better, it was not irrelevant, referring to the part in which the dress boys up in dresses. I really don't see how dressing guys up in dresses (which, no matter how "open minded" you are, is something women classically do in our society) has anything at all to do with the acceptance of homosexuals. It would make sense, maybe, if they were trying to encourage acceptance of transgender or people with GID, but this is not the case, and I don't see any link between homosexuals and people with these kind of syndromes. (Now, no one come out and say I hate on these people because I called transgender and GID syndromes: I'm using the term scientifically as in "a series of symptoms".)

It would be like organizing a convention of acceptance of japanese people, then giving everyone cameras and telling them to take pictures of everything they see. It's an automatic, stereotypical association which makes no sense at all.



:yeah:



For me, homophobia = disliking/hating/prejudicing people based on who they decide to kiss, have sex with, or holds hands with and NOTHING ELSE, ONLY based on that. The part I highlighted of what you wrote really tells me that you keep making the assumption that homosexual = effeminate. If GoDokic's friends are able to accept him but not the "typical gays", it's obvious that they aeren't homophobes, just people who can't relate to certain social group (effeminate men). Are they saying that they are horrible people? No,just that they can't relate to them. Big deal. That's society for you. Each person has determined social groups they can't relate to, you probably/surely have some as well, for whatever reason. I don't see how this is "intollerance".

No one, for the umpteenth time, has ever in this thread encouraged intollerance towards them.

Nor do I think people who have gone against me and GoDokic are suddenly the "paladins of tollerance."
I am not at all a religious man, and I sincerely personally dislike the teachings of the roman catholic chuch, and absolutely despise the vatican (and I live in Italy). But come on, Randy's signature is basically ridiculzing and banalazing a whole religion and all those who believe in it, most not just for the stupid aspects his signature highlights. Wow, such tollerance and understanding! If only I could learn from you. I'd find nothing wrong with that signature coming from any other person. But when it comes from someone who scouts intollerance in every nook and cranny, that's pretty effed up.

What if I had a signature saying "look at those gays running around, spending hours at the salon and every afternoon shopping, obsessing about their bodies, talking only about the cocks they suck, spending every night in gays discos and being constantly promiscuous. Yet they want to be accepted by society!". You'd be pretty pissed off, and don't say you wouldn't. Talk about generalization, stereotypes and oversimplification.

Did I hear someone say "double standards"?

No no no no no no no. There's a BIG difference between not being able to relate to someone and disliking someone. There are plenty of people I can't relate to that I don't dislike. Homophobia is way more than hating someone because of whom they kiss and hold hands with. It's the mindset that typical heterosexual gender/sex performance is a measure of normalcy. GoDokic's friends dislike effeminate gay men because they think it's abnormal for men to act like that, which is so obviously a homophobic viewpoint that I can't even believe it's being debated here.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 05:50 PM
You're the one who brought up effeminate men in a thread that was only about acceptance of homosexuality. Only because you think homophobia has everything to do with effeminate men. You are BLAMING them for the existence of homophobia, and then you say you're not intolerant of them but only describing reality as it is.

NO. People have a problem with HOMOSEXUALITY. The Bible does not say "the feminine men are an abomination." It talks about HOMOSEXUALITY. Guys have been dressing like women "for fun" for centuries, all in the name of entertainment. No problem. Guys kissing each other? BIG PROBLEM. The issue is HOMOSEXUALITY.

Why are there hardly any OUT pro athletes? Why is it a HUGE DEAL to have any gay kiss on American television? Between "masculine" guys? Is it because people are disgusted by feminine men? Or are they disgusted by gays?

Open your eyes.

I think I'll stop reading your posts alltogether. The points you make could be valid but I've answered ALL the questions and statements you now posed in previous posts, but instead of argumenting you just go back to square one. Oh, and I just answered your opening accusation in my last post.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 05:55 PM
No no no no no no no. There's a BIG difference between not being able to relate to someone and disliking someone. There are plenty of people I can't relate to that I don't dislike. Homophobia is way more than hating someone because of whom they kiss and hold hands with. It's the mindset that typical heterosexual gender/sex performance is a measure of normalcy. GoDokic's friends dislike effeminate gay men because they think it's abnormal for men to act like that, which is so obviously a homophobic viewpoint that I can't even believe it's being debated here.

HOMO-phobic. It's not femophobic. I'd not be able to relate to those types of men (nor do I think would GoDokic's friends) even if they enjoyed vaginas instead on penises, just like I can't relate to many "over the top" metrosexuals. So it really has nothing to do with homophobia.

égalité
Apr 3rd, 2011, 06:14 PM
Well I can't relate at all to really macho "over the top" straight men, but I don't see any reason to dislike them for how they act.

BartoLiNa
Apr 3rd, 2011, 06:16 PM
Though I could have right away explained a bit better, it was not irrelevant, referring to the part in which the dress boys up in dresses. I really don't see how dressing guys up in dresses (which, no matter how "open minded" you are, is something women classically do in our society) has anything at all to do with the acceptance of homosexuals. It would make sense, maybe, if they were trying to encourage acceptance of transgender or people with GID, but this is not the case, and I don't see any link between homosexuals and people with these kind of syndromes. (Now, no one come out and say I hate on these people because I called transgender and GID syndromes: I'm using the term scientifically as in "a series of symptoms".)

It would be like organizing a convention of acceptance of japanese people, then giving everyone cameras and telling them to take pictures of everything they see. It's an automatic, stereotypical association which makes no sense at all.

Oh well that's fair enough. The BNP are known for using the most extreme examples, they do it with race all the time.

