Do we have a chance to change attitudes toward gays?

[demgurl]

During the run up to elections it truly saddened me all of the scandals that came out about gay republicans. How sad it must be to not only live your life in secret but to vote to pass laws against yourself and to know that if your secret openly came out you would not have any friends in the work place any more. It must be tiring putting on the facade day after day.

While thinking about this I wondered if anything good could come of the scandals. I now hold hope that perhaps a Phoenix can rise from the ashes of ruined careers. I think we should all take this opportunity to put a face on the issue of being gay. People can relate more if someone they know represents what they fear or would not otherwise know.

I contend that if we need to act while everything is still fresh in people's minds. We could write LTTE's or talk to people we know who are Republican or anti-gay rights. We need to show them that people like Foley are the people who they came to respect and admire. This is a person they voted into office and who, even though he was gay, put his pant legs on one at a time (yeah, I can hear the jokes now - one leg at a time when the pages left his home - this is a serious moment, OK?) This is a normal human being who they had no idea about. He did not cause their divorce rates to go up. He did not turn his constituents gay. I do understand he did a lot of questionable things but this may be our one big hope to get through to people who we might otherwise not be able to reason with.

There is enough hate and oppression in society without taking out needless fears on gay people. I do not understand why they want to stop two loving people from being together. Things need to change at some point and from where I sit this may be our best chance to get through to some of these people. Somehow the bridge needs to be gapped and we need equal rights for everyone.

[Sapere aude]

1. I think the most important thing to do is to convince people that being gay is not a lifestyle

choice and that a religious reason to be anti gay is nothing but plain bigotry just as it was bigotry for white religions to be against integration in the South.

[demgurl]

8. So how do we do that?

I thought that putting a face on homosexuals may be like putting a face on Parkinson's. It makes it more real to people. But I am open to other ideas. There are many paths that can be taken to achieve one goal. How can we best convince them this is not a choice?

[baby_mouse]

30. Tell them. Face to face.

There's no substitute for being out and telling people the truth. Generally, they will ask, anyway, if they are ordinary , decent people...

Takes time, but that sort of work can't be undone.

Just try to avoid taking offence. Most of what they think they know is stuff they've made up or been told by liars and they don't know it's offensive...

[demgurl]

33. Will they believe you ...

if you are not gay? I guess first you need to locate those who are anti-gay and then you work hard to convince them whether you think you have a chance or not. You will always strike out if you do not try.

[Ms. Toad]

50. It may depend on how you approach it

I have had great success (on other issues - rape and death penalty) by speaking one on one with individuals who have made hurtful comments, affirming their worth (often I can honestly say something like, "we have spent a fair amount of time together, and I know from watching how you treat others you would never deliberately hurt someone," then moving into - "but something you said recently hurt me very deeply and here is why," particularly if I can speak personally to the matter (it was painful to hear that comment about me, my brother, sister, father, etc.)

Can't tell you it works for non-gay folks on this issue, since I am speaking as a lesbian who has been out for 25+ years.

Another place you can be effective (even more so than me) is in public speaking. When I go speak somewhere and the ONLY thing that people know about me is that I am gay it does not have nearly the same impact as my one on one contacts, where people often learn I am gay after they have come to know and respect me for a whole host of other reasons. I think folks who don't have a direct stake in the issue are generally more effective in cold forums (i.e. they don't know me first). Contact your local or state Equality group - many of them have speakers' bureaus.

[Ms. Toad]

51. Absolutely

I don't think any (or at least no more than one) of our neighbors or anyone else I know personally voted for the marriage discrimination amendment two years ago.

Although I would never put down anyone for choosing (or feeling as if s/he had no choice) to remain closeted, my experience is that it is not an issue (or at least if it is they aren't saying anything to my face) for anyone who knows me. My teenage daughter is out about her parents and reports the same - its not really an issue. The more of us who are able to be out, the more quickly it will die out as an issue anywhere.

[BlooInBloo]

32. Bullshit. That's the most irrelevant issue in the whole shebang.

The only thing of ANY relevance is: THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT - ***regardless*** of whether or not it's a lifestyle.

EDIT: spelling error in title.

[OnionPatch]

124. Lifestyle choice or not

to me the whole issue is FREEDOM. How can you go around boasting that you are the leader of freedom in the world and then not allow some of your own people to be free to live as they choose?

[eridani]

126. And convince them to quit USING THE DAMNED WORD!!!

We don't have "lifestyles;" we have LIVES! "Lifestyles" are about furniture and other such consumer choices.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

146. Haggard's letter to his church

Oh man. When I read it, all I could think about was how this dude was taught his whole life that his own thoughts and inclinations were evil and how he spent his whole life unsuccessfully fighting his own body. It would be like teaching people that moving their left hand was evil and trying to resist the urge to move your left hand - your entire life!

It was that letter that made me actually start feeling badly for the guy. Jeez, this is a guy who would rather admit to buying meth than to being gay.

[msongs]

2. only if anti-gays cannot make money off it or fear monger it

cuz for most anti-gay groups/churches/politicos being anti gay is a fund raising opportunity. can't gas jews or lynch blacks anymore,
so the glbt crowd is the last safe group to smear and attack.

and those groups use fear to keep their sheep forking over the cash, so fear of gays is a money grubbers fantasy land.


Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[demgurl]

10. But those are the leaders.

The leaders are making the money. We need to get through to the actual people. We do not need the leaders in order to do that. And as a bonus, they will not have as many people on their side.

[nini]

3. wasn't the issue more of hypocrisy than being gay?

Those guys voted and preached against gay people, yet were living double lives. That's what the issue was more than them being gay.

Obviously you are right that being gay shouldn't be an issue at all, but with those idiots it was their hypocrisy that really got to the moderate voters this time. (IMHO)

[demgurl]

9. You are absolutely right.

It was hypocrisy and so much more than that. Many bigger issues. Things that should be addressed but I do not think they will be. And, besides, addressing hypocrisy will not get them to change their thoughts about gays. But if they see that gays are normal everyday people who you can not tell from your next door neighbor, perhaps they may begin to see gays in a different light. Something has to give. There are people in this country being deprived of marriage just because of hate. This does not sit right with me.

[skiddlybop]

12. Well, look at this

this from Milwaukee daily paper
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=528978

I thought the analysis was fascinating and I wondered if it showed that there was a poison pill inside of the Republican/fundamentalist alliance for both of them:

For Republicans to advance these intitiatives, they will necessarily lose other races;

But fundamentalists will demand these sacrifices to affiliate with Republicans.

For fundamentalists, the aggressive involvement in partisan politics will result in the church attracting such as DeLay, Foley, Haggard, Ralph Reed and Abramoff, amoral partners who bring the political acumen the conservative churches want...or do they? Especially when it tends to corrupt the church from within?

Must these two partners separate for their mutual good, I wonder?

Can't believe Tex was thoughtful or truthful enough to say this...



Marriage amendment strategy backfires on GOP
Posted: Nov. 8, 2006


Cary Spivak &
Dan Bice
E-MAIL

It sounded like a good idea at the time.

Get the proposed same-sex marriage constitutional amendment on the November ballot to drive up the Republican vote while driving Democrats out of office. The plan worked for President Bush two years ago, particularly in Ohio. So why wouldn't it do the same in Wisconsin this year, the GOP brass reasoned.

Welcome to the real world.

"The timing ended up backfiring," said U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, a Menomonee Falls Republican. "I think the opposite worked out this time."

The controversial amendment easily passed Tuesday, with Wisconsin voters approving the ban by 59% to 41%.

Advertisement

But the measure clearly had an unintended consequence by sparking a larger-than-expected turnout, especially among left-leaning college students, who flooded their campus polling places.

The result: Dems scored some unexpected gains in the Statehouse.

"We're very happy," said Rep. Mark Pocan, an openly gay Madison Democrat, "and we definitely saw this as a product of the turnout on the college campuses."

In the Assembly, Republicans lost as many as eight seats, reducing the GOP's once formidable control of the house to what now appears to be a 52-47 margin. Five of the new Democratic legislators were elected in districts that include University of Wisconsin campuses. Among those expelled was Colleges and Universities Chairman Rob Kreibich, who represents UW-Eau Claire.

Democrats gained control of the Senate by knocking out four Republicans, including longtime Sen. David Zien, who also represents UW-Eau Claire.

If you can win by losing, score one for Fair Wisconsin, the well-funded grass-roots group that led the unsuccessful fight against the amendment. In his victory speech, Gov. Jim Doyle, who scored his own impressive seven-point victory over U. S. Rep. Mark Green, also put a spotlight on the group, thanking it for its efforts.

Even Republican honchos begrudgingly credited Fair Wisconsin Wednesday for a strong get-out-the-vote effort that helped Democrats up and down the ticket.

Just how surprised were the GOP bosses by the turnout?

Before the election, their data concluded that Green needed 940,000 votes to unseat Doyle. In the end, Green topped that goal by 36,000 votes, yet he will soon be out of work.

"Usually, if you exceed your vote goal," said Republican Party executive director Rick Wiley, "you win."

So much for conventional wisdom.

The turnout was most impressive on college campuses

Wiley said he witnessed this firsthand at UW-Milwaukee on election day. Some 30 UWM students waited in line to register to vote while he was there, he said, and more than 1,000 ended up signing up to cast ballots Tuesday.

According to the left-leaning Wisconsin Public Interest Research Group, 16,837 people voted this week in the 10 wards in and around the UW-Madison campus, compared with 10,140 in the same wards in 2002 - a whopping 66% increase.

"Fair Wisconsin did a good job of turning out the college vote," Wiley said. "They ended up being Doyle's turnout vehicle."

That's a little much, said Fair Wisconsin boss Mike Tate, who said the first-term Democrat would have won re-election without the amendment.

The campaign organizer wasn't so humble when it came to the legislative races.

"We were a significant driver of progressive turnout," Tate said. "What ended up happening was that the voters were targeted, especially moderate Democrats and independents. . . . They voted against the Republican leadership."

Tate's tally: "We added probably 5 percent to the Democratic margin."

On the UW-Oshkosh campus, Tate said, his group had in excess of 100 election-day volunteers. Fair Wisconsin also had paid staffers at each four-year UW campus and volunteers at each dorm.

"We have, running away, the highest young voter turnout in the nation," boasted Tate, who saw Democratic victories as the silver lining to his group's decisive loss on the amendment.

Sensenbrenner doesn't disagree with the impact of the amendment on driving up the campus vote. But that's only part of the story, he said.

By putting the same-sex marriage and death penalty measures on the same ballot, Sensenbrenner said, Republican leaders in the Legislature ended up drawing the wrong type of voter to the polls - Democrats, especially conservative ones. Those people voted for the ballot proposals but against Republican candidates.

His proof: About 275,000 people cast ballots for the ban on same-sex marriages but not for Green.

What's more, he said, the Republican strategy gave opponents 1½ years to organize and raise millions of dollars.

"It was a lose-lose situation," Sensenbrenner said. "You had Reagan Democrats and socially conservative union members who wanted to vote yes and yes (on the referendums) and then voted for Doyle.

"And then you had liberals who voted no on both, then voted for Democrats."

Intriguing analysis, but here's one final observation on this election that has yielded so many surprises.

Pocan and the folks at Fair Wisconsin find themselves in agreement with a GOP leader and Sensenbrenner, the right-winger whom liberal Democrats love to hate.

Talk about your strange bedfellows.

Cary Spivak and Dan Bice can be contacted by phone at [phone] or e-mail at [e-mail].

[cboy4]

13. Fascinating. Thanks for posting this!

:thumbsup:

[demgurl]

15. That is very interesting.

It would seem they outmaneuvered themselves. Karma can really give you a swift kick in the butt.

