Originally posted by powerfulone1987
Cinemedicction, you said that black people have clothes directed primarily for them unlike black people but you are wrong.Tommy Hilfiger directs his clothes to only white people. It doesn't have a little acronym or whatever like FUBU but it's still all the same directed to white people.
Hilfiger has no direct cliente. F.U.B.U. indeed does. Click me.
Now, not that you're implying it, but I have no desire to join up with other overwight people. That's just me. I was under the assumption that overwight people were looked down upon for their poor eating habits, their inability to motivate themselves to change their lifestyle, and their general unkept appearances. I guess I've been all wrong these past 10 years, hovering between 340-265 lbs.
Originally posted by qubit
Any minority group has specific issues. I don't see how publishing a magazine specifically to address these issues is "segregationist." Segregationism happens when a majority tells a minority that they can't enjoy the same benefits as the majority. When a minority chooses to explore his own heritage without the interference of the majority that's called CULTURE.
Not looking to poke fun, but "segregationism" is not a word. Secondly, magazines such as "Black Enterprise" are indeed a form of self-segregation. In law-speak, it's de facto segregation, which is derived from economic or social factors. You can call it culture, and today's racial double standards prevent me, as a white guy who's proud of my heritage too, from starting ANYTHING that caters exclusively to white people. That's just how it is, and if I tried, I'm a racist by default, because I want..*gasp*..equality! The same equality that everyone that decides to single themselves out wants soooooo bad, supposedly!
Originally posted by qubit
FUBU isn't FBBB (For Blacks by Blacks). You can argue whatever you want about who the "Us" stands for, but that's not going to stop you from walking into a FUBU and buying that cool rapper cap and putting on backwards, forwards, sideways or upside-down.
Beg to differ. Click me.
"Its name is an acronym for "For Us, By Us," a slogan that expressed the founders' purpose of creating a line of popular clothing designed for African-Americans, by African-Americans."
..and yes, it would stop me, and it has, and it always will. I'm not one of "them". I'm white, I'm suburban, and I'm proud to me. I'm not some Eminem, punk white kid who is "mad at the world" because they can't "relate" to what I'm "going through". It's an exclusive Black man's clothing label, plain and simple.
Originally posted by qubit
The fact that African Americans do this in your face is great. I completely applaud their success. It's a reclamation of pride. It doesn't detract from your rights or happiness or honor, unless you yourself take issue with it, which you obviously do.I'm not saying that minority groups don't hold some resentment for being marginalized. And YES, minority groups ARE marginalized by the mainstream. Can you blame us for being resentful?
Why does a minority group expressing pride in their own heritage and difference threaten you?
"In my face..". Lordy. I'm sure they also take pride in the fact that they're commercially contradicting themselves, taking MLK's words to mean absolutely nothing, again, cornering themselves, wanting to have their cake and eat it too. They don't threaten me at all. It's their ignorance and greed on a social level that gets to me. Why can't they just move on, grow up, and try to live as one? No need for gay pride parades, be proud of yourself. No need for exclusive black clothing lines, wear what everyone else wears.
Originally posted by qubit
You are confused, sir. On the one hand you claim that our parades are too forward. On the other you claim that we huddle up and close ourselves off. Which is it? A sub-culture we are. But the perception that we are "submissive, passive-aggressive" is entirely your own.Don't guise your contempt in false conciliation. There is nothing of acceptance in your words.
Only contempt I got is for those that do nothing but double talk. Case in point below.
Originally posted by qubit
You have every right to go to any of the places you've mentioned. In fact, many straight people do -- straight people who are secure enough in their own identities that they don't feel they have to oppress others to assert their own. You just don't choose to go to these places because you don't feel comfortable around gays. Your complaint is tantamount to saying that I should suppress my uniqueness so that you can feel comfortable where ever you go. But you would NEVER consider suppressing your disapproval of me so that I can feel comfortable going wherever I want. Yours is the double-standard.Honestly, I'm not comfortable going to straight bars with my hubby because we get dirty looks. Are you telling me that I can't even go to a gay bar?
I'm gay and I go to gay bars and clubs, because I'm accepted there, not because I want to shun the rest of society. And gays have every right to view you with suspicion because of the history of persecution by people who claim to espouse equality. You won't get thrown out of any gay bar or club unless you make your anti-gay views known.
Firstly, I'd like to thank you for your invalid assumptions that I don't or haven't frequented gay bars. As a former VIP member of Minneapolis' "The Gay 90's", the sentiment is even stronger. Sure, "we" have the right, but in all honesty, are gay bars as neutral as regular clubs? Not hardly. Do you find drag queen/king performances at straight clubs, or do you find karaoke? They aren't as inviting to straight people, and that's a fact. The clientele at gay bars, from my experience, don't mind who comes and goes, granted, because naturally, their disposition can't allow them to be strict. I'd imagine if straight kids that actually want to be there walk in, their company is MORE than welcome, right?
