I found this little "gem" in my meanderings. I'd like to see how KMC reacts to it.
I can't tell if this would be classified as baiting, attempting to make a point, or just being, well, stupid.
You can insert your own adjective into the title. I think 'retarded' fits best.
__________________ "His signature loud high-energy approach to pitching an array of products and beard has gained [Billy] Mays a substantial amount of recognition."
its simply a flipside of the same illogical barbed questions which have always been asked of homosexuals. seems pretty ridiculous doesnt it?
its meant to be. i dont think it was trolling, but rather an attempt to have the viewer look at the situation from a different perspective. a few of those questions kinda killed the point though, but what can you do...
I realized this much...but some of the questions just don't seem to make any sense whatsoever.
Do people really ask questions like, "Just what do men and women do in bed together? How can they truly know how to please each other, being so anatomically different?"
'Cause that's pretty stupid. As humans, we find a hole and stick it in.
__________________ "His signature loud high-energy approach to pitching an array of products and beard has gained [Billy] Mays a substantial amount of recognition."
While I know you realize that it's satire, the point you raise is a valid one...though, maybe without realizing it.
I know plenty of gay men that don't know what it's like to sleep with a woman. I had a reputation to protect in high school and college, so I experienced it. But, as I have always said...there is something to the "friction of sex".
Keep in mind that the implication is that these questions are commonly asked directed at homosexuals:
11. Just what do men and women do in bed together? How can they truly know how to please each other, being so anatomically different?
It seems far more reasonable to me to suggest that people with different reproductive organs won’t know how to please eachother in bed than to suggest that two people with the same organs wouldn’t. I mean, we’ve had our whole lives since adolescence to figure out what feels good for members of our sex, but we have much less time to figure out how to please members of the opposite sex: your first time you have had no experience. In stark contrast, if you’re bedding a member of the same sex for the first time you probably already know what works for you. Yet somehow, opposite sex couples do manage to have a good time: it’s almost like the claim is ridiculous either way.
14. How can you become a whole person if you limit yourself to compulsive, exclusive heterosexuality?
16. Could you trust a heterosexual therapist to be objective? Don't you feel s/he might be inclined to influence you in the direction of her/his own leanings?
I’ve got to be honest: neither of these make the least amount of sense to me whether it’s directed at heterosexuality of homosexuality. If they are indeed often directed at homosexuals (I wouldn’t know, myself) they’d be just as stupid and nonsensical.
18. Would you want your child to be heterosexual, knowing the problems that s/he would face?
Problems in this case wouldn’t mean discrimination or anything of the like, but in the grand tradition of “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus”, do you really want to condemn a child to the horrors of trying to communicate over the sex-border? Let’s be honest here: most men don’t know how to properly communicate with females, and I’m sure the opposite is true. Then there’s the problems that are directly addressed in earlier questions: problems with intercourse, sexually transmitted diseases, high divorce rates… then there's accidental pregnancies...
You have a point with number 11. Number 18...meh. I don't understand 14 or 16 either. I think number 14 is urging us to experiment. As in bisexually. 16 I think is....I don't know....
The point is that it doesn't function properly as a parody because while homosexuals are likely to be uncomfortable "coming out", and might in fact be rejected by their peers, the same is not true of heterosexuals. The joke relies on the fact that the question, usually directed at homosexuals, is without valid grounds just as it would be if directed at heterosexuals. In this case, however, it is valid for the one but not the other.
I believe, Draco, that I have a hypothesis on #16. At universities, there tend to be councilling services available: a priority there seems, in my experience, to be helping out people who are, shall we say experiencing new or different urges (this is surely present in private practices as well, but I have no knowledge of those in particulat)? Not sure I can recall the exact term... sexual identity, or something like that. In any case, I imagine that the question may have developed along the lines of a suspicion that if you discuss this issue with a gay therapist, you'll be pushed to be gay.. presumably part of a widespread gay recruitment campaign. Of course, if you're a heterosexual, that's manipulation. On the flip side, then, I imagine someone who is genuinely a homosexual might be (in the same vain of ridiculous questioning) pushed by a heterosexual therapist to "straighten out" if you will. In both cases the behaviour would be unethical when a person is in a vulnerable position like that, and the thought that a therapist has a vested interest in the outcome of such therapy is simply ridiculous.
I have to say that you've made a stupid point by trying to say that the points made were 'retarded'. They're supposed to be nonsensical, and are specifically directed at those who use the same ridiculous views to argue against homosexuality.
__________________
Why don't you do right, like some other men do?
Get out of here, get me some money too...
What does heterosexual mean? I mean, really? Have you really ever thought about it? I don't think there has ever been a moment when I had to wonder... Am I gay?
And to subject homos to ridiculous questioning like the one's parodied above is just stupid.
KMC Community Forums
Dec 8th, 2005 03:41 PM