[nini]

38. good article..

we do come out to do the right thing too!


good it blew up in their faces for a change.

[RoccoR5955]

4. I don't think so.

There is the same attitude towards people of color, and people with mental illnesses as there is towards gay and lesbian people in parts of this country. I don't foresee any change any time soon. I wish I could be more optimistic about this, but such is reality. I have to deal with it at work, every day. I am a white asexual male, who is rather eccentric, and just because I am 'different' people ostracize me. They don't talk to me, they have nothing to do with me, because they believe that I am a 'nut.'

Anything different from the norm, average people are afraid of. I have tried talking to people about these issues, and they do not listen. It's not an easy thing to do. We do need equal rights for everyone, but as long as people fear that which is different from themselves, we will always have this albatross hanging around our necks.

Just my eleventy-three cents.

[demgurl]

14. I am sorry for the way they have treated you at work.

One of the wonderful things about the internet is that you can get to truly know a person who you might now even think to talk to in real life. You get past the superficial hangups that are so common in the "real" world.

All I know is I can not just give up. I have such a wonderful and loving marriage and it makes me very sad to think there are people out there that desperately want what I have but because of their sexual orientation they are denied that exact thing.

[RoccoR5955]

20. From everything I have heard

They should let ANYONE have the same misery of marriage that heterosexuals have.

[demgurl]

24. Oh yeah?!?!?!?!

:grr: .........:hug:....:rofl:

[terrya]

5. Well, one can hope.

One gets discouraged, however, after hanging around here sometimes....

[demgurl]

22. I often wonder if that is us or infiltrators.

If it is us then we really need to work on areas. If it is them, they need to leave us alone.

[HockeyMom]

6. It's the word "marriage" that bothers them

It seems the majority want gay couples to have all the civil benefits of marriage, but somehow "religious" marriage is the stumbling block.

Why I have always said separate the two. Have government licenses/contracts, be Civil Unions for all, straight and gay. Leave the word "marriage" to the religious for ceremonies in churches, who can then decide by their creed who they want to "marry".

It is fine with me if my CIVIL "marriage" (whatever they call it) of 32 years is called a Civil Union by the government. It will not change the fundamentals of how my husband and I live day to day.

[cboy4]

11. Exactly. You're not going to see traditional Catholic or other

religious gay marriage ceremonies.

Religious groups wouldn't allow it and the way I'm humiliated by the Catholic Church, I'd never desire it.

So this whole notion of gays threating the "religious" sanctity of traditional marriage doesn't hold much water.

Again, when it comes to this issue, people need to use their heads and think beyond what they see as the shocking topic of Gay marriage.

You understand HockeyMom :)

[Ms. Toad]

46. There are probably as many, if not more, gay couples

in the US who have had religious ceremonies than legal ones.

Doesn't mean that the state has any business forcing religious groups to perform ceremonies for same gender couples, but when they choose to do so (as mine did 12 years ago) the state should recognize it in the same manner it recognizes all other marriages taken under the care of that faith community.

[demgurl]

16. I like your thoughts, HockeyMom.

So you think it is the framing/wording of the issue. If we just go with something non-threatening to them then they will acquiesce a lot easier. That sounds like solid logic to me.

[sandnsea]

44. unification contract

Maybe people would get a clue what they're doing too, if they had to sign something that outlined the 1049 federal rights (and obligations) in a marriage contract. Actually, I don't even understand how they can hold people accountable to any family or marital law, considering nobody ever actually sees any of it in print before they sign on the dotted line. If we changed the legal part for everybody, maybe it would be taken more seriously.

[klook]

120. Damn straight.

I'd love to see a move toward civil unions as opposed to marriage, for straight and gay couples.

[readmoreoften]

183. If it's the word "marriage" that bothers them, why are they passing amendments that include banning

civil unions and domestic partnerships. I think there is a thin margin of conservative dems and rational republicans who are falsely alarmed about civil unions-vs-marriage. The majority of people in America-- by about 55% apparently, and 80% in Tennessee-- want to make sure that GLBT people's relationships are not recognized at ALL. Part of this is because pulpits are falsely telling these people that their churches will be forced to hold ceremonies for gays. But that doesn't mean the civil unions or DPs are okay by them-- they just consider them to be the slippery slope that leads to gay marriage.

This whole marriage thing can't be decided by the will of the people any more than civil rights legislation in the past. People almost never want to give up their privilege to be a part of an exclusionary group.

[cboy4]

7. Thank you for writing this. I just think to myself, you know,

they have gay marriage in Massachusetts and the earth hasn't stopped rotating.

I've yet to see any stat that shows married men from throughout the country are leaving their wives and children to move to MA to get married . . . and vice versa with women.
Look at Canada. Things are fine there....people are also getting married in Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands.

It continue to be all hype.

It's all fear mongering.

The question that needs to continue to be asked is, if gay people get married, so what?

How does this truly affect your family and your lives?

You already live around gay couples . . why do you oppose them getting that license that allows them to see each other in the hospital and make decisions for each other.

Someone needs to explain to me what's wrong with all of this.

Sadly, I don't think I'm really preaching to the choir here at DU...even though people like demgurl get it. :pals:

[demgurl]

25. I get it but I wish everyone else did.

:hug: To me, marriage is about love. Allowing others to marry enhances everything. Barring people from marriage takes away from all marriages because true love knows no exclusions. Making exclusions lessens what everyone has. In my opinion what adults do behind closed doors is none of my business.

[Hippo_Tron]

17. The issue will take care of itself as old people die off

If you poll people under 40 they will tell you overwhelmingly that they could care less about gay people getting married. The problem is that this may take a decade or two and frankly if I were gay I wouldn't want to wait that long for equal rights. I don't know exactly what we can do.

[cboy4]

21. It's why I usually drive on the sidewalk when I see groups of older

people. :sarcasm:

A JOKE!!

But I hear what you're saying and I agree.

[zyguh]

48. HAHAHAHAHA.............. ..huh hehehe. ...

That made me laugh. Lol, I am so happy. As I sat here laughing at that comment, I realized that laughing feels so GOOD.

Isnt that stupid? OF COURSE it feels good to laugh. Why would I just now have that "enlightment like" moment where it just suddenly hit me how good it feels to laugh.

This election has changed everything for me.......the last 6 years I have laughed, lots of times, but not THIS kind of laugh. I realized that my laughter these last two days has actually had JOY behind it. No tension, and constant stress, just pure joy at the pleasure inside of a simple laugh. I had not realized until just now what it means to be oppressed. Thats what this election has removed from me, it has freed me somehow. Dont all of you actually feel physically lighter?

The last 6 years must be in a small way what its like to live in an occupied country. I know having soldiers and guns around everyday is much different, but I mean the feeling that your not free and that the country you belong to isnt really your country anymore. We had basically had our right to free speech taken away as the constant yelling of the other side and the instant attacks if you expressed any sort of idea that wasnt 100% in step with the Republican party line. We DONT have a free press anymore. The corporations that own the various media outlets have had literally billions of dollars at stake in various forms of legislation in front of the Republican Congress, so I DO understand why the free press became the Republican press. It doesnt excuse it, but the Republican congress is 99% to blame for that as well. When the Bush admin budgets something like 2 billions dollars for PR and we find out that supposedly non-partisan reporters have been on the payroll shilling for the party line........how many more reporters have been making a little extra from Repub programs?

I could go on and on, but you all what happened the last 6 years as well as me. Some probably more so because I did shut-up and found it easier to just keep my mouth shut. But some of you (bless your souls) wouldnt quite down for anything, and you were attacked every day of the last 6 years. Thank you for that, and the example you set. The best way to say thanks I guess is this: I have learned from your example, and I will NEVER be afraid to speak the truth in my heart to anyone ever again. I will always have the knowledge that many of you refused to be quite to serve as my shield if speaking truth ever again turns dangerous or scary.

So I was thinking about the media being on the Bush payroll thing, and thought well, I could always write my congressman and ask them to investigate.........and right when I started to give the accustomed sarcastic snort of derision I am used to giving when having thought like those over the last 6 years, my heart skipped a beat. I said outload, rather loudly, Holy crap! I CAN write my congressman and the CAN investigate now. ROFL.......that was weird experience because the sudden 5 second fit of heart rending bawling that hit me when I realized that just as suddenly mixed with the most beautiful pure laughter that just came in waves....it was incredible....still is

So, I think we should "officially" call Nov 7th, 2006 American Freedom Day. Im having my t-shirt made as soon as I post this.

Thanks for the laugh, I love laughing these days.....it is such a wonderful wonderful feeling!

[cboy4]

53. I'm happy I made you laugh. I, as well, have not felt this good in

quite a long time.

Although, while I'm no longer with a minority party :):party:, I'm still a minority fighting for basic equal rights. :cry:

I hope our victory paves a road to change.

[zyguh]

57. I so didnt mean to take away from this serious discussion

Either. I probably should have posted that on a different thread....so I am sorry if my joyful little post seemed strange or out of place to anyone here.

[cboy4]

63. lol. It appeared out of place, but all of us are celebrating our victory,

so I think it was perfectly fine that you wanted to share your individual joy! :)

[Nicole]

64. LOL

:rofl:

[Maven]

84. ...

:rofl:

:spank:

[Odin2005]

29. Exactly, when right-wing boomers start dying it will become less of an issue.

[demgurl]

31. I do not think gays should have to wait until all the old people die off.

Not that you were suggesting they should. I just think some action is better than no action. It is so easy to not fight for something if we already have the rights locked up. I could sit in my house and be all happy that I have a mate and two kids. It would be easy for me to say fuck everyone else and that I have what I want.

Our party is not about getting ours and letting everyone else fight for theirs. I am a woman and I would not be where I am today if men felt that way about women's rights. Blacks would not have the same entitlements as whites if people did not come together to help each other. Right now gays are sorely lacking in equal rights. We are the party that sees these inadequacies and we set them right.

I feel passionately that everyone should be able to have as deep a love with their mate as I do with mine. Everyone should be able to openly commit to their partner. Everyone should be able to pursue their version of happiness. Yes, that should be a right of some sort....the pursuit of happiness. Perhaps we should make that into a law. Nah, I guess that would never work!

[MuseRider]

18. Yes!

Of course. I have been doing it for a couple of years now. Education is key. It also helps that there are more openly gay people who are willing to take that risk, the more someone really knows a gay person the harder it is to criminalize or marginalize them. So both the things you mentioned are the keys that I have found work. Go for it. The time is always right. As bad as things seem I do sense there is a change coming and it will be positive.

[demgurl]

35. I am glad to see others fighting the fight as well.

Thank you for telling me what is working for you. It helps to have the input of other's life experiences.

[porphyrian]

19. Exposure tends to eliminate irrational fears and prejudices.

However, that would mean gays would have to spend time around ignorant assholes that don't yet understand what's insulting about their behavior. It's an idea, though.

[Sapphocrat]

23. Fascinating thread (I'm only halfway through it).

I'm just going to shut up and watch as the convo develops. I really appreciate you doing this, demgurl (you have no idea how much), but this lesbian just wants to sit back and see what you guys come up with.

But I do have to cut in long enough to say thank you. :)

[demgurl]

28. Sapphocrat......

You have much more of a stake in this than any of us do. I hope you will speak up and tell us your thoughts and feelings. Are we banging up against walls or do you think any of ours ideas have a chance? You must have had some conversations about this in the past, what ideas have you come up with?