I'm just thankful people like that don't have more than a snowball's chance in hell of getting into power in my country :cool:

Nicolás89
Apr 3rd, 2011, 06:48 PM
Though I could have right away explained a bit better, it was not irrelevant, referring to the part in which the dress boys up in dresses. I really don't see how dressing guys up in dresses (which, no matter how "open minded" you are, is something women classically do in our society has anything at all to do with the acceptance of homosexuals. It would make sense, maybe, if they were trying to encourage acceptance of transgender or people with GID, but this is not the case, and I don't see any link between homosexuals and people with these kind of syndromes. (Now, no one come out and say I hate on these people because I called transgender and GID syndromes: I'm using the term scientifically as in "a series of symptoms".)



First, society is continuously changing of course, wearing "men's clothes" definitely helped women at the start of their equal rights movement.

Second, seriously wth? Are you honestly opening the door for the mental disorder debate? If gid was a real disorder, then what is left for homosexuality? Even if you're not using the term "disorder" as in a disease, if I would use your logic it does open the gap for anyone to explain homosexuality as a mental disorder "as in a series of symptons".

I honestly think your whole point from start to finish is an unfortunate compilation of words.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 06:49 PM
For me, homophobia = disliking/hating/prejudicing people based on who they decide to kiss, have sex with, or holds hands with and NOTHING ELSE, ONLY based on that. The part I highlighted of what you wrote really tells me that you keep making the assumption that homosexual = effeminate. If GoDokic's friends are able to accept him but not the "typical gays", it's obvious that they aeren't homophobes, just people who can't relate to certain social group (effeminate men). Are they saying that they are horrible people? No,just that they can't relate to them. Big deal. That's society for you. Each person has determined social groups they can't relate to, you probably/surely have some as well, for whatever reason. I don't see how this is "intollerance".

No one, for the umpteenth time, has ever in this thread encouraged intollerance towards them.

Nor do I think people who have gone against me and GoDokic are suddenly the "paladins of tollerance."
I am not at all a religious man, and I sincerely personally dislike the teachings of the roman catholic chuch, and absolutely despise the vatican (and I live in Italy). But come on, Randy's signature is basically ridiculzing and banalazing a whole religion and all those who believe in it, most not just for the stupid aspects his signature highlights. Wow, such tollerance and understanding! If only I could learn from you. I'd find nothing wrong with that signature coming from any other person. But when it comes from someone who scouts intollerance in every nook and cranny, that's pretty effed up.

What if I had a signature saying "look at those gays running around, spending hours at the salon and every afternoon shopping, obsessing about their bodies, talking only about the cocks they suck, spending every night in gays discos and being constantly promiscuous. Yet they want to be accepted by society!". You'd be pretty pissed off, and don't say you wouldn't. Talk about generalization, stereotypes and oversimplification.

Did I hear someone say "double standards"?

My problem with your view is that you assume that because someone acts a certain way to you at face value, that you cannot relate to them. What happened to relating to people at a deeper level than simply their hobbies or the way they carry themselves in public? :lol: If that's how limited you are in getting to know others, then I am really quite sorry to hear that.

As for your comment re: my signature, I am going to assume you have no clue who George Carlin is, and if you do, you have no understanding of the context of the quote :lol: I am accepting of all, including those with religious backgrounds :) If you had that gay quote in your signature I would probably wouldn't get it, because there is no irony or context to it :shrug:

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 06:56 PM
No no no no no no no. There's a BIG difference between not being able to relate to someone and disliking someone. There are plenty of people I can't relate to that I don't dislike. Homophobia is way more than hating someone because of whom they kiss and hold hands with. It's the mindset that typical heterosexual gender/sex performance is a measure of normalcy. GoDokic's friends dislike effeminate gay men because they think it's abnormal for men to act like that, which is so obviously a homophobic viewpoint that I can't even believe it's being debated here.

Thank you :worship:

The fact that this is even a debate is actually mind-boggling. Sad fact is that there are a lot of gay men themselves who have elements of homophobia as well, and think it is okay to be gay as long as you act a certain way that does not reflect poorly on them. Why else would you care whether or not someone is effeminate?

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:01 PM
HOMO-phobic. It's not femophobic. I'd not be able to relate to those types of men (nor do I think would GoDokic's friends) even if they enjoyed vaginas instead on penises, just like I can't relate to many "over the top" metrosexuals. So it really has nothing to do with homophobia.

You keep telling yourself that :yeah:

There are plenty of people that I have a limited amount of things in common with, their behaviour doesn't make me cringe.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:10 PM
They absolutely have no problems with that, and if they did, I'd probably slug them (verbally :lol: ) and no longer be their friends. And I did not say more gays should act like Ricky Martin, I said there would probably be more acceptance if straight guys had seen more examples like Ricky Martin rather than someone like Chris Crocker.

And in my opinion, it goes beyond tolerance. As I've said a few times before, alot of straight guys don't know any gays and have no clue that there as many differences among the gay men than there are among straight men. Every single person is unique. A big part of them, believe it or not, think that all gays are feminine, speak in a high voice, wear make-up, women's clothes and are basically superficial sluts. I'm just saying, if more of them had more examples like Ricky Martin (someone who is not like what I described before), in their life or in the media or whatever they might realize that gay men come in all sizes and shapes and some of them are not that different from them, and some of them are, but that's still ok, and thus stop stereotyping.

And I'm saying that cause that is exactly what happened with my friends after I've told them I was gay, they weren't just nice to me, they basically changed their oversimplified ideas of a gay person.

Acceptance means going beyond what we see as common or normal from what we are used to, or taught. Would stereotypes change with more Ricky Martins in the public eye? Yes, probably. Would it change whether or not someone is homophobic? No, because until they accept all homosexuals without judgment regardless of how well they relate to some vs. others, they are still homophobic as far as I am concerned. I don't think you disagree with that.

I am glad that your friends have accepted you as you are, including being able to express yourself around them as you wish to. A lot of people say that they are okay with gays and lesbians, but there is a stipulation involved that they are okay as long as you don't make them uncomfortable through signs of affection etc. Thankfully you have not had to encounter this.