I'm secure enough in my "manhood", but it's a little unnerving when I walk around a room full of people claiming to be themselves, yet they're being anything but. This is all personal experience, just like the guy who offered to "pack me" was a personal experience, as was the sexually deviant gay roommate of mine that was convicted of identity theft, me being the victim, was a personal experience. Yeah, you'll probably use these as an answer as to why I have "contempt" towards homosexuals, which I don't, because I'm socially aware and smart enough to know that one doesn't represent the whole.
Originally posted by qubit
What's the difference between challenging my right to self-expression, and challenging the WAY I choose to express myself? Are you saying that I can only choose to express myself in the way that you choose for me? Don't you see how ludicrous that is? That's like saying you have every right to express your desire to wear red, but only if you do so by wearing blue because I don't like red.Have you ever considered that the wedge has two sides? Your unwillingness to accept that some people want and need to celebrate with pride is as much a cause for creating that wedge as our unwillingness to suppress our identities to make the world feel safe to you.
Of COURSE flamboyance is an affectation. It wouldn't be CALLED flamboyance otherwise! That's the point! It's a challenge to your preconceptions. It makes you question. Do all men have to wear pants? Do all women have to wear skirts? Do all families have to have a father, a mother, and 2.5 children? And most significantly: can you accept alternative preferences, life-styles, orientations whilst being confident and secure enough in your own to be unthreatened by it? Challenge is the mechanism whereby we all grow.
Look, the gay day parades aren't all that intrusive. And even if you find them so, it's only for one day a year. The people in the parade are not going to come to your home, or any place other than that designated for the parade, and force you to watch them. If you're uncomfortable or not ready to be challenged, then just DON'T WATCH.
Do all men have to wear pants? No. On the same token, why do they feel the need to wear skirts? There's no point, other than to be different, while, of course, claiming they're "unique". With that, you make it sound like publically displaying your homosexuality in some outrageous way is just to be showy, and not about pride.
Couldn't you get the same message across a lot stronger if homosexuals had a parade IN NORMAL DRESS!? That way, the next time you're at work, you'll see that in all actuality, they're no different from the next guy! THAT'S EQUALITY! Pride? You can be proud without the eccentricity, can you not?
What's this about expression? Did I not say I wasn't challenging it? I said self expression is a right, but the nature in which its done should be re-evaluated. I, personally, think it's unnecessary, because frankly, I don't think you're being yourself. That is, unless, you were painted gold at birth, wore a dress when you were born, or whatever colorful adornments you so chose to thrown on to "be yourself" with. It's so contradictory, and you wonder why you're persecuted? It's because of the contradictions, and the double standards, and the refusal to MOVE ON AND FIT IN! Is it illegal for gays to be inconspicuous?
I personally wouldn't go around in skimpy consumes, but nor would I put on a cap sideways. But I wouldn't go around hurling tomatos, eggs and unsults at people who do. And I wouldn't call them segregationist, either. It's a form of personal expression, and not a threat to me.
Now now, wearing a hat sideways is in no way comparable to dressing up like a flaming greek goddess with your ass exposed. Also, I don't approve of throwing this at these people, nor did I say that they should be disallowed to express themselves in this way (hell, if they're silly enough to do this, then feel free, I'm always up for a laugh).
The way we choose to express ourselves is our right. It is not within your perview to dictate how we do that. It is your right to disapprove. But it is NOT your right "to make fun" of people who have different practices, preferences, and orientations from yours.
Yes it is my right to make fun of those people like the one in the picture above. Simple as that. I don't mock people of different practices (though it would be my right to do so if I felt like it) , simply those who think that by dressing like idiots and marching down the street they are proving some kind of valid point. Yeah, you want attention, we get it, now go return your costumes to party city.
You only think that gay pride parades are stupid because you can't see the symbolism of camp. You personally haven't been through the oppression that we have. Your simplistic detest for something you don't understand is callous and myopic. You are responsible for your own sense of segregation.
Yes, I guess I don't understand the point of bringing attention to yourself by dressing like greek goddesses and then whining when people mock the idiotic look present. Can you explain it too me?
My own sense of segregation? Yeah, if it were up to me there would be NO segregation, gay people would not need to dress up like women to get attention, and they would not need to do gay pride parades, they'd have the same exact rights as everyone else in the world (marriage, etc). But hey, if they want to differentiate themselves by dressing like fools, I guess that won't ever happen.
Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
Then I'd ask you to explain the lisp. It's not natural, it's another form of self-segregation brought upon yourselves. White kids that spit with a urban drawl get flack too, and for good reason. The irony of it all is people that resort to shit like this always whine about not being accepted, yet, have they ever tried to be themselves? Hardly. Lisps. You weren't born with it, and it's used as nothing more than a definition of who you are, or like a verbal uniform that says "Hi! I'm ultra-gay!" . Of course society is going to exploit it.Personally, I don't cringe, I don't even react. Sometimes, I think that's what they want, and the lisp is the cherry on top, and the solidification that they WANT to be exploited for some odd reason.
I mean, if you're looking to make a name for yourself as a homosexual, become a CEO of a company, start up a business, become a legendary gay rights advocate. Just do it without all the glitter, not only is it unbecoming, it's just solidfying stereotypes, which, like I said, are usually rooted in truth.
First of all, you can remove any hope that I'm going to explain anything to you.
Second, a lisp is a speech problem...not a descision. I know several straight men with lisps.
Lastly, do not step up to me with my own beliefs. Do not enter a discussion at the ass end and then start using others own words against them. If you took the time to know anything about me or the subject being discussed over the last 100 plus pages, you would know I'm no flag waving heal wearing queen. But you know what? A whole hell of a lot of my friends are. My belief in it's explaination is in my last post. The over whelming factor in all of this is that you are either against equal rights for gays or yo are not. You can confuse the issue with bullshit about the way "they" act or the way "they" dress...but the bottom line is that you are either for it or against it. Muddy the waters with disdain for lisps all you want...you're no less a bigot.
Here ya go, my first few posts in this thread.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I think the biggest issue in the question posed is a matter of validity. People want to know what others think about the subject so that they can form their own opinion on the matter..or validate it to themselves. This is the way I see the question really being formulated in someone's head: "Is homosexuality something these freaks picked up because they're different and should be frowned upon for somehow "seeking" out this heddonistic lifestyle....OR..were the poor diluted souls born that way and simply can't help where they stick their dicks?"...which leads to the much more sympathetic disgust known as begrudged pity.In either case, I wonder why it matters? If I am gay because I am genetically hard-wired to be gay, or whether I'm gay because I chose to be, isn't relevant. I simply am. I'm gay, and there's nothing that the good lord Jesus, the lord of darkness Satan, George W Bush, Firey Eyes, Adolf Hitler, Ghandi or John Kerry can do about it. It is a fact. And unless we are going back to the prehistoric days of simply killing those who are different BECAUSE THEY'RE DIFFERENT then it's a fact that the world is simply going to have to accept.
I've heard all these arguments before, and they always seem to fall short of ever accomplishing something...anything. When the argument is over and everyone has lost intrest in the thread, no one will have changed their mind, much less reached an informed conclusion where either side has been considered.
I'm not one of those gay guys that stands on the steps of capitol hill and waves a rainbow flag. I'm not a big supported of gay rights...as they are contradictory to the very goal they are meant to acheive. Special rights for gay people will only set them apart from the rest of society even further. It's like taking two shows and comparing them...like Six Feet Under and Queer as Folk. Six Feet Under has a lot of gay themes which are part of the larger story. Queer As Folk is simply a soap opera about gay people that fulfills every stereotype in the book. A straight guy can watch Six Feet Under and enjoy it, and not even notice the difference between the gay and straight characters...but let a straight guy watch Queer As Folk and they talk about how disgusting it is. I don't want special rights for gay people, I want human rights for everyone.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I wasn't offended at all, and I apologize if my comments came across that way. I read posts like this on every forum I go to, and they are invariably the same from one forum to the next. You have the straight non-religious types who say either a) who gives a shit? or b)being gay is wrong cuz it just is and it disgusts me. Then you have the straight religious types who say, without fail and in no uncertain terms, that it is the work of Satan or God never intended for gays to exist. You get the occasional gay guy or woman who says "we have the right to exist, no matter what you think...we were born this way". Then, every once in a great while you run across the religious gay guy that has twisted what he hears in to some message of tolerance he's discovered about christianity in the country today that makes him believe that people like Jerry Fallwell are really just looking out for us gay people by spreading the truth. I often imagine this last type of person to committ suicide not long after..