I have never understood how one sector of society can be left out while others are given certain privileges. In college I took a psychology class and we had a debate over homosexuality. There were two teams of three people and I volunteered to be on the 'homosexuality is inborn' team. I have never been against homosexuality but this debate really opened my eyes. I had no idea that homosexuality is found in many species of animals. How can someone argue that it is a conscious choice when dumb animals do it?

You are welcome but it is really quite selfish. I want my kids to grow up in as hate free a world as possible. I want to nurture them in a loving world. I want to live in an environment conducive to acceptance and understanding. And it terribly bothers me when I see people oppressed. I look forward to your comments.

[Sapphocrat]

86. ...

You have much more of a stake in this than any of us do. I hope you will speak up and tell us your thoughts and feelings.

Are you ever going to be sorry you asked, once you see the length of this post. LOL But thank you for asking. I don't believe I've seen a more sincere request. (I thought I did once, but then I was told I was going to hell for my sinful "lifestyle." LOL)

I wanted to sit back for a while because I was seeing a lot of non-LGBTs chiming in (which is very unusual for me to see), and I wanted to see it from your perspective instead of through my own rainbow-colored glasses. LOL

Since there's been a lot of input since I last checked in...

Are we banging up against walls or do you think any of ours ideas have a chance?

Up to this point in the thread, two main ideas stand out: Semantics and education.

Semantics, as in not calling marriage equality "marriage": Personally, I don't care what anyone wants to call it, because all that matters is that my partner and I have 100% of the exact same rights you and your husband do -- and, frankly, we'll call ourselves "married" no matter what anyone else calls it.

I understand completely the weirdness factor the religious amongst us have about the word "marriage," as "marriage" is generally considered a religious institution. (I find insulting the implication that all gay people are godless heathens who don't want religious marriage. That's neither here nor there, but that subtle distinction isn't lost on me.)

I do my best to skip words that "frighten the horses"; e.g., I happen to HATE using the word "partner" -- it's cold and impersonal and means nada to me, but I always use it in the presence of straight people, because anything else seems to make most straights queasy.

(What do I call my partner when I'm talking to other gay people? My "lover" -- that comes naturally for many of us, and doesn't carry the sense of illegitmacy I think it does with straights. When my lover and I are finally married, I will call her my wife without blinking an eye -- but that makes a lot of straight people even queasier than "lover." So, solely for the comfort factor of straights, I force myself to call us "partners," or "life partners.")

I seem to be getting way off topic here, but there is a point: that semantics is a very big deal indeed -- especially to people with a big Ick Factor about LGBTs in general. So it will always be "marriage" to me, but you can -- and, to get around other people's Ick Factor, you will have to -- call it anything but "marriage." Which irks me, but I'm not entirely un-pragmatic. :)

Which all leads to a discussion of semantics much larger than I'll get into tonight. But just as I try to appease straights by saying "partner" and 'same sex unions" (or whatever), there are many other words and phrases I would urge you (the collective "you") not to use when trying to drum up support for us -- some because they're insulting to LGBTs, but in this case mainly because they're turn-off triggers to lots of straight people; e.g.:

- "lifestyle" - Strike it from your vocabulary. I don't have a "gay lifestyle" any more than you have a "straight lifestyle." We all just have lives.

- "gay rights" - There's no such thing, any more than there is such a thing as "black rights." Do (straight) African-Americans have special rights? Of course not. They just have the same (legal) rights as whites. So why qualify "rights" with "black" (or "gay")?

- "gay marriage" - Same thing. We don't want some special category of marriage. We just want marriage equality. And that's what I call it: "marriage equality."

- "sexual orientation" - It reduces us to our genital function. It's really an affectational orientation, but I know that's a mouthful, so "orientation" (without the "sexual") would do just fine, IMO.

- "homosexual" as a noun. Ditto genital function, and it's a clinical word that sounds like a pathology. Lesbian, gay man, bisexual person, transgendered person, and collectively "gay people," "lesbian and gay people," or "LGBTs" is better. I don't mind "queer," but a lot of LGBTs hate it with a passion, so I would avoid it.

You get the idea. Stuff like that. If there's ever a question about the right word to use, ask one of your friendly neighborhood LGBT DUers. We even have a concierge desk. LOL

Education: This is where it really all lies: Making people familiar with gay people in their midst. Some surveys say 70% of all Americans say they know at least one gay person. Silly surveys! 100% of all Americans know a gay person, but either don't know they know one (or more), or won't admit that Uncle Freddie and his "roommate" aren't really roommates.

Which leads us to...

You must have had some conversations about this in the past, what ideas have you come up with

Oh, a few conversations here and there. ;) If you haven't had enough of me by the end of this post, go search for me in the archives. I talk. A lot. About this. :)

Anyway...

At the heart of it all really is just getting people to realize they don't hate gay people as much as they think they do. I'm sure you've heard countless stupid white people say things like: "I'm not a bigot! One of my poker buddies is black, and we get along just great! See, black people are fine, one at a time -- it's just in groups, they scare me."

It's a horrible thing, but I bet 99% of all the white people reading this are nodding, and going, "Yeah, I have heard that." And some have said it themselves.

Well, it's exactly the same with homophobes and gay people: "I know a gay guy at work, but I like him -- he's not one of those pansy-ass faggots you see in those fag parades on the news!" It's not Bob the Gay Guy in the next cubicle that freaks out Joe Homophobe -- it's just that in groups, we scare him.

So you're spot-on about making people see faces instead of mere "issues." (Although I'd have preferred it if you hadn't compared homosexuality to a degenerative neurological disease. LOL Don't worry; I thought it was funny, but only because I really get your intentions.)

So, how do you make gay people "human" to straight people without a clue (or a desire to be clued in)? First, that problem is mostly ours: if every LGBT came out at the same time, LGBT equality would almost be a non-issue, because our sheer numbers would make us unstoppable. (And I'd bet any amount of money we account for a good 15% of the total population, maybe more. In Australia, a full 17% of all 20 million residents identify as gay or lesbian -- and you know not every last Aussie is out of the closet. And no, there's nothing in the water; Australia for all its fault is just a far more openminded country. It's not that big a deal to be gay.)

But at the moment, precious few LGBTS are completely out -- to themselves, family, friends, at work, and beyond. (I resent those who stay in the closet, because they make it hell for those of us who are out -- and we end up doing all the dirty work for them, without any help from them.) For my part, I encourage closet cases to come out (while supressing my resentment -- although I'm just about ready to scream at Jodie Foster about now). What you can do is the very same thing: Encourage your closeted gay friends (and you know a few, even if you don't know it yet) to come out, and support them every step of the way -- and encourage your gay friends who are already out to get politically active.

Beyond that, it would be nice if every city and town had a "Meet Your Local Homos Day." LOL There actually used to be a program in the SF Bay Area during the 1970s/80s where a Real Live Gay Person would give talks to high school classes about what it meant to be gay in America. Great program, and the kids dug on it -- but there was so much backlash from the 'phobes, it went away. :(

But there are many, many opportunities out there, and many more to be made, in order to put happy gay people out there for the world to see. My partner and I (who live on opposite sides of the planet, thankyouverymuchINS!) volunteer for any opportunity to bring our specific situation to light; and I myself occasionally speak at city council meetings on behalf of my old high school's Gay-Straight Alliance. And sometimes my face gets on the local evening news.

But the people who make the biggest impact are the straight people who speak on our behalf. Simply put, straight people will listen to other straight people more than they will listen to us. So I would encourage you to seek out such opportunities, locally, for starters, such as city council meetings (where LGBT issues do come up from time to time), and learn to love speaking in front of groups. (It's not so bad after the first time! And a supportive audience can make it downright fun.)

Yes, write LTTEs -- of both complaint and praise -- every single time an issue catches your eye. If there's nothing to respond to, find a reason to write. For example, to bring attention to an issue going on in my hometown, I got an urgent call from a fellow activist asking me if I'd write a piece for a local paper about the next-day anniversary of the suicide of a young gay Mormon who couldn't resolve his gayness with his church. I made a quick call to the editor, who extended a Friday deadline, and wrote the thing in half an hour -- and it was published the next day.

Sometimes opportunities just throw themselves in your face, and you have to jump on them.

Yes, write your congresscritters. Be a pest. And repeat the reasons you want Bill XYZ passed (or stopped), every single time.

Finally, get involved with us. Hang out with us. Make yourself a regular in DU's GLBT forum; jump in, ask questions, and argue with us when you disagree. Do the same thing in real life: Go to your local Gay & Lesbian Community Center and volunteer an hour a week -- even just to cover the phones, for example. Then drop in on an open discussion/social group. Just walking into a community center will present you with an overwhelming number of opportunities to find out exactly how you can make a difference in your area.

And watch our TV shows if you can. I don't mean "Will & Grace" reruns, or "Queer Eye." I mean, tune into LOGO if you've got it on cable, and watch documentaries about gay people, made by other gay people. That's where you'll see our lives, in every exhilarating, and excruciating, detail. Find "In the Life" on your local PBS station. Listen to "Queer Channel Radio" on Air America.

If you're going to sell us, you've got to know your product. ;)

Those are just a few suggestions. Be creative, and actively look for opportunities, and suddenly opportunities will be flying at you.

I have never understood how one sector of society can be left out while others are given certain privileges. In college I took a psychology class and we had a debate over homosexuality. There were two teams of three people and I volunteered to be on the 'homosexuality is inborn' team. I have never been against homosexuality but this debate really opened my eyes. I had no idea that homosexuality is found in many species of animals. How can someone argue that it is a conscious choice when dumb animals do it

Heheheh... It usually goes like this:

'Phobe: "Homosexuality is NOT NATURAL!"

You: "Yes, it is. Did you know that the natural occurrence of homosexuality has been documented in more than 550 species of animals? In fact, bottlenose dolphins don't even form heterosexual pair bonds, but almost exclusively homosexual pair bonds; they mate heterosexually primarily for procreation. And 100% of all bonobo chimpanzees, which are among our closest living relatives, are exclusively, and permanently, bisexual."

'Phobe: (sputtering) "But... But... PEOPLE are not ANIMALS!"

End of conversation.

I never gave much thought to how black people were treated until our sixth-grade teacher took us through Jane Elliott's "Blue Eye Experiment." It was supposed to last for three days, but it was such a painful experience for those of us who didn't have blue eyes, the teacher halted it before the end of the first day.

I hated it SO much (maybe because I was already relating it to my own "differentness," which I've known since the day I was born) -- but I've never forgotten the lesson.

If you have never heard of this experiment, check out PBS's page on the doco "A Class Divided" (start with the link "One Friday in April, 1968"):

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided

Sometimes that's what it takes for people to really get it: a course of study, or something more extreme, like literally putting a person in somebody else's shoes.

I'd love to see a "Gay Eye Experiment" for straight people who don't recognize even a hint of homophobia in themselves.

You are welcome but it is really quite selfish. I want my kids to grow up in as hate free a world as possible. I want to nurture them in a loving world. I want to live in an environment conducive to acceptance and understanding. And it terribly bothers me when I see people oppressed. I look forward to your comments.

That's not selfish at all. You may think it is, but re-read what you wrote above, and ask yourself: Who are you doing this for? Your kids. After them, then there's your desire for a loving world, and you can't stand oppression, even though has no direct impact on your daily life.

If that's selfishness, I wish everyone were as selfish as you. :)

[NMMNG]

87. This post deserves its own recommendation

Excellent piece! :applause:

[Sapphocrat]

91. Thank you, BTFS!

You flatter and humble me. Not that you should stop or anything, but. ;)

Thanks, my friend. :)

[demgurl]

100. Sapphocrat......

What a wonderful and heartfelt post. You are right that it was long but I asked and you answered. Thank you. I need to take the kids to school right now and so I promise I will be back later. You took a lot of time to answer my questions and give us your thoughts and feelings. That deserves time to answer, not some slipshod thing I just put together. I will be on later today. Again, thanks.