Stamp Paid
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:11 PM
Reprehensible, no. But definitely extreme given the state of this debate. Sure it can have more than one meaning, but you can't throw around that term without a pretty good argument to support it.
------

Oh, and Stephen LOL @ the bad rep. Yes, I really agree with everything Darop has said in this thread. I am capable of adding more of course but I find that he and Apoleb are already doing a great job in this thread as my views are already similar to theirs.Really? I cant really relate to/understand a lot of whats being said in the thread because these are largely white gay men's issues. But is Darop saying that while he doesnt agree with discrimination against them, he thinks feminine men make it harder for mainstream heterosexuals to accept gay people?

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:38 PM
No no no no no no no. There's a BIG difference between not being able to relate to someone and disliking someone. There are plenty of people I can't relate to that I don't dislike. Homophobia is way more than hating someone because of whom they kiss and hold hands with. It's the mindset that typical heterosexual gender/sex performance is a measure of normalcy. GoDokic's friends dislike effeminate gay men because they think it's abnormal for men to act like that, which is so obviously a homophobic viewpoint that I can't even believe it's being debated here.

Hmm so you encourage stereotypes yourself appearantly. Why do you associate homosexuality with effeminate men automatically? It seems like one of the goals of the gay community is in fact to destroy the ridiculous stereotypes that exist.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:39 PM
First, society is continuously changing of course, wearing "men's clothes" definitely helped women at the start of their equal rights movement.

Second, seriously wth? Are you honestly opening the door for the mental disorder debate? If gid was a real disorder, then what is left for homosexuality? Even if you're not using the term "disorder" as in a disease, if I would use your logic it does open the gap for anyone to explain homosexuality as a mental disorder "as in a series of symptons".

I honestly think your whole point from start to finish is an unfortunate compilation of words.

:spit: :haha:

Women were wearing men's clothes because they wanted to prove the point that they were equal to men. So, uhm, gays... want to be equal to women?? :scratch:

Symptom is not just a medical term, and I'll just ignore random accusations of me wanting to make homosexuality seem like a disease. A symptom can also be something absolutely positive, so that shows how idiotic your post is.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:44 PM
You keep telling yourself that :yeah:

There are plenty of people that I have a limited amount of things in common with, their behaviour doesn't make me cringe.

Wow, what a great mature answer. And you keep telling yourself your own bullshit :yeah:

How about homophobes? Don't they make you cringe? How about DaMamaJama, since you called him schizophrenic? Maybe he/she doesn't make you cringe, but you went straight to the next level and verbally offended him! You go gurl! :bigclap:


:rolleyes: x 1000.

Nicolás89
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:50 PM
:spit: :haha:

Women were wearing men's clothes because they wanted to prove the point that they were equal to men. So, uhm, gays... want to be equal to women?? :scratch:

Symptom is not just a medical term, and I'll just ignore random accusations of me wanting to make homosexuality seem like a disease. A symptom can also be something absolutely positive, so that shows how idiotic your post is.

Seriously? How many meanings the word "syndrome" has though? Better reading comprehension would help but if that's how childish you are then this discussion is over.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 07:53 PM
Seriously? Better reading comprehension would help but ff that's how childish you are then this discussion is over.

It is also a sociological and psychological term. A syndrome is a group of symptoms in the same individual/system which may or may not have a cause.
Picking your nose can be a symptom. Voting a nazi-fascist party can be a symptom. Posting on a tennis forum can be a symptom. Enjoying other men's sexual company can be a symptom.

SO:

Symptoms: wanting to be able to give birth, identifying one's self with the opposite gender, desiring a vagina instead of a penis ------> GID syndrome in a male.

Sorry for the outburst, maybe you really didn't know how the word syndrome can be used, but I keep getting accused of random stuff so I'm pretty much on the defensive. :o

égalité
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:11 PM
Hmm so you encourage stereotypes yourself appearantly. Why do you associate homosexuality with effeminate men automatically? It seems like one of the goals of the gay community is in fact to destroy the ridiculous stereotypes that exist.

I never did that :weirdo:

Nicolás89
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:15 PM
It is also a sociological and psychological term. A syndrome is a group of symptoms in the same individual/system which may or may not have a cause.
Picking your nose can be a symptom. Voting a nazi-fascist party can be a symptom. Posting on a tennis forum can be a symptom. Enjoying other men's sexual company can be a symptom.

SO:

Symptoms: wanting to be able to give birth, identifying one's self with the opposite gender, desiring a vagina instead of a penis ------> GID syndrome in a male.

Sorry for the outburst, maybe you really didn't know how the word syndrome can be used, but I keep getting accused of random stuff so I'm pretty much on the defensive. :o

I know what GID is, I just refuse to consider it as a syndrome, because it does open the possibility for anyone to consider homosexuality as such. Sorry for repeating.

Anyways, I do am waiting for a quote where the term syndrome/sympton is used in sociology and/or in any context other than in medicine or phycology. I doubt that its use is common in other areas, if is used at all.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:20 PM
I know what GID is, I just refuse to consider it as a syndrome, because it does open the possibility for anyone to consider homosexuality as such. Sorry for repeating.

Anyways, I do am waiting for a quote where the term syndrome/sympton is used in sociology and/or in any context other than in medicine or phycology. I doubt that its use is common in other areas, if is used at all.

Definition 2b answers both the way I meant the term and your doubt about whether or not it can be used in fields other than medicine and psychology.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/syndrome

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:40 PM
Acceptance means going beyond what we see as common or normal from what we are used to, or taught. Would stereotypes change with more Ricky Martins in the public eye? Yes, probably. Would it change whether or not someone is homophobic? No, because until they accept all homosexuals without judgment regardless of how well they relate to some vs. others, they are still homophobic as far as I am concerned. I don't think you disagree with that.