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Which is what my question has always been. If I am going to burn in hell for all eternity, then why would you want to make my life miserable now? If I have an eternity of hell to look forward to, isn't that comforting to those who believe that I live a life of sin? A reasonable person would assume so, however I think it illustrates how uncertain those people are in their choice of religion. Maybe they don't believe in it as strongly as they would like to think they do, maybe they still doubt. I mean, if me burning in hell forever doesn't satisfy them, then maybe nothing does. Maybe not god or their church or me not being able to marry my boyfriend. Nothing will ever please them.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
As I have said before, I don't believe that gay people are interested in acceptance. I'd be satisfied with simply being treated as a human being. I have a lot of friends who are "in the closet"...there are various reasons surrounding their motivation. Some are affraid to loose friends or jobs or family. That's disgusting. But, it is life. So...there is a reason that the changes should come about socially...not legally. It all starts at home...and until people are educated, then I can accept that there is ignorance. Even after education, people still do not "accept"...so, it will never truely go away until those people are dealt with.
well capt, I'm pretty sure the thing homosexuals most hope for is acceptance, I have too friends 'in the closed' and y do u think they are in that stage? cause they are afraid that if people see who they really are they might not accept them.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
First of all, you can remove any hope that I'm going to explain anything to you.Second, a lisp is a speech problem...not a descision. I know several straight men with lisps.
Lastly, do not step up to me with my own beliefs. Do not enter a discussion at the ass end and then start using others own words against them. If you took the time to know anything about me or the subject being discussed over the last 100 plus pages, you would know I'm no flag waving heal wearing queen. But you know what? A whole hell of a lot of my friends are. My belief in it's explaination is in my last post. The over whelming factor in all of this is that you are either against equal rights for gays or you are not. You can confuse the issue with bullshit about the way "they" act or the way "they" dress...but the bottom line is that you are either for it or against it. Muddy the waters with disdain for lisps all you want...you're no less a bigot.
I'm for it, I'm just pointing out that there are ways of going about it where you don't have to make it so hard on yourselves to get what you want. Like I said, the wedge. The way you present yourself goes a long way. I'm more apt to listen to a professional homosexual male than a proud guy dressed in drag, barking about wanting the same treatment. Am I supposed to take them seriously? That's like a presidential candidate dressed in a clown suit going on campaign.
As for lisping, would you personally be willing to admit the majority of homosexuals that use it are natural?
Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
I'm for it, I'm just pointing out that there are ways of going about it where you don't have to make it so hard on yourselves to get what you want. Like I said, the wedge. The way you present yourself goes a long way. I'm more apt to listen to a professional homosexual male than a proud guy dressed in drag, barking about wanting the same treatment. Am I supposed to take them seriously? That's like a presidential candidate dressed in a clown suit going on campaign.As for lisping, would you personally be willing to admit the majority of homosexuals that use it are natural?
Trust me, I'm more willing to listen to a gay man without a lisp as well, but I also realize that I've been programed to do so. The difference is that you want to lend more credence to the man with no lisp than you do to the one without one. I ask you, what is the differnce? They're both men.
Secondly, I have no need to admit anything for anyone. I have known several straight men with a lisp. Granted, thats in direct opposition to every gay man sitting around me, but I know it to be fact. A lisp isn't strictly relegated to homosexuals.
Question..why are many homosexuals/lesbians "naturally" inclined to act like the opposite gender?
I never understood how one could say they are genetically predisposed to being attracted to the same sex, and then go out with someone of the same sex who acts/dresses like someone of the opposite sex...
Why not just go for the real thing, instead of a wannabe?
I would think that if someone was "naturally" attracted to the same gender, they would be attracted to all things that were disinctive to it.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Question..why are many homosexuals/lesbians "naturally" inclined to act like the opposite gender?I never understood how one could say they are genetically predisposed to being attracted to the same sex, and then go out with someone of the same sex who acts/dresses like someone of the opposite sex...
Why not just go for the real thing, instead of a wannabe?
I would think that if someone was "naturally" attracted to the same gender, they would be attracted to all things that were disinctive to it.
cuz really ones a willy-less 😂
Originally posted by powerfulone1987
Are you saying you are homosexual or bisexual?
cine's not either, he's straight... I think 😕
Maybe because just because it's not genetic doesn't mean it can't be just the way the person is and the way they feel, which is out of their control, because they don't choose it.
Can you ever see yourself choosing to be homosexual or bisexual. No because it's not something you can choose, you can't make yourself all of a sudden be attracted to a certain sex, now can you?
NO.
Originally posted by hotsauce6548
Why would you choose to be tormented and teased and not enjoy the same freedom as others? 😬
I've heard that excuse before, and it obviously doesn't account for people who don't care what other people think, and those who want to make themselves happy.
I don't know why this thread is still open. It can't be proven either way.
Originally posted by powerfulone1987
Can you ever see yourself choosing to be homosexual or bisexual. No because it's not something you can choose, you can't make yourself all of a sudden be attracted to a certain sex, now can you?
NO.
You can choose to supress or act on impulses, though. It's virtually the same thing. I'm straight as hell, but who are you or anyone else to say that I'm incapable of walking up to a guy that I am physically and emotionally attracted to, and engaging in something with?
You're not me, so there ya have it..