[Sapphocrat]

111. No worries, and no pressure.

Please don't feel at all obligated to answer in such mind-numbing detail as I did; there is enough seed in my post for an orchard. LOL

You asked openly and sincerely, and that is a rare thing indeed -- which makes it a privilege to respond.

Take care of those kids first. They are what's most important, now and in the longterm. :)

[theHandpuppet]

101. Fabulous post!

This belongs on the front page. Thank you!

[Sapphocrat]

112. Thank you, tHp...

If I had the capacity to blush, I might. ;)

You're no slouch yourself, you know. :toast:

[ThomCat]

114. A Must-Read Post!

:applause:

Wow!

[demgurl]

160. Sapphocrat.....

I am now home and can give your post the attention it well deserves. Thank you for being so open. It can be scary, sometimes, putting yourself out there for all to see but I think it will help others understand in the long run. People are right, I wish you could recommend a single post. Perhaps you should think of starting your own thread with that post. The more we truly communicate the more we understand and the less we fear. Please think about starting your own thread.

I really enjoyed reading your perspective on semantics and I back you all the way. As a "straight person" (Goodness I hate labels) I always try to show respect to a gay person but am sometimes stuck as to what to call their significant other. I do use the term partner a lot but I do it out of respect. Most gay people are not married and so I can not call the significant other their spouse. A 'lover', to me, does not indicate the type of commitment that people who love each other truly have. If a straight person was talking to me about their 'lover' it just would not come across (in my mind - I do respect what you are saying about you and yours) as a truly committed relationship. I also hate to assume people are lovers just because they are in a relationship. I would truly have to get to know a person to know if it were true. I do not want to be presumptuous about someone's personal and/or sex life. I guess, from a stranger's perspective, the safest word seems to be partner. I always struggle with these types of things because I want to show the respect that others deserve. What do you prefer a stranger call you and your lover?

Thank you for letting us know what LGBT names you like and do not like. I will use the term LGBT from now on. By the way, stupid question, what does that mean? I assume it stands for something but I haven't the foggiest idea of what it stands for. It is nice to be educated on these things. Thanks!

You know, if straight people are afraid of LGBTS in big groups, maybe you guys should stop running in packs like wild wolves!!! I can't seem to remember the last time I saw a LGBT by themselves. Give the group stuff a break and then we won't be afraid of ya! ;) :rofl: :hug:

OK, I get that everyone knows a few LGBTS. I used to know some in my college days but they were not openly gay, they just confided in me. I do not know those people any more and I get what you're saying about getting closeted LGBT to come out but how can you do that if you do not even know who may be gay? I would gladly encourage people and throw my support their way but if they are in the closet, I sure don't know about it. Of course, hubby thinks I am dense anyway. Even if someone acts flamboyant, I still do not make judgments on what sex they are attracted to. Their life is their business, not mine. And, unfortunately, I do not have any gay friends. I wish I did have a diversity of friends to expose my kids to the vast array of people out there. My family and I would be better for it.

I like the "Meet Your Local Homos Day", that is cute. We went to Anchorage a few years ago and came upon this huge festival. We went over to investigate and found out it was a big gay pride fair. There were rides and attractions, etc..... It appeared there may have been more straight people there than LGBT and yet there was not a single protester. Everyone was getting along very well. We stayed for a couple of hours and we all had the best time. My kids didn't even want to leave.

Thank you for giving me at least a few things I can do. (government, speaking, talking to other straight people) I have no reservations about speaking in front of people. In college I used to go to parties where I did not know a single person just so I would be thrown into a situation where I was forced to meet new people. When it is something I am passionate about I do not mind at all. I do not mind writing LTTE's or especially bugging my congresscritters. I am very happy to bug them. After all, they do work for us.

I used to watch "Will and Grace" every week. I listen to Air America but have never heard of "Queer Channel Radio". I will look into that as well as the other television programs you have mentioned.

I will look into the LGBT forum this weekend and I will check the city for a Gay & Lesbian Community Center. (I feel so ignorant that I had no idea there was such a thing. You are doing a great job educating this straight person)

On the other hand, I was aware of the "Blue Eye Experiment". (yeah, there are some things we straight people do know! ;)) I have never experienced that experiment first hand but I can only imagine what it would be like to do it.

I think a "Gay Eye Experiment" is the only way some people may be able to see past their prejudices. But the others we will work on together. If it helps to have straight people on your side, please know you have a very vocal one in me. My husband is not as outspoken as I am but he is also on your side. I will start taking some of the steps you have suggested this weekend. And when I have more time I will go back and read other posts you have made in the past.

Thank you for taking so much time to talk to those of us who may understand but now we understand even better. I hope you have a wonderful weekend.

[cboy4]

174. Nice job with this Sapph. There is no question your sword is your pen!

:hug:

[Cameron27]

26. I can only speculate about this from the point

of view of a straight woman, but if I were lesbian I'd say screw their attitudes and keep fighting in the courts as a matter of civil rights. Are there plans to challenge these amendments in the courts?

These people have got to grow up for gods sake and if they don't, then they aren't worth spit.

[SouthernBelle82]

27. Well sure

I'm a fan of the show "The Hill" on the Sundance Channel. It's a show where cameras follow the staff of Congressman Robert Wexler (D-Florida who was re-elected) and on his staff his chief of staff is a guy who is gay and with his partner and they have a son. One of his staff members (press secretary I believe) told on one episode of how her mother for years voted republican and on one episode they hosted a dinner for the staff and she met the chief of staff and his partner and their son and really fell for them as a family and for the first time voted democratic in a governor race. I think it will take time to change people's minds but look at the state of Arizona. Here in TN the stupid amendment one did pass but also keep in mind lots of people didn't vote because it was too confusing language for them (So at least they cared what they were voting on) and/or they just didn't care about the issue this time around. I think the republicans only used this issue to get people out to vote and for them so they could try to win or "win" but it didn't work for them this time. Remember that people at one time had really harsh feelings about interracial marriage and for a long time that was not legal. That is the best comparison I can think of other than towards the civil rights movement for blacks.

[demgurl]

34. SouthernBelle.....

I had never heard of that television show. Thanks for mentioning it. You really give me hope talking about how many people just did not vote on the amendment at all. I hope since their plan backfired they will not raise the issue again. I take offense at vying for votes by raising the walls of hate between the citizens of this country. That is just appealing to a person's most base instincts and I hate how many people take that bait.

I personally a few religious people. (preachers, priests and wives of the said men) I wrote emails each and every week before the election. I gave links about what the GOP thought of the religious 'wackos'. I gave quote after quote and hammered it home time and time again. I am not sure if it made any difference (perhaps they were too polite to tell me to take my emails and shove them) but perhaps it rolled over in their minds at night and maybe a light went off as to how they were being manipulated. I at least tried to change votes and opinions using facts and trying to hammer home the truth.

I live in the south and can tell you hatred against interracial marriages is still alive and well. Some of the things you hear just turns your stomach. It is a shame that sometimes you think how far we've come only to realize we keep taking steps back.

[ScreamingMeemie]

36. Step one: Our party needs to embrace all of its members and not

be so willing to siphon off their rights as U.S. citizens to score points. We need to stop "strategy" conversations before they start and present a united front in caring for the rights of each and every one of our citizens regardless of race, sex, handicap, age or sexual orientation. It's really that simple.

[demgurl]

37. I could not agree any more than I already do.

That should be our mission statement, Mrs. Grumpy. We should be busy promoting what we truly believe in and need to fight for, NOT what the polls tell us people are thinking. Politics has become about parroting polls rather than personal beliefs. It is really quite sad.

[greblc]

39. No

...not with this generation. So few people today see Gay Rights as the Civil Rights Issue it is. I think many moderates are put off by the in your face attitude of Gay activists. I think the GLBT community would be better received if they Illustrated the humanity of the problems GLBT people have with their everyday lives. I.e. Adoption, Property rights & ownership, Estates and general occurances of predjudice. I am in full support of Gay Marriage but I don't think the current course is progressing the issue. Hostile attitudes just polarize the middle.

[ScreamingMeemie]

41. Unfortunately I see it as not choosing to but having to be in your face...

...in order to even get the illustrations of the problems they have and treatment they receive.

[greblc]

49. I've been on th recieving end of a passive agressive Gay Man...

who happens to be my sons grade school principal. There was a need that concerned a group of children and their interests that I brought to him. He chose to put his feelings on a certain request before the needs of his students and a youth organization that was supported by every other grade school principal in the Minneapolis School District. This didn't make my choice to support Gay rights easier. Tell me what I would lose by saying F' him and vote against any and every Gay Marriage Bill because he was a self serving in your face dick.

Find common ground. Hetero's have no reason to support Gay's. More dependants on health insurance will only cost heteros more on theirs. Hetero heirs will lose property to Gay Partners. More competition for adoptions. Some heteros are just attached to the Websters Dictionary's definition of marriage. The middle has to be comfortable with Gays before anything will happen. Nobody is comfortable with anything forced on them.

Again I support Gay Marriage.

[ScreamingMeemie]

52. It's about Equal Rights...

You don't support anything but your own interests when I read your post above. I'm sorry, but, in my own opinion-not really knowing why your principal's "feelings" were the way they were, if the youth organization was anti equal rights in any form, my child wouldn't be involved.

"Hetero's have no reason to support Gays (no apostrophe)."

Yes I do. I support equal rights because it could be my son, daughter, neighbor, niece, nephew, or even your son that I am supporting. Walk a mile greblc.

[greblc]

61. I don't disagree with you.

But why should the middle support Gay Rights? Reasons? The Majority of them think it's a choice. "Just quit being Gay".

Do you stop your Religious Affiliation because your church does not ordain Gays? Do you steer your child from a Religion because it's leaders are against gays?

Do I distance my self from the Democratic party because it's 2004 Presidential Nominee failed to support Gay Marriage. I don't blindly agree with every policy and decision the organizations I'm a part of choose.

The youth organization I support is Cub Scouts. There are values in Scouting that I believe in. Some of the same values found in the Democratic Party and Most Religions.

Again I support Equal Right for Gays.

[Maven]

85. Then contact the cub scouts and tell them you don't support discrimination.

Instead you blame the gay teacher. :eyes:

[ScreamingMeemie]

88. I stopped my affiliation because my church waged a campaign

of hatred against gay marriage 2 years ago. You can't support it and speak out against it at the same time.

[Sapphocrat]

97. MrsG...

The more I know about you, the more you blow me away.

You. So. Totally. Rock.

[Sapphocrat]

96. Why should gay people support Middle America?

Goddamned farmers out there in the Corn Belt, living the high life on all those federal subsidies -- which the blue states pay for, without getting so much as a "Thanks, suckers!" Buncha goddamn federal-welfare queens is what they is, goddamnitall.

:sarcasm: <= for the sarcasm-impaired

Do you have any idea how you sound?

P.S. Yes, I divorced myself from the Roman Catholic Church because of its 15th-century edicts re gays. I stopped being a hypocrite when I was 15 years old. My conscience is clear. How's yours?

[ScreamingMeemie]

176. Hey Sapph...?

You. Rock. Even. More.

:hug: :yourock:

[mondo joe]

152. Personally, I wouldn't want my kids in a group that practiced exclusion

as a policy.

And moreover my kids wouldn't want to be in it.

[cboy4]

54. Oh, so you judge whether a whole class deserves equal rights based on

individual experiences.

How frighteningly closed minded.

NO, on finding common ground.