I disagree with the last part because what alot of straight guys dislike about gay men is not in fact who they are physically attracted to, but rather the feminine over the top behavior they actually associate with all gay men. If those ignorant ppl actually knew that gay men doesn't necessarely equal feminine, high voice, women's clothes etc. etc. I think they might stop putting all gay men in the same basket and be a little more open.

Nicolás89
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:44 PM
Definition 2b

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/syndrome

I said where is USED not where is DEFINED, two very different things.

And anyway, you WERE describing the "symptons" of gid as is described in phycology. I obviously can't explain why some men / women feel like they were born in the wrong body, just as I can't explain why gays /lesbians are attracted to the same sex but I'm sure I won't classify their behaviours as symptons of. I don't see anyone classifying straight behaviour as symptons of being heterosexual.

young_gunner913
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:47 PM
I disagree with the last part because what alot of straight guys dislike about gay men is not in fact who they are physically attracted to, but rather the feminine over the top behavior they actually associate with all gay men. If those ignorant ppl actually knew that gay men doesn't necessarely equal feminine, high voice, women's clothes etc. etc. I think they might stop putting all gay men in the same basket and be a little more open.

Even the tons of straight guys, especially the ugliest of ugly, who say "I'm fine with gays as long as they don't hit on me"? :o

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:48 PM
I never did that :weirdo:

"GoDokic's friends dislike effeminate gay men because they think it's abnormal for men to act like that, which is so obviously a homophobic viewpoint that I can't even believe it's being debated here"

That was your statement, You said disiliking effeminate men is homophobic? The last time I checked, homophobic meant having prejudice against homosexual ppl, not effeminate men, you're the one who made that association. :rolleyes:

over the top effemninate men sometimes annoy me too, are you calling me a homophobe?

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:49 PM
Wow, what a great mature answer. And you keep telling yourself your own bullshit :yeah:

How about homophobes? Don't they make you cringe? How about DaMamaJama, since you called him schizophrenic? Maybe he/she doesn't make you cringe, but you went straight to the next level and verbally offended him! You go gurl! :bigclap:


:rolleyes: x 1000.

Really, your first response in this thread as a whole set the great tone for maturity here - Kudos :yeah:

I don't accept or tolerate hatred - Does DaMamaJama make me cringe? Actually no, because as I have already said, someone else's opinion isn't going to disrupt my life. He's welcome to feel the way he does, although I disagee with his view.

Keep rolling those eyes honey, you're the only one making a fool of yourself :bigclap:

Oh, and calling me "gurl" really doesn't offend me either, but I appreciate you again showcasing your own insecurity about anything effeminate :yeah: Learn to accept yourself, and you will have a much easier time accepting others without worrying that how you act is going to be judged as "too gay". We wouldn't want bigots to think you're one of those evil yucky girly-men :lol: I'd much rather be myself, than a puppet to how others want me to be :yeah:

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:50 PM
I disagree with the last part because what alot of straight guys dislike about gay men is not in fact who they are physically attracted to, but rather the feminine over the top behavior they actually associate with all gay men. If those ignorant ppl actually knew that gay men doesn't necessarely equal feminine, high voice, women's clothes etc. etc. I think they might stop putting all gay men in the same basket and be a little more open.

Why is it that they dislike gay men with effeminate qualities?

And why do you find those qualities annoying?

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 08:53 PM
So basically, you're very proud of yourself for showing your friends that gay people can be "normal"? Or not what they expected?
That's great, but you pretty much make your views obvious when you keep putting value on how well a gay person can make straight people comfortable, essentially. I just think that having the end goal of having straight people be cool with you, and still be intolerant of "typical gays" is really not doing anything to combat homophobia other than make those guys cool with one homosexual, but still have that hierarchy of comfortable-to-straight-people behaviour versus "gay" behaviour.

Not once did I say something like that, I do not give a damn what any straight guy thinks of me, I act exactly the way I want in life and if anyone has a problem with that, well, let's just say I'm not gonna be nice to them.

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:03 PM
Why is it that they dislike gay men with effeminate qualities?

And why do you find those qualities annoying?

Why I don't know, I'm also annoyed by ppl who swear all the time, is that ok with you? I think some of you are going WAAAY out of the definition of homophobia. Darop can cringe at whoever the hell he wants and that wouldn't make him a homophobe. The only think that would make him a homophobe is cringing at the concept of someone being sexually attracted to another person of the same sex.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:06 PM
Really, your first response in this thread as a whole set the great tone for maturity here - Kudos :yeah:

I don't accept or tolerate hatred - Does DaMamaJama make me cringe? Actually no, because as I have already said, someone else's opinion isn't going to disrupt my life. He's welcome to feel the way he does, although I disagee with his view.

Keep rolling those eyes honey, you're the only one making a fool of yourself :bigclap:

Oh, and calling me "gurl" really doesn't offend me either, but I appreciate you again showcasing your own insecurity about anything effeminate :yeah: Learn to accept yourself, and you will have a much easier time accepting others without worrying that how you act is going to be judged as "too gay". We wouldn't want bigots to think you're one of those evil yucky girly-men :lol: I'd much rather be myself, than a puppet to how others want me to be :yeah:

Ok, this is too much. I say "you go gurl" jokingly all the time, both ironically and sarcastically. I say it to my my mom, my siblings, my friends of whatever sex and sexuality. Showcasing my insecurity about anything effeminite? WTF? :lol:

As for DaMamaJama, you don't agree with his views and it doesn't disrupt you life yet you call him schizofrenic. Is that being acceptant and tollerant? No, seriously tell me, because apparently we have different views on what these adjectives mean. I don't see how offending someone is better than cringing.