Equal rights are non-negotiable.

As for how it's going to cost you more for you "heteros...." :wtf:

Why then should I vote for school bond measures in my community, when I don't have any children???

I'm making sure you "heteros" have nice schools for your kids and playground equipment at my parks because it's the right thing to do.

You should take notes.

[greblc]

67. I'm playing devils advocate.

Part of the problem advancing the issue is the inability to address the concerns of the moderates. The people who will vote for the Legislation aren't the left or the right. You need gain the support of the soccer moms in the bible belt. How do you do it?

[cboy4]

71. Greblc, I'm concerned about you. In the post your structured, it

was something I very easily could have mistaken for a post on a right wing web site.

Instead of supporting equal rights because it's the right thing to do, you rattled off a bunch of nonsense that is no doubt the view-points of the people in the bible belt you feel I should be concerned about.

If you are opposed to the reasons you listed, you're were extremely unclear in your post.

How do you expect me to believe you support gay marriage, when you sound like you don't support anything gay....even basic health care because you're worried it's going to cost you more money?

Just remember many of the arguments you cited were used in the '60's to shut out black people.

[greblc]

72. If I could pass a Gay Marriage Amendment Today I would.

Maybe I'm not illustrating my point well enough. I'm brining up argument from the Right and center. I'm not a lurking Freeper

I live in southwest Mlps. I have Gay Neighbors, I have Gay Friends I want nothing but happiness and equality for all of them. Read my posts carefuly. I'm saying there has been little progress in gaining equal rights for gays. People generaly vote for their personal interests. If you have a friend or family member who is gay there is better chance you support their cause. What if you live in Minot, North Dakota and have had ZERO exposure to any Gay people or issues. You can sway people, but how ?

We keep saying we won the election this week. We'll kinda...the right didn't loose the left didn't win, it was the middle that swung our way. What I'm saying is most everyone here is in agreement that everyone deserves equal rights...amen. Turn off you computer go to bed. I'm asking how do you bring the middle to the understanding that Gay Marriage is a right? You don't have to convince me.

Are we here for a sounding Board?

[LostinVA]

99. No, that's not what you're doing

But good try!

:applause:

[greblc]

73. Read all my posts in context not just one.

Then I'll take notes.

[LostinVA]

102. I did -- and I still don't trust your motive in these posts

They are definitely NOT pro gay rights, no matter how much you're trying to spin it that way.

If we replace "black" with "gay" in your posts, we have a primer from the 60's for why civil rights shouldn't be extended to blacks.

[donco6]

55. I'm assuming you mean Boy Scouts.

Just say so. You're mad because the principal wouldn't let scouting in his school.

[greblc]

68. His school?

Of course I'm mad. So tell me why I shouldn't turn my anger into a vote against Gay Rights? I wont but tell me why?

[NMMNG]

80. Um

The youth organization I support is Cub Scouts. There are values in Scouting that I believe in. Some of the same values found in the Democratic Party and Most Religions.


You do realize the "values" in scouting that are also found in most religions are homophobia? That's why the principal wouldn't let the Scouts be at his school. Would you want a racist group to be allowed on campus? How about if the group was racist against you?

[mondo joe]

130. Here's why: because he's not the problem, the scouts' policy is.

The principal is looking to be fair to all students.

If you want to be mad, be mad at the Scouts for their unfair policy and work to change it.

[Kerrytravelers]

162. So, one principal doesn't let in the Boy Scouts and the civil rights of people

must pay for your righteous indignation?

And, here's a hint, darling, repeating over and over again that you Support Gay Marriage is kind of like saying I'm a Compassionate Conservative. If you have to say it over and over, it probably isn't true.

Now, about your Gay friends and neighbors, I'm just curious if you also have Black friends and neighbors and Hispanic friends and neighbors and non-Christian friends and neighbors. Just wondering. :shrug:

[Change has come]

179. Because your gay friends and neighbors

didn't make that decision.

[NMMNG]

60. So you're saying,

Heteros don't support anything unless they get something out of it?

Heteros are selfish SOBs?

Heteros care only about themselves?

Heteros would let others suffer needlessly so long as it meant they got a bigger piece of the pie?


Is that what you're saying?

[cboy4]

66. Let me answer for him:

YES

[greblc]

69. Not me, not everyone.

But the Majority.

[LostinVA]

103. Wrong

Good try, though.

[Nicole]

62. I disagree

"Tell me what I would lose by saying F' him and vote against any and every Gay Marriage Bill because he was a self serving in your face dick."
What you lose is the opportunity to do the right thing. Blaming & punishing an entire group for the actions of one isn't it.

"Hetero's have no reason to support Gay's."
Yes we do. Gays are our neighbors, family, friends and fellow citizens. All deserve of our support.

"More dependants on health insurance will only cost heteros more on theirs."
I find the opposite is usually true. More people paying insurance premiums lowers the cost for all. Have you ever priced an individual policy & compared it to a group policy? You might be surprised.

"Hetero heirs will lose property to Gay Partners."
They aren't really losing anything, you can't lose what was never your's. Hetero heirs "lose" property to other heteros every day. My family just went through a nasty probate fight & no gays were involved.

"More competition for adoptions."
I wish that were the case. Then maybe so many kids wouldn't grow up in the system because they weren't adopted.

[greblc]

70. I agree.

I'm saying these are argumentive points that I have heard. I'm questioning how Gay rights can advance when those working for it are combative towards the majority who will vote it into law.

[greblc]

74. Thank You! This is the insightful reply...

I was looking for. Thank you!

[Der Blaue Engel]

76. So if a black man pisses you off

do you consider voting against civil rights for all blacks as well?

This is no different, and I find your post rather offensive.

[greblc]

78. I see where your going.

No. I believe in equal rights for everyone. The point I'm trying to make is some people would ....

If a Black man uses his Public Employment, a position of power to stifle the progress of Volunteers and children who belong to a group he disagrees with. Yes that would piss me off.

Hell...Read all my posts in context If you don't understand my point I'll try to clarify. Sorry if I offended you or others.

[NMMNG]

81. If the principal were black

And the group that were denied access to the school was the KKK, would you still be in a snit?

[LostinVA]

104. By his "logic," yes

Or, since he'll probably say the Klan is "too extreme," let's say the CCC wants to start a school=level club. They are the KLan in a business suit instead of a sheet... so, by his "logic," again yes.

[Kerrytravelers]

163. !

:rofl:

I'm afraid what the answer will be! :scared:

[Der Blaue Engel]

82. I understand the point you're trying to make

But I'm not sure you understand what's fundamentally wrong with your example. What you seem to be implying is that gays must behave a certain way to earn their rights in the eyes of those who are prejudiced against them. (Sure, you say *you're* not that way, and it isn't "fair," it's just the way it is. Again, not really the point.) There are good people and there are bad people of all stripes, sexes, and religions. We do not have to be exemplary citizens in order to have civil rights.

Further, you don't seem to be getting that it isn't just one "in your face" gay's personal opinion about the Scouts. If they discriminated against blacks, they should expect no different. It's unfortunate that they choose to discriminate, because it is *them*, not one gay principal, who are hurting the kids. As far as I know, the Scouts are not allowed to meet at public schools in California for that very reason. They're welcome to their own beliefs, but they are not entitled to public money or the use of public schools as long as they continue to discriminate.

Please think about the children who may be gay who wish they could be in the Scouts, or the children who don't pray to God, and imagine how fair this seems to them. And to their parents. And on, and on it goes.

[donco6]

117. It's not that simple.

The actions of the Boy Scouts toward gays does not align with your example.

The Boy Scouts, as an organization, don't believe gayness is compatible with scouting. They have no basis for it; it's just their "thing." So you have a principal who - whether he's gay or not - doesn't believe that having the kids in his school exposed and indoctrinated in that kind of naked bigotry is a good thing. The principal has - well - Principles. And he holds to them, knowing that people such as yourself will shower him with hatred because they aren't getting what they want.

The only "stifling the progress of children" that's going on by denying access to Boy Scouts is the stifling of antigay indoctrination - as exemplified by your baseless stands so far.

[cboy4]

83. You're absolutely correct. It's no different n/t

[Sapphocrat]

89. So, your experience...

...with one "passive agressive Gay Man" {sic} colored your "choice to support Gay rights"?

Tell me what I would lose by saying F' him and vote against any and every Gay Marriage Bill because he was a self serving in your face dick.

My God, that really is what you meant!
:wow:

OK, so then you think it would be a good idea for me to demand a repeal of the Civil Rights Act because I think Mike Tyson is one of the biggest pricks who ever lived? After all, he's black and everything. And he's a self-serving, in-your-face dick.

Jiminy Cricket on a crutch, so you have any idea what you're saying?

Hetero's have no reason to support Gay's.

And I have no "reason" to support Roe v. Wade, or school lunch programs, or labor unions, as I will never be pregnant, I have no hungry children, and I don't belong to a union. Guess what? My reason is that supporting all of the above (and more) is the right thing to do.

Would you mind telling me what your top three pet issues are? Bringing the troops home? Lowering prescription drug prices? Campaign finance reform? 'Cause I'd like to know which issues to stop supporting.

Can you shock me any more than you already have? Oh, wait, you can -- here it comes:

More dependants on health insurance will only cost heteros more on theirs.

Do the math for me. And if you can't do the math, then explain to me why you should have health insurance, and I should die a slow, painful death from cancer because I have none. Be specific when you tell me why your life is worth more than mine.

Hetero heirs will lose property to Gay Partners.

Well, golly gee, didja ever think maybe the DECEASED wanted it that way?!

More competition for adoptions.

And how many older, troubled, disabled, and/or otherwise "undesirable" children have you adopted so far? Any crack babies in your home? AIDS babies?

I thought not.

Some heteros are just attached to the Websters Dictionary's definition of marriage.

And that's the least of my worries, after reading your post. In your little world, it's perfectly moral and reasonable to actively deny an entire segment of the population the rights you enjoy, because you got yours, so fuck everybody else.

I have never heard anything so selfish in my life. Well, at least I've never heard it admitted so openly and shamelessly.

The middle has to be comfortable with Gays before anything will happen.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but you don't represent anything even remotely resembling "the middle." Where do you get these talking points?

Nobody is comfortable with anything forced on them.

And what, exactly, is being forced on you? If you don't like gay people, don't be one. And don't marry one of us.

You haven't the foggiest idea what it is to have anything "forced" on you. You want to see "forced"? You trade places with me, and have every last shred of security ripped from your privileged little life. YOU try maintaining a relationship from 8,000 miles away, because blind, narrowminded, selfish bigots refuse to let the two of you live together in your own country. YOU make the decision to leave the United States, your family, and your friends. YOU refrain from holding your spouse's hand on a walk through the park for fear of somebody beating you to death. Hell, YOU go to Houston and have a landscaper refuse to do your yard because SHE is a Christian, and SHE doesn't do business with people of YOUR kind.

You don't know jack about being "forced" to do anything. You know NOTHING about it. NOTHING.

Again I support Gay Marriage.

You really expect anyone to believe that?

God, you must think we're stupid.

[LostinVA]

105. Breaking down his "logical post" like that REALLY exposes it for what it is

Actually, for what ALL his posts are. Not that we had any doubt...

Kinda appalling they're still up, huh?

Gosh, I'm sooooo glad to have advocated like the poster on DU.

Oh boy.

[ThomCat]

115. Your post is AMAZING!

Excellent breakdown!

This is exactly what needed to be said!

:applause:

[donco6]

116. Bravo.

Excellent post - with no reply, I see.

[mondo joe]

125. Heteros have no reason to support gays? Are you NUTS?

I mean aside from the investment in basic human rights and equality, which serves everyone, there are heteros who actually know and care about gays.

And more dependents will not increase cost to heteros.

The idea that hetero heirs would LOSE property to gay partners is idiotic.

[Kerrytravelers]

167. "Heteros have no reason to support gays? Are you NUTS?"

In short: Yes.

In long: Insulting, inflammatory and completely out of bounds for anyone who supposedly supports GLBT Equality.

[Kerrytravelers]

161. "Again I support Gay Marriage."

:rofl: That's real evident.

[Kerrytravelers]

165. After two years and one day, I have to say, this is one of the most

insulting, ridiculous, inflammatory and, quite frankly, thoughtless and fucked-up posts I've ever read here at DU. And that, my friend, is quite an honor.

[demgurl]

45. I think Rosa Parks' actions could have been .....

categorized as being a hostile attitude. Sometimes, when you feel oppressed, it just sort of comes out in ways in which you hadn't planned. Sometimes it is the cumulative effects of everything you have experienced. Sometimes it is just because you are human and have your limits.

I do think you are right and problems need to be highlighted. Although the marriage problem has been told time and time again and I do not see anyone rushing to fix it or feeling empathy for gays. (not on their side, anyway.)

I totally understand how hostile attitudes can have the opposite long-term desired effect. Being sympathetic, I am sure you can see why it happens.

I think those opposed to gay marriage do need interaction to see that we are all the same. We all want love, families, a home and a wonderful life filled with memories. I am not sure how to expose people to that. I think a lot of people would be truly amazed to see how many people around them are gay. The more this gets out there, the better chance gays have of being accepted. There have to be solid ways that we can help the process along.

[cboy4]

47. Can you cite examples and define what you see as the "in your

face attitude of Gay activists?"

Who are these people and what are they doing that you believe is over the line in the eyes of moderates?

I actually believe the problem is there is not enough gay activism.

As for having to illustrate the humanity of the problems of gays, are you telling me that people are so brain dead that they can't figure that out . . . that they can't read through the hype and fear mongering . . . that I have to show you pictures of a person outside a hospital crying because they have no right to go to the 8th floor to visit their dying partner?

You may be very correct, and if you are, how tragic people are so busy with their lives to not be more caring about people.

I actually think the real problem people have is they believe it's against their religion.

[greblc]

75. Read post 49 #

As I see it a Gay Grade School Principal used his power and influence to make a point. I have no agenda, the 6 yr Old Cub Scouts have no agenda. The Principal did. He advanced his agenda at the expense of 6 yr old boys. His beef is with the National Leadership of the Boy Scout of America. He took his personal issue out on a local group that was within easy reach. My community is very supportive of Gay Rights and our Gay Principal. He seemed to want to make something of an issue that isn't for 6 yr old Cubscouts.

Turning all of Scouting in to a hate group is something that Gay Activism has done to piss moderates off.

People are brain dead. They need to hear stories to create empathy

[Sapphocrat]

94. Gay people didn't turn scouting into a hate group.

The Boy Scouts did it to themselves.

Homework time:

http://www.sdscoutingforall.org/

And, by the way, if you really want to hear a real-life story to help you locate your AWOL empathy, I'll tell you mine. I have no secrets. I have a feeling you won't take me up on the offer, but I'll put it out there anyway: If you want a solid, verifiable, living example of how denying me everything you take for granted has ruined the life of a peace-loving, law-abiding, hardworking, tax-paying, patriotic -- and out, proud, and unapologetically gay -- American, I will tell you.

But I don't think you really want to hear it. It's much easier, safer, and more comfortable to demonize us when we are faceless.

[mondo joe]

150. To the contrary. The principle is being fair to all the students.

For some reason you don't mind the fact that Scouts excluded some kids based on orientation or religion.

It's the job of the Principal to care.

[demgurl]

184. greblc......

Gay Activism has not turned the Boy Scouts into a hate group. I have never talked to any LGBT about the boy scouts, I only know what I read in the papers and hear on the news. I do not want to be in any way associated with a group that excludes certain people from being leaders. I also do not want my children associating with a group who is supposed to help them become good strong adults but they have Ollie North speak at many of their events. WTF??????

I get approached by boy scouts to buy popcorn but I always tell the boy scout that until the policies of their organization change I can not give money or buy items. This last go around I pulled their leader aside and told him I am aghast that a group such as the boy scouts would leave out people who truly care and want to give back to society.

Last month my kids came to me and got excited over an invitation to join boy scouts. I had already talked to them about prejudices in society and that talk included the LGBT community. I sat them both down and explained what exclusions that the boy scouts do and how we can never be a part of a group that would exclude a section of society based on who they love. I explained that love is in short enough supply as it is and that it was morally wrong to do what the boy scouts are doing. The boys agreed.

My decision had nothing to do with gay activists. My decision is based on what is right or wrong. I am blessed and I know I am blessed. I have, for some reason, been given top seed in this society. I am a white heterosexual female who resides in the United States of America. This means that according to the way society works I am only second in line to the white male. I am ashamed of the emerging I-have-mine-you-get-yours-on-your-own fuckheads in society. I realize how lucky I am, that is not lost on me. But you know what? I could have just as well been born any other skin color/sexual orientation/location in the world. The job of people who have is not to lay back and take it easy.

The job of those with entitlements is a big one. Ones who are entitled have a huge job of helping others. We are obligated to do this because it improves things that we do not even see with our naked eye. It helps one person who in turn can get a leg up and help others. We can have a huge ripple effect or we can waste our lives away and achieve nothing. When we are dead that is it. You will be in the ground and nothing matters any more. You only live on with what you have left behind. It is up to each of us to decide what that will be. I intend on leaving this place in better condition than when I found it. What will you do?

[Sapphocrat]

90. On religion...

I actually think the real problem people have is they believe it's against their religion.

Asbsolutely -- with one small footnote: They believe in the Gay Bogeyman because that's how it's been sold to them, while the "salesmen" (Jesus H. Bush & Co.) couldn't care less what God thinks, and know it has nothing whatsoever to do with "morality."

(I know you know all that, cboy -- I just had to add it for the majority, who don't.)

I have got to formulate a quick-and-easy read on how all of this (us, a woman's right to choose, stem cells, the whole kit and caboodle) boils down to keeping the Straussian model alive for TPTB. The only hard part will be keeping it in short, digestible form, without writing a damned book. LOL

As for there not being enough gay activism, I couldn't agree with you more. Oppressors never remember one of Sun Tzu's greatest lessons: "To a surrounded enemy, leave a way for his escape; do not press too hard the enemy that is in a desperate corner."

Well, we've been pressed too hard into a desperate corner, and like any trapped animal, we're fighting back in a way no one has seen since the first modern onslaught against us in the 1980s.

I think we are seeing more activism -- but not enough yet. Not nearly enough.

(Disclaimer for those who would LOVE to turn me in for anything: I practice and advocate only nonviolent means of activism. My pen is my sword.)

[donco6]

56. So, let me be clear . . .

Just want to make sure I understand what you're saying.

You believe gays would be better off in their quest for equal rights by sticking to the following:
Adoption
Property rights and ownership (transfer, I'm assuming)
Estates (same as above)
General prejudice

And abandon the right to marry. At least "for now". Is that right?

[greblc]

77. I think Marriage is the Fast Track.

Ultimately I'd like equality. So much of the hang up is on religion and the word Marriage. I'm saying gather the pieces and the rest will follow. Yes.

[Sapphocrat]

92. No, no, don!

It's all the other way around! See post #49.

I know, I know -- I had trouble getting it *cough* straight myself. But then I discovered post #49, and all became clear!

Unfortunately.

[NMMNG]

59. The "in your face attitude"?

The problem, you see, is that to most bigots merely acknowledging the fact that one is gay is an "in your face attitude". They aren't bothered by straights holding hands, walking with their arms around each other, kissing and even lightly groping one another in public. But if two guys walk down the street a little too close together they're "shoving their sexuality down everybody's throats".

And if some of us are hostile it is with good reason. We are sick and tired of the bigots telling us we are deviants, perverts, sinners, less than human. We are sick and tired of people denying us our rights based on 2000 year old texts penned by old men in a desert. We are sick of having our loved ones and even ourselves fall prey to verbal, psychological and physical abuse at the hands of people who think their religious beliefs give them the right to treat us like crap. We are tired of sitting in the back of the bus waiting for our elected leaders to do something about this and have decided to do it for ourselves.

Would you have told MLK Jr. to stop his "in your face" tactics?

[greblc]

79. Relax I'm on your side

Please read my all of my post on this thread.

I wish you nothing but the best.

[LostinVA]

108. No you're not -- friends/advocates don't write posts like yours

Gay DUers aren't stupid, as much as some people on here would like to think. We've had this thrown at us a million times. It is very easy for us to know who our allies are... and who the so-called "devil's advocates" are, too...

[Sapphocrat]

93. Now, THIS...

...is a post I wish I could recommend on its own. Bravissima, bell'amica! :applause:

[LostinVA]

109. Agreed!

[LostinVA]

106. "Would you have told MLK Jr. to stop his "in your face" tactics?"

I love your posts, Buffy.... they are so logical and to the point.

And, yes, he would have called Dr. King to stop his "in your face" tactics... because, you know, all it was doing was pissing Bull Connor off...

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[marmar]

122. "90% naked, tongue kissing his GLBT lover"

Been to a public beach lately? 90% naked men and women tongue-kissing their heterosexual lovers is pretty much the norm. It only becomes an issue when it's gays and lesbians doing it.
It reminds me of high school, in the lunchroom. White kids always sat together at lunch, but black kids sitting together at lunch was "problematic and separatist." I'm heterosexual so I can't completely understand what it's like to tackle society as a gay man or woman, but I'm African American so I can definitely relate to a lot of the frustration.

[SwingVoter2006]

133. It's not OK when straights do it, either

Public vulgarity of the sort you described is not a big fav of mine, either. Yes, there is a double standard, in that straight lewdness gets a pass very often. I wish it were not so. But as I said in another part of this thread, life is not fair. What matters are results. Do GLBT's want results, or do they want to stay in the present and be mad that much of straight America is offput by the more "exotic" members of the community? For gays to win this thing, they need to advance the "normal" picture as far as they possibly can. The confrontationalists who delight in emphasizing their "abnormality" are the ones who shoot everyone in the GLBT community in the foot.

Oh, and my example is taken straight from a couple I saw at a Seattle GLBT parade a couple of years ago. One of many. So no, I did not make it up. The kissing was not as shocking as the nakedness or dildos. I don't want my kids seeing that. Neither do most Americans, I think. But if this is the picture gays want to put out to middle America, they need to not be surprised when middle America draws back from issues like gay marriage.

[ThomCat]

153. Damn, that's a great post!

:applause:

Excellent smackdown of a double standard!

[donco6]

128. "Swingvoter" huh?

Guess that would put you in the (R) camp, then. But nevertheless . . .

Yeah, gee, if that guy had come and asked me whether he should include the butt plug and dildo, I'd have said, "Well, you know, it's not ME, but you gotta do what you gotta do . . ." But, the fact is, he didn't. So I don't know WHAT THE HELL THAT HAS TO DO WITH ANYTHING.

We're not arguing for rights because we're nice people. Because we promise to be good. Because we swear we will never do anything to offend anyone else. But the fact is, straight people are often the antithesis of all those things - and THEY already have these rights! Why are we held to this double standard?

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mondo joe]

137. Funny thing - you don't even aspire to be fair.

I don't know why you think one gay person can control what another does anyway.

Can you control what GW Bush does?

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donco6]

142. "Tight community?"

Sez who?