Apart from that, I refuse to keep debating with people who's only last resource in a conversation is offending me, implying that I haven't accepted myself and that I'm a puppet. I would never dream of saying that directly to any one of you, because I don't know you. And you really don't know me and have absolutely no way of saying that. Pretty much anyone who disagrees with you can't "accept" themselves and are big puppets. Yeah, great way of thinking! :yeah: Talk about fascist mentality.
So, in order to not be a puppet, I have to be effeminite or completely and uncircumstantially stand by those who are. Yuh. :weirdo:

Mind your own business and keep being a hypocrite, preaching tollerance and then verbally offending people personally when you hit a wall. :)

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:13 PM
Why I don't know, I'm also annoyed by ppl who swear all the time, is that ok with you? I think some of you are going WAAAY out of the definition of homophobia. Darop can cringe at whoever the hell he wants and that wouldn't make him a homophobe. The only think that would make him a homophobe is cringing at the concept of someone being sexually attracted to another person of the same sex.

I really don't get why this is so hard to understand. If I dislike 10% of black people I meet for reasons different from the fact that they are black, does that make me a racist? Does that automatically mean I think that blacks are inferior and shouldn't have civil rights and bla bla bla??? No. It means I don't enjoy the company of that 10% for whatever reason AND they're black, not I don't enjoy their company BECAUSE they're black. Sheesh.

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:18 PM
I really don't get why this is so hard to understand. If I dislike 10% of black people I meet for reasons different from the fact that they are black, does that make me a racist? Does that automatically mean I think that blacks are inferior and shouldn't have civil rights and bla bla bla??? No. It means I don't enjoy the company of that 10% for whatever reason AND they're black, not I don't enjoy their company BECAUSE they're black. Sheesh.

:lol: I know, such a simple thing to understand. To me, the fact that some ppl here instantly made a connection between effeminate behavior and gay men is closer to the actual definition of homophobia than what you did.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:19 PM
Ok, this is too much. I say "you go gurl" jokingly all the time, both ironically and sarcastically. I say it to my my mom, my siblings, my friends of whatever sex and sexuality. Showcasing my insecurity about anything effeminite? WTF? :lol:

Apart from that, I refuse to keep debating with people who's only last resource in a conversation is offending me, implying that I haven't accepted myself and that I'm a puppet. I would never dream of saying that directly to any one of you, because I don't know you. And you really don't know me and have absolutely no way of saying that. Pretty much anyone who disagrees with you can't "accept" themselves and are big puppets. Yeah, great way of thinking! :yeah: Talk about fascist mentality.
So, in order to not be a puppet, I have to be effeminite or completely and uncircumstantially stand by those who are. Yuh. :weirdo:

Mind your own business and keep being a hypocrite, preaching tollerance and then verbally offending people personally when you hit a wall. :)

I bet you'd never dream of saying to an effeminate man that they make you cringe to their face either though, because you really don't know them - Yet you're still able to make an assumption that they're all just putting on an act, and that you have absolutely nothing that could possibly relate to their life :lol: Before you start calling others hypocrites, look at your own comments and actions that incited this entire debate here.

FleetSeb
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:21 PM
I think you misinterpreted the point of the post you replied to - My comments were not judging or insulting masculinity by any means, my response was to the term "straight-acting". It's a word that drives me crazy, because I feel that gay men should be able to exude their own masculinity without it being called "straight-acting". No judgment at all against masculinity, more a wish that we not have to associate it as something that only a heterosexual man can be.

I like you, have friends of all gender, sexuality, religion, race - I enjoy my friendships with different people because we all have different things that bring us together in spite of our differences. Likewise, we all have our differences in spite of the things we have in common at face value. I am a gay male, and bottom line is that I am proud of who I am as a person above my sexual preferences or anything else that is a facet of what makes me who I am. My friends and my family know me well enough to know that I am a lot more than just a gay man, and those who do not are not of any particular concern to my day to day life.

Okay fair enough :) I think I understand better now what you meant so thanks for the response.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:24 PM
Why I don't know, I'm also annoyed by ppl who swear all the time, is that ok with you? I think some of you are going WAAAY out of the definition of homophobia. Darop can cringe at whoever the hell he wants and that wouldn't make him a homophobe. The only think that would make him a homophobe is cringing at the concept of someone being sexually attracted to another person of the same sex.

You really don't know why something annoys you? :confused:

égalité
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:31 PM
"GoDokic's friends dislike effeminate gay men because they think it's abnormal for men to act like that, which is so obviously a homophobic viewpoint that I can't even believe it's being debated here"

That was your statement, You said disiliking effeminate men is homophobic? The last time I checked, homophobic meant having prejudice against homosexual ppl, not effeminate men, you're the one who made that association. :rolleyes:

over the top effemninate men sometimes annoy me too, are you calling me a homophobe?

Oh PLEASE. If an effeminate straight male gets beat up for how he acts, are you claiming that's not a homophobic act? :unsure:

Apoleb
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:33 PM
I bet you'd never dream of saying to an effeminate man that they make you cringe to their face either though, because you really don't know them - Yet you're still able to make an assumption that they're all just putting on an act, and that you have absolutely nothing that could possibly relate to their life :lol: Before you start calling others hypocrites, look at your own comments and actions that incited this entire debate here.

You really don't need to offend him in order to make your point. :o

I don't think his comment is a big deal anyway. 'Very effiminate' men make him cringe. You can't expect everyone to like all character traits, and this is just a character trait.

Over the top mannerisms annoy me on both men and women. They are called "mannerisms" for a reason, and there is an exact word for it in colloquial Lebanese that I don't think it has an equivalent in US colloquial language. And it's just that: over the top mannerisms. I do appreciate femininity in men anyway. It shows a more vulnerable side and sometimes also a more confident side.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 09:50 PM
I bet you'd never dream of saying to an effeminate man that they make you cringe to their face either though, because you really don't know them - Yet you're still able to make an assumption that they're all just putting on an act, and that you have absolutely nothing that could possibly relate to their life :lol: Before you start calling others hypocrites, look at your own comments and actions that incited this entire debate here.

My "dislike" of most people like this is based on experience. I met many of them, didn't appreciate their company, learned to recognize them. I have a friend who is effeminate, but he isn't part of the group I am talking about in this thread: I get along with him very well, and it's as if he's a friend who's a girl, but in a guy's body. No problem with that.

And no, I don't tell them to their face that they make me cringe, because there's no need for that, because until they don't encroach upon my rights they can do whatever they want with themselves. I simply do not associate with them. I never said that they're ALL putting on an act. I don't know why or how you made that assumption. I said that some are over the top, and the fact that those who are like that are often identified with gay culture annoys me deeply. But the effeminate men don't annoy me any more than ditsy blondes, the big macho guys who say that women can't get enough of them, people who try as hard as possible to come off as "artsy", etc.. etc..

But when I say I'm annoyed by a certain type of person, I don't feel the need to make a list of ALL the people that annoy me just to prove I'm not intollerant: you know, there's something called "benefit of the doubt", but everyone immediately jumped on my back, called me homophobe, self-loathing, and then you with the whole "can't accept yourself - puppet" crap. Please.

Apoleb
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:00 PM
Oh PLEASE. If an effeminate straight male gets beat up for how he acts, are you claiming that's not a homophobic act? :unsure:

If his attackers knew that he's straight? No not really. It's not homophobic, it's femophobia and it could be promoted by both straight or homosexual men. :shrug: And that's an important distinction to make.

égalité
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:07 PM
If his attackers knew that he's straight? No not really. It's not homophobic, it's femophobia and it could be promoted by both straight or homosexual men. :shrug: And that's an important distinction to make.

No, not if the attackers know he's straight.

But even if they did, I bet the attackers would explain their actions by something along the lines of "he was acting like a queer."

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:09 PM
Oh PLEASE. If an effeminate straight male gets beat up for how he acts, are you claiming that's not a homophobic act? :unsure:

Oxford dictionary:

HOMOPHOBIA: an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.
HOMOSEXUAL: (noun) a person who is sexually attracted to people of their own sex.

I see no mention of effeminate actions, nor should there be.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:12 PM
No, not if the attackers know he's straight.

But even if they did, I bet the attackers would explain their actions by something along the lines of "he was acting like a queer."

I can't understand if this post was sarcastic or not, but if it wasn't..... you pretty much proved one of my points. They beat him up for the way he way he was acting (which is stereotypically connected to homosexuality), not because he liked penises. That's still a horrible thing, but can you understand what I've been getting at?

Stamp Paid
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:19 PM
I disagree with the last part because what alot of straight guys dislike about gay men is not in fact who they are physically attracted to, but rather the feminine over the top behavior they actually associate with all gay men. If those ignorant ppl actually knew that gay men doesn't necessarely equal feminine, high voice, women's clothes etc. etc. I think they might stop putting all gay men in the same basket and be a little more open.Thats not true. I know several "straight acting" gay men who have been totally stigmatized once they were honest about their sexuality because their straight friends felt like they were 'tricked'. They would match rather see a feminine gay guy because they know what to expect beforehand, as opposed to a straight acting gay guy who gets close to them and then blindsides them by being gay.

The heart of the issue is people either have an issue with gay people, or they don't. Degree of masculinity is something that only gays think about. In many straight people's eyes, a fag is a fag whether he is masculine or not, and thats the attitude that needs to change. Pandering to the heterosexual majority by coming off as "straight" as possible for acceptance is misguided, and is not going to gain further acceptance for all gay people. Do you know how many hate crimes have happened against "straight acting" gay men whos sexuality was revealed?

People need to be accepted and celebrated for who they are, period. Anything less is not good enough.

Apoleb
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:27 PM
No, not if the attackers know he's straight.

But even if they did, I bet the attackers would explain their actions by something along the lines of "he was acting like a queer."

OK, but that still doesn't really point out whether they hate him simply because of his effiminate characteristics or whether they hate him because of the association they draw between femininity and homosexuality.

I think it's useful to make the distinction between the two, and I think they can exist independent of each other even though they frequently confound. There's such a thing in my view as "masculine values" independent of sexual orientation. It was also apparent in Greek culture at some stages (for example, The Sacred Band of Thebes).

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:48 PM
You really don't need to offend him in order to make your point. :o

I don't think his comment is a big deal anyway. 'Very effiminate' men make him cringe. You can't expect everyone to like all character traits, and this is just a character trait.

Over the top mannerisms annoy me on both men and women. They are called "mannerisms" for a reason, and there is an exact word for it in colloquial Lebanese that I don't think it has an equivalent in US colloquial language. And it's just that: over the top mannerisms. I do appreciate femininity in men anyway. It shows a more vulnerable side and sometimes also a more confident side.

Don't dish out what you can't take - I'll leave it at that regarding your first sentence.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 10:59 PM
My "dislike" of most people like this is based on experience. I met many of them, didn't appreciate their company, learned to recognize them. I have a friend who is effeminate, but he isn't part of the group I am talking about in this thread: I get along with him very well, and it's as if he's a friend who's a girl, but in a guy's body. No problem with that.

And no, I don't tell them to their face that they make me cringe, because there's no need for that, because until they don't encroach upon my rights they can do whatever they want with themselves. I simply do not associate with them. I never said that they're ALL putting on an act. I don't know why or how you made that assumption. I said that some are over the top, and the fact that those who are like that are often identified with gay culture annoys me deeply. But the effeminate men don't annoy me any more than ditsy blondes, the big macho guys who say that women can't get enough of them, people who try as hard as possible to come off as "artsy", etc.. etc..