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mondo joe]

148. You have some funny perceptions. I wonder if you'd shrug off inequality

for blacks, or Christians, because "life isn't fair".

[Kerrytravelers]

166. How do you know you've had more exposure than most?

Quite frankly, I find it insulting that you dare presume that you are the expert on GLBT rights and "behavior."

This is pure disgusting. You are simply throwing these right-wing fundy myths and actually expecting us to take you seriously.

And, quite frankly, all I've seen you do on these boards is argue, insight, inflame and insult. A simple search on your user name can clear that up.

So, really, why are you here? Because, frankly, honey, we aren't buying what you're selling.

[mondo joe]

145. You're making shit up. I am gay and I don't know a single person who has

done what you described in parades.

The funny thing about life not being fair is that the objective of law is to counter that by being fair - but you don't seem to know that. Or care.

[donco6]

147. If I hear "life's not fair" one more time . . .

What a maroon. The whole point of seeking rights is because we KNOW life's not fair. And that that in itself is not an excuse to deny rights to citizens.

[mondo joe]

149. Indeed. The point of law is to BE fair - not to compound life's inequities.

What a curious stance.

[Sapphocrat]

180. Who's hurting which cause again?

It's not control, it's getting people to realize how they are hurting the cause!

So how does one get you to realize you're not helping the cause of swing voters? Isn't there some sort of Central Swing Voter Bureau that modulates your behavior when you stop representing the tight swing-voter community in the best possible light? :eyes:

"Tight community." Uh-huh. Yep. We gays are one big, monolithic army, fused to a single brain stem.

If you could curb your obsession with butt plugs and dildos long enough to think about LGBT people as individuals, you might begin to understand the core of the entire issue: We are just like you -- whether you like it or not -- in terms of diversity. We don't wake up gay. We don't work gay. We don't play basketball gay. And we don't think gay. We're black, we're Asian, we're in wheelchairs, we're on the floor of the stock exchange, and we're cleaning toilets. We're computer scientists, and gardeners, and caregivers to our aged parents, and grandparents ourselves. We have barbecues -- not gay barbecues. Many of us are vegetarians and vegans -- we don't avoid gay pork chops. We own guns, and we are vehemently anti-gun; we smoke pot, and we are rabidly anti-drug; we run the Boston marathon, and we lost both legs in Iraq.

We. Are. Just. Like. Everybody. Else.

And yet you insist on seeing us as one large, faceless blob -- with a butt plug in its ass -- and clinging to the tired old "stop flaunting it!" schtick, chiding us for our behavior, because, golly gosh gee, you really are just telling us all this for our own good, and you're really, really, really on our side. :eyes:

You think this "the fringe is hurting the gays!" screed is new to any of us? No more than "the left is hurting the Dems!" hysteria is. And it's about as effective.

So put your "fringe" bogeyman to bed; it's empty and meaningless fearmongering. Without "the fringe" -- from the screaming, in-your-face drag queens at Stonewall, to the Act/Up members who stopped church services dead by lying down in the aisles -- there would be no forward progress in LGBT rights. And without "the fringe" -- from those crazy atheist bastards like Thomas Paine, to that uppity Rosa Parks who just wouldn't stay in her place, to that in-your-face Cindy Sheehan -- there wouldn't be an America.

One last thing: You have been butting heads with "mainstream gays" -- and quite a few "mainstream straights" -- for the better part of 24 hours. Who do you think you're fooling when you advise us to make our "point emphatically, with examples, and often"? That's exactly what we've been doing -- and you don't like it one bit.

[demgurl]

185. Sapphocrat.....

I did not see the deleted posts but I must speak up for the hetero side of things. (against what I think the deleted poster may have said) There are some heteros that enjoy but plugs. There are heteros who enjoy anal sex. And, what the heck, I am one of those heteros. (not that it is anyone's business, but there it is) So making out such an act to be an abomination is just a load of crap.

We are all human. We all want to be loved and accepted. We all look for that special someone. You can not divide up people on their likes and dislikes - it is just not that easy.

[Sapphocrat]

193. It had nothing to do with hetero sex practices, demgurl.

I was responding to an extremely offensive post that characterized LGBTs in a way that I wouldn't repeat in polite company.

[demgurl]

194. Sapphocrat.....

:rofl: I think you misunderstood. I meant that if they were characterizing LGBTS that way, they better think again because there are quite a few of us in the straight community who enjoy the same diversions! Not that this is any of their business, but someone has to speak up and say, "If you say that about them, you are saying that about me as well."

[donco6]

140. Thanks to you.

Butt plugs and dildos enter into it because for many underexposed middle Americans, this is the only picture they often get of gays.

Yes, thanks to you and people like you who continue to use this as the depiction of all things gay.


But life is not fair. What matters is getting your rights secured, however you have to do it. If it means putting on a more "normal" face for the poor stupid straights now and again, especially during big public parades and whatnot, who cares?

Again, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I have NEVER marched in a gay pride parade - clothed or otherwise. You're saying that until we squash all offensive behavior of people we have never met, we can't expect to gain CIVIL RIGHTS that are supposed to be ours by nature of being citizens! This just makes NO SENSE AT ALL!


You can "be yourself" AFTER you get your rights secured under the law. You will need broad straight support to do it. It's up to you.

Jeebus, can you BE more patronizing? The only thing missing is the pat on the head.

[Kerrytravelers]

164. You wouldn't be the first to make that guess.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2657190

I'm got the oven heating up. What would you like on your tombstone?

[mondo joe]

151. And yet MLK was arrested. So were others who fought for civil rights.

Was that too IN YOUR FACE?

[LostinVA]

154. Congrats! You were able to fill this post with almost every single

Offensive, anti-gay RW cliche in the book.

That is impressive!

STANDING OVATION.

[Jamastiene]

158. Keyword, "almost"

Yep, he forgot to mention leather jackets and black pants. That is another big lesbian cliche. Of course, I actually fit that one when the wheather is cool outside. You know what that means. I'm offensive to 'im. I guess he wants some of you to stand around and scold me now. I've been bad. :spank: :P

[LostinVA]

159. You're a very embittered homosexual squirrel lover, Jamastiene

And, I saw that video of you at the Raleigh Pride Day parade -- OMG!

[swimboy]

173. Assless chaps!!! ASSLESS CHAPS!!!

He forgot Poland, I mean assless chaps!

But he does recognize that not all gay people parade naked with butt-plugs so he must be some kind of fucking expert! :grr:

[cboy4]

172. Hey, you need to be quiet and just worry about your strap on.

:eyes:

[cboy4]

171. Excuse me, but you sound like someone from the 60's who argued

they would be in favor of blacks drinking from the white drinking fountain, if only they would stop _____________ (fill in the blank).

No, blacks deserved equal civil rights, unconditionally, despite the behavior of anyone, including Malcolm X.

During the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles, it was a small segment of the African American community that burned down buildings and fired guns at the cops.

Do you believe the behavior of a small percentage of the over all black population shouldn't have afforded the same rights as whites had that riot taken place in the '60's?

My point is, if you actually did see someone at a parade wearing a "strap-on dildo....butt plug" :eyes:, then that was surely 1% of the participants. I have seen half a dozen gay parades in San Francisco, and I have NEVER seen anyone dressed like that during the actual event.

And lets for argument sake say it happens. The under exposed Middle Americans you speak of never see that! They don't show that on the news. And furthermore, 90% of the parade is not naked. Now you're just making up shit, please. Nobody in the parade is naked. Public nudity is not waived for the event. People do have their shirts off, but they are guys. Big deal. Kissing? Yup, so what.
Costumes are common at lots of different parades, so you'll see drag queens. Big deal.

If you ask me, there is much more nudity and shocking activity at Mardi Gras every year. Have you ever been? I've seen at least one guy getting blown by a girl! Those straights are so promiscuous!

You know the Gay Pride parade is one day per year. The rest of the time, gay people are your Federal Express delivery person, your dentist, your teacher, your social worker, your chef, your retail associate, your airline pilot or flight attendant, and your district attorney.

There are plenty of marriage equality demonstrations, where people show up dressed as every day society. Same thing with marches on Washington.

Come on. The people who don't want gay people to have equal human rights is because the whole idea of two people of the same sex getting married makes them feel uncomfortable and/or it's against their religion/the bible.

That's the crux of the issue. It's not because they watch a 20 second clip on the news from a parade once a year showing drag queens and same sex displays of public affection....the same public affection you see every day in straight America.

It would be nice to have more prominent gay role models to "showcase" for America, but I wonder why more don't come out of the closet?

The bottom line is it doesn't affect anyone if gay people get married. Gay couples are living in neighborhoods throughout the country already.

People need to understand that this is the 1960's for gay people. We see the many obstacles that prohibit us, but we will not give up and stop. Not until we receive the rights we deserve as human beings.

Let that sink in. Human beings.

And sorry, we'll continue to battle, with or without your blessing or anyone else's. That's just the way it is.

Equal human rights are non-negotiable.

They did not give up in the '60's when it seemed hopeless. Nor shall we. It's going to happen, it's just a matter of when.

As they say, nobody ever said liberation would be easy.

[Sapphocrat]

178. OK, let's have that dialogue...

...right after the dialogue we have about Mardi Gras and "Girls Gone Wild" videos. I'm not saying all straights engage in this kind of shock sport -- but enough do that they make life more difficult for "normal" heterosexuals. And yes, I know it is the job of LGBTs to be smart enough to differentiate the fringe from the "average" heterosexual... but you just have so many Paris Hiltons running around and Britney Spears getting married every five minutes, it's a very difficult task? :sarcasm:

As far as your disgusting visual of MLK, he may as well have done all those things throughout the March to Selma for the reaction he received from frightened white folks -- which, curiously, wasn't a whole lot different from yours.

[LostinVA]

98. There is no so-called "in your face" attitude of "gay activists"

My, my... I'm soooo glad you "support" gay rights.

I've been rather appalled by the huge majority of your posts -- they are so not fooling anyone, you know?

I think you're find a nice, cozy home on my IL... I've ever put in a nice, comfy chair.

*POOF*

[SwingVoter2006]

107. As in most things, extremism often poisons the well water

Good points, greblc.

Speaking as a straight with gay friends and who has had a lot of co-mingling with the gay community via my work in public radio, the one way in which the GLBT community shoots itself in the foot is in taking a hostile, confrontational, storm-the-bastions-of-normality attitude. And this attitude largely comes from the GLBT radical fringe, which enjoys pissing off straights of all persuasions, as a sort of shock sport. Don't tell me it doesn't happen because I have *SEEN* in happen.

Everyone knows how much straights contribute to the problem. That probably doesn't need to be said around here.

What doesn't get said often enough (from what I have seen) is how GLBT's are also contributing to the problem. At least the fringe GLBT's who neither want, nor desire, amicable relationships with the straight majority; especially the religious straights.

[donco6]

119. WTF?

Since when do civil rights depend on someone being "likeable"?

There are plenty of "radical fringe" straights out there. Are you saying THEY should have rights to marry? To adopt? Because they aren't non-radical?

So we have to somehow pass a test of non-radical-ness, and after that, we'll be likeable enough to be allowed to have rights that everyone else already possesses?

Sheesh.

[SwingVoter2006]

132. I'm talking about winning broader support

I never said you had to be likeable to "earn" rights.

I said if you want laws and legislation which advance rights in the GLBT community you gotta be willing to face the fact that a certain, albeit small portion of GLBT's are not as interested in winning broader support as they are in pissing off and/or shocking the hell out of straights, just for shits and giggles.

This confrontationalism is not conducive to rolling back anti-gay-marriage laws. It simply reinforces the closed straight perception that gays "have something wrong with them." Sad, but true.