But when I say I'm annoyed by a certain type of person, I don't feel the need to make a list of ALL the people that annoy me just to prove I'm not intollerant: you know, there's something called "benefit of the doubt", but everyone immediately jumped on my back, called me homophobe, self-loathing, and then you with the whole "can't accept yourself - puppet" crap. Please.

Listen, you came in here first with a broad sweeping statement that had no explanation behind it at all. When you generalize, you put yourself in the position to offend people. Your very first post itself started with "Call me intolerant all you want", which gives me the impression that you had to know that your generalization was quite possibly going to incite a negative reaction.

I don't know what your motives were behind that first comment, but when you group people together as a "type", you're not going to get a lot of sympathy from me that others have lumped you in as a certain "type" too.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:08 PM
Listen, you came in here first with a broad sweeping statement that had no explanation behind it at all. When you generalize, you put yourself in the position to offend people. Your very first post itself started with "Call me intolerant all you want", which gives me the impression that you had to know that your generalization was quite possibly going to incite a negative reaction.

I don't know what your motives were behind that first comment, but when you group people together as a "type", you're not going to get a lot of sympathy from me that others have lumped you in as a certain "type" too.

"Call me intollerant all you want" because what I was about to say was not "politically correct", and I know that absence of political correctness sets many peoples' "intollerance alarms" off immediately, even without there being a context. But still, that doesn't justify the way you acted, because as the thread went on I explained my point of view in a progressively detailed manner. Don't hide behind a finger.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:14 PM
"Call me intollerant all you want" because what I was about to say was not "politically correct", and I know that absence of political correctness sets many peoples' "intollerance alarms" off immediately, even without there being a context. But still, that doesn't justify the way you acted, because as the thread went on I explained my point of view in a progressively detailed manner. Don't hide behind a finger.

I was through with my discussion with you quite some time ago, and had ended it in a completely respectful manner. You then chose out of the blue, to use my name in a reply that was sarcastic, condescending, and unnecessary unless you were looking to incite the same kind of response back. Don't speak like you are some kind of victim or martyr.

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:15 PM
Thats not true. I know several "straight acting" gay men who have been totally stigmatized once they were honest about their sexuality because their straight friends felt like they were 'tricked'. They would match rather see a feminine gay guy because they know what to expect beforehand, as opposed to a straight acting gay guy who gets close to them and then blindsides them by being gay.

The heart of the issue is people either have an issue with gay people, or they don't. Degree of masculinity is something that only gays think about. In many straight people's eyes, a fag is a fag whether he is masculine or not, and thats the attitude that needs to change. Pandering to the heterosexual majority by coming off as "straight" as possible for acceptance is misguided, and is not going to gain further acceptance for all gay people. Do you know how many hate crimes have happened against "straight acting" gay men whos sexuality was revealed?

People need to be accepted and celebrated for who they are, period. Anything less is not good enough.

Your first paragraph has nothing to do with what I said, in the example you mentionned, the straight guys were basically mad at them for lying and hiding their sexuality. (which I also think is fucking ridiculous, it can be hard to come out and anyone who doesn't realize that is an idiot, and I wouldn't wanna be friends with them anyway.) Anyway, that story has nothing to do with what I've been saying.

I also emphatically disagree with the second paragraph, that's not how close minded ppl work, in a general way, you look different, you act different, you have different interests, you're going to be excluded. You look straight, you act straight, then ALOT of ppl won't have a problem with you. I've personally experienced the effects of that many times and like I said a zillion times now, NO I DON'T THINK IT'S COOL AND NO I DON'T THINK EVERY GAY GUY SHOULD START ACTING STRAIGHT TO PLEASE ANYONE. Sadly that is just the way it is for many straight men. And I also think it would be awesome if we could change the attitude of every single straight guy. But will it ever happen? most likely not.

Dominic
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:20 PM
You really don't know why something annoys you? :confused:

Are you telling me that you know exactly and precisely why every single thing in life that annoys you does?

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:23 PM
I was through with my discussion with you quite some time ago, and had ended it in a completely respectful manner. You then chose out of the blue, to use my name in a reply that was sarcastic, condescending, and unnecessary unless you were looking to incite the same kind of response back. Don't speak like you are some kind of victim or martyr.

All I did was question your "tollerance". And that annoyed you, because you know as well as I do that calling someone schizofrenic because they say something that seems weird isn't tollerant. And you proved it once again, by finding the stupidest excuse possible to personally offend me and make assumptions on my interior life though you've never even met me.

Whatever. I really don't need to justify myself in your eyes because I really don't care to, so just keep on trucking in your own little world of presumed extreme tollerance and everything will be fine and happy. Keep thinking that whoever doesn't have your same point of view is a puppet or a schizofrenic and you'll never have the smallest doubt on anything, you'll never be destabilized, you'll always be happy, and you'll always think you're right. Just like the brainwashed fascists. :wavey:

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:28 PM
Are you telling me that you know exactly and precisely why every single thing in life that annoys you does?

If I took a few moments to be honest with myself and think about why something has enough affect on me to make me annoyed, then yes...I didn't think that was real hard for anyone to do :shrug: I'm just asking for your honest opinion on the same thing, but if you honestly can't assess that then so be it.

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:36 PM
All I did was question your "tollerance". And that annoyed you, because you know as well as I do that calling someone schizofrenic because they say something that seems weird isn't tollerant.

Whatever. I really don't need to justify myself in your eyes because I really don't care to, so just keep on trucking in your own little world of presumed extreme tollerance and everything will be fine and happy. Keep thinking that whoever doesn't have your same point of view is a puppet or a schizofrenic and you'll never have the smallest doubt on anything, you'll never be destabilized, you'll always be happy, and you'll always think you're right. Just like the brainwashed fascists. :wavey:

Nope, that wasn't what incited my comments back at you, but I'm not going to play games here with you - You decided to throw my name into a reply when I had said nothing further about you or any of your comments, and now you act surprised and offended that you got the same as what you put out there in the first place.

Having said that (and not that I need to justify my comments toward someone else to you), DaMamaJama and myself have had many banters in the past regarding issues of a similar nature - I don't take his comments to heart or to face value, and I don't imagine he does for me either. You chose to make my discussion with someone else your defense for your own comments, when you have no clue of the dynamics regarding that conversation.

If you'd like to continue your arguments by throwing my name into your discussions with others (and with sarcastic and rude tone at that), you'll get the same in return from me. If you'd like to agree to disagree and maintain a level of civility, that's fine too.

Darop.
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:43 PM
Nope, that wasn't what incited my comments back at you, but I'm not going to play games here with you - You decided to throw my name into a reply when I had said nothing further about you or any of your comments, and now you act surprised and offended that you got the same as what you put out there in the first place.

Having said that (and not that I need to justify my comments toward someone else to you), DaMamaJama and myself have had many banters in the past regarding issues of a similar nature - I don't take his comments to heart or to face value, and I don't imagine he does for me either. You chose to make my discussion with someone else your defense for your own comments, when you have no clue of the dynamics regarding that conversation.

If you'd like to continue your arguments by throwing my name into your discussions with others (and with sarcastic and rude tone at that), you'll get the same in return from me. If you'd like to agree to disagree and maintain a level of civility, that's fine too.

:haha: You're such a tool. You were the first to make conjectures about my life, and went as far as saying that I was insecure, that I was a puppet, that I hadn't accepted myself, that I act as others want me to act. Case closed. I would never even think of that. Really, that's pathetic.

Anyways this thread's gotten lame, for the last time, I'm outta here. Bye people :wavey:

Randy H
Apr 3rd, 2011, 11:52 PM
:haha: You're such a tool. You were the first to make conjectures about my life, and went as far as saying that I was insecure, that I was a puppet, that I hadn't accepted myself, that I act as others want me to act. Case closed. I would never even think of that. Really, that's pathetic.

Anyways this thread's gotten lame, for the last time, I'm outta here. Bye people :wavey:

My only comment anywhere along those lines in our initial conversation with you, was my statement that "sometimes what we hate in others is what we hate in ourselves". You argued your case on that, and I did not make another comment along those lines until you went out of your way to use my name in discussion in a sarcastic and rude manner long after we had resolved our own discussion amongst one another several days prior. You, and anyone else, can look that up for themselves. Any disparaging comments after, were a result of you inciting that kind of tone in your own posts about me. Who's the tool?

égalité
Apr 4th, 2011, 12:12 AM
I can't understand if this post was sarcastic or not, but if it wasn't..... you pretty much proved one of my points. They beat him up for the way he way he was acting (which is stereotypically connected to homosexuality), not because he liked penises. That's still a horrible thing, but can you understand what I've been getting at?

Yeah, and I think you just proved my point :lol: They attack a guy they perceive as gay, whether he's actually gay or not. They have a problem with effeminate men because they're homophobic. I know they're two different things, but let's return to the real world for a second. 999 times out of 1,000 the reason someone has such a violent reaction to an effeminately-acting man is because they associate it with homosexuality.

If an islamophobe attacks a person they think is Muslim, 1. whether that person is actually Muslim or not is completely independent of the attacker's motives and 2. no one would buy into it if the guy said, "I don't hate Muslims, I just hate people who behave in a way that's associated with Islam."

Say I attack someone because I hear them speaking Arabic. Not all Muslims speak Arabic, not all Arabic speakers are Muslim. But I think it's a pretty safe bet that I don't just have a strong aversion to the Arabic language.


OK, but that still doesn't really point out whether they hate him simply because of his effiminate characteristics or whether they hate him because of the association they draw between femininity and homosexuality.

I think it's useful to make the distinction between the two, and I think they can exist independent of each other even though they frequently confound. There's such a thing in my view as "masculine values" independent of sexual orientation. It was also apparent in Greek culture at some stages (for example, The Sacred Band of Thebes).

See above.

Also sexuality in ancient Greece was dealt with in a completely different way from how it's dealt with today. There was no "gay identity."

Kworb
Apr 4th, 2011, 12:33 AM
And most effeminate men ARE gay. It's only become a stereotype because it's the most obvious way to identify gay men without actually catching them in the act. And that's exactly what the stereotype is; effeminate = gay. The opposite, gay = effeminate, holds true only for those living under a rock. Far more common stereotypes are gay = promiscuous, gay = polygamous, gay = nymphomaniac, gay = anal sex = disgusting, etc.

I think what's so disappointing and why I get so worked up over this is that if you are born into this minority, there should be some kind of understanding that everyone is born a certain way and you should just respect and tolerate that and not make sweeping generalizations like "girly men make me cringe".

Dominic
Apr 4th, 2011, 01:57 AM
If I took a few moments to be honest with myself and think about why something has enough affect on me to make me annoyed, then yes...I didn't think that was real hard for anyone to do :shrug: I'm just asking for your honest opinion on the same thing, but if you honestly can't assess that then so be it.

Really? I think that's pretty weird to be honest. Annoyance is a feeling, alot of feelings in life can't even be explained scientifically yet, so why would it be believable that you can do it? Why am I annoyed by loud music? Why am I annoyed by ppl who swear alot, why am I annoyed by someone who drives slow in front of me? Why am I annoyed by some accents I don't find particularly beautiful? What kinds of reasons am I supposed to give to those, and why would they need a reason. And most importantly, does it bother me that I find these things annoying, no. Everyone is different and that's just the way I am.