I'm talking about a minority of GAYS making it harder for GAYS to get what they deserve. Capiche?

We can argue all we want about whether this is fair. I would think by now most gays would realize that LIFE is not fair. What matters is results. Do gays want to secure their rights, or sit and stew over how stupid straights are?

[donco6]

136. This is just a typical RW red herring.

"You'll get your rights as soon as you get those <insert offensive group here> under control."

They know there is no way to do that, so they can merrily proceed in their bigotry in perpetuity.

Not that you would be in that camp. Because I know you support gay rights all the way.

[mondo joe]

139. I'll make you a deal - I'll control the behavior of that minority of gays right

after you control the minority of straights who are severely homphobic.

Deal?

[SwingVoter2006]

143. See post #141

[justiceischeap]

131. Um okay

Just so you know, those of us in the GLBT community who are considered "normal" do discuss the fringe element and how it can hurt the cause. However, the piece of the puzzle you are missing is this... It is the media who focuses on those people. Instead of focusing on the so-called "normal" segment of the GLBT community, they go for the sensational.

I can honestly say that I wish these folks would tone it down but, and this is important so pay attention, just because I don't agree with how they express themselves doesn't mean I have the right to alienate them or say they deserve not to enjoy life the way they want to. Same goes for my attitude towards straight people who take their freedoms for granted.

I'm sure during the civil rights era there were groups of black people who wished the Panthers would just go away, that they were making things too difficult for the rest of them. When in fact it is that very attitude from within one's own community that does the harm. If we, the GLBT can't or won't accept our "fringe" groups, how can we ask or expect anyone else to? Got news for anyone who thinks "fringe" hurts anything, these elements are in all social walks of life but you don't hear straight folks damning their fringe groups because guess what, you already have all your equal rights.

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kerrytravelers]

169. So, is it you who gets to define "normality?"

Because, if I were the judge, you sure wouldn't fall under my definition.

[swimboy]

175. But we ARE fucking normal, Blanche! We ARE FUCKING NORMAL!!!

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

177. O.M.G.

:spray:

I love you.

:hug:

[Sapphocrat]

182. You get back exactly what you put out.

demgurl got back exactly what she put out: A thoughtful, considerate, mutually-respectful desire to work together on an issue that reaches far beyond simple equal rights, and is at the core of that elusive ideal called "peace".

You think we enjoy "pissing off straights of all persuasions," eh? How deluded. I bet you didn't read a word of my reply to demgurl, and I bet you won't:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2665838&mesg_id=2671492

In the meantime, you have received exactly what you have put out, measure for measure.

Mirrors are cruel, aren't they?


On edit: typo

[justiceischeap]

40. Education is Key

We need to show them that people like Foley are the people who they came to respect and admire.

The first step in educating people is discerning between gay and pedophile. I don't want people like Foley lumped into my "lifestyle," that's been going on for too many years now and it needs to stop. Foley is the reason why people think all gay men are pedophiles and predators and that needs to stop. Foley may be gay (which I seriously doubt) but he's also a pedophile and I don't want his face representing my "people" or cause. Foley and people like him are the reason this movement has so many problems being seen as sympathetic.

We've come a long way and for some it isn't happening quick enough but the fact that it's a national topic for debate is a great first step. As a lesbian, I for one will be glad when our community is no longer used to divide voters on real issues or is used as a fear tactic. It's tiring to see the division in my own party let alone the republican party and fundies.

I think when uninformed people learn that we aren't after their wives, husbands, children, pets, etc. the sooner this will stop being a debate and real work will be done.

That's just my perspective of the whole thing from where I sit.

[demgurl]

43. I really respect your perspective....

and I know there is usually a but after a statement like that so here it is....but there is no 'but'! Thank you for bringing another angle to this problem. I had also thought of that angle. I believe with all my heart that that guy is a pedophile. I do not believe they ever came out with solid evidence that he ever actually had sex with an underage page. I believe he was careful to make sure they advanced to the age of consent before doing anything. That being said, it is enough for me that he used the congress as his stomping grounds to scope out possibilities for his sex life.

I respect the life gays lead and I do not want to damage that in any way. I was concerned with that angle when I posted but I also felt that the right was probably given the old spin about how there was no proof and that Foley may be gay but never acted improperly. I am not sure about the spin but I know they always do spin and I know that it was so close to elections that they would be spinning very hard. At this point I believe most republicans think Foley may be gay but he never did anything illegal. Even so, I do not want to plant the seed of hatred any more than it already is. Foley was but one example. There are many suspected and a few confirmed who are right wing politicians. These politicians have not (YET) been caught in a scandal and they can he held up as an example of someone they can relate to and who is gay.

I think your perspective is right on. I am really pleased that people in this thread can speak without attacking each other. The amount of politeness and respect here is overwhelming. I wish every thread was this friendly. Thank you.

[justiceischeap]

113. I'm glad this discussion is taking place

And it's being done in a civilized manner. Too often this issue is polarizing and people get heated one way or another. In my life I've just become accustomed to being tread on... How sad is that?

[demgurl]

186. That is sad.

No one ever deserves to be tread on. :hug: :hug: :hug: Keep your chin up and don't let them get you down.

[Withywindle]

42. Yes, of course we do...

...I think it happens every day. I think it happens every time somebody's beloved friend or family member comes out, every time somebody who's never met a gay person before does and learns that his/her fears and prejudices aren't justified, every time some brave person stands up in school or church or work or at the bar and challenges unthinking homophobic crap being parroted mindlessly.

And I think there has been a sea change in this country over the last two decades, but it is gradual, and there are going to be those who will never change until they die off, and there are going to be those who profit by peddling hate no matter what we do. We mustn't pander to those people. The trick is to figure out who is open to reason and human empathy, and treat those people with respect--without backing down and without waffling on our own position that "Life, Liberty, **and the Pursuit of Happiness"** is for EVERYONE, which is really not a particularly complicated or "nuanced" position, now is it?

[tyedyeto]

58. Surprisingly, AZ voted down the 'gay marriage' proposition

But down this way in the desert, they don't like 'brown people' (Hispanics) more than they don't like gays. All the propositions about 'illegals' passed overwhelmingly.

[NMMNG]

65. Attitudes towards gays have changed over time

And they will continue to do so. However it will be, as it has always been, an arduous process consisting of a step or two forward and several steps back. America's RW religious revival has put a massive stumbling block in our way and we need to get around that.

The battle is far from over, and we need to keep fighting no matter what.

[demgurl]

187. BTFS....

all of us on every level need to be fighting. I understand the obstacles that the fundies put up but with all of us fighting to educate, together, we can really bring more people around. I truly believe we can make a difference.

[wholetruth00]

95. One would think that after so many of "darlings of the RW and Christian right

were outed that people would realize that until they found out about a person being gay, they thought highly of that person. And since they didn't know or couldn't tell a person was gay until the person was "outed" they would come to their senses and realize that their phobia and hate against gays is purely ridiculous. But there I go again believe that people can think.

[demgurl]

188. Shame on you, wholetruthOO.....

Not only are you saying that people should think but it would appear you want them to use their common sense and logic. How can they do that when Justice Sunday is on their television set?

[theboss]

118. I think the attitude change will ultimately take care of itself

This is not an issue that can be couched in the same "civil rights" language of the 60s, because there are pockets of America (mostly the large cities) where gay people are accepted and have full legal protection and rights.

That was not the case in the civil rights movement. In 1968, Boston and Alabama were pretty much at the exact same point.

So, legally certain parts of the country are well ahead of the others. I think you will slowly but surely see improvement in the South and Midwest on this over the years.

As for acceptance, certain parts of the country are light years ahead of the others. This will take longer, but I think it will happen. And I'm not sure you can force it necessarily.

[Coexist]

121. the under 40 crowd - yes

the over 60 crowd - no.

[Virginia Dare]

123. Of course, this is a civil rights movement....

it may take a couple of generations, but it will change.

[Burma Jones]

127. Of Course.....

[Alpharetta]

129. give up a wedge issue?

won't happen. It would be like giving up a weapon, only not as verifiable.

Sorry, I read your entire post and I know you're hopeful. But I don't see acceptance of gays on the horizon for politics any more likely than any of the other divisions which get leveraged with fear and unacknowledged privilege for the majority.

Only when straight WASPS become the minority and are forced to join coalitions do the Republicans pick and choose other minorities to maintain power. They pick the least objectionable (to them) minorities first. They court Jews now. They court Hispanics to their faces, but use fear and immigration behind their backs. I don't know which minority they'll court next, but I have a suspicion it won't be gays.

Apologies for my pessimism.

[demgurl]

189. Straight WASPS will be the minority very soon.

I can't help but wonder if a lot of them feel it coming and they are holding on for dear life. As a society, we really have our priorities screwed up.

I am not enough of a dreamer to imagine that politics will give up the issue. But we can take it away from them and win on many levels. If we get to the people and change their attitudes, the Republicans will have one less weapon. This is good for the Democratic party. It is also good for the LGBT community since less prejudice will make it easier for them to finally become equals.

No matter how overwhelming the odds may seem, we just can not give in to pessimism. We need to keep things on a positive note and keep trying. And when one person gets a little tired then they can lean on someone else and work together.

[Akoto]

135. As the old saying goes ...

Bigotry is not inborn, it is learned.

I don't think there's hope for the older generations. Yes, there are some within the bunch who accept others for their differences, but I don't believe them to be the majority. That will change, though.

There was a time when the Bible was everything, when the Church ruled off of the peoples' fears, when we believed in fairies and witches and a planet that we could sail off of the edges of. Time eventually taught us that all of these things were false and wrong. Some, we're still dealing with, but we're getting there. Rights for the gay population will be just the same.

Eventually, the bigoted generation's teachings will be forgotten. They'll be seen as foolishness, just as all the other things that civilization has cast off. I don't think it's likely to happen within my time, but it will happen.

[StraightDope]

155. Get rid of all of the Jesusians...

Problem solved.

[demgurl]

190. StraightDope......

I understand why you say that and I believe at times I may have thought the same on an assortment of issues. When election time came around, do you know who I turned to? Every religious person I know. I write them so often that I am sure they dreaded seeing my emails about the sins of the Republicans.

It is one thing to say this off the cuff but I think we need to keep this positive. I do not want to deny anyone the same rights I have no matter what. It may be frustrating at times but perhaps that is the real test of our character. The test could be reaching down to see how how much we can all come together.

One of my husband's best friends is a preacher. He is so strong in his beliefs and just sticks to them. My husband and I talk about this quite often since the man voted for Bush (a pro-life issue) but does not see the hypocrisy of Iraq. I once put forth a theory to my husband. I recalled the Tower Of Babble and how everyone was spread out and made to speak different languages. I said that if the God his friend believes in is really that great, he would not be threatened by this tower. What if that story was all a ruse? What if the real story is that it is all a test. God wanted to test his children to see how strong of character they were. He spread them out and gave them insurmountable odds to allow them to find the inner strength to overcome the many barriers and come together again as one. I theorized that perhaps it was not just a language barrier but color, age and sexual orientation of everyone as well. And if this was the case, we are miserably failing the test as all we can do is point out differences and make war.

Just a small disclaimer: I am not religious. I did grow up in an all girl's catholic school but that was long ago. This theory I put forth for my husband's friend so that perhaps he could look at things in a different light.

If I had to, I would rather work at the inclusion of everyone rather than the exclusion.

[Armstead]

156. Here's my thoughts about what might happen

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2663170&mesg_id=2663170

[mondo joe]

157. What I hope would come of this is that people would just give up on the lie

about being gay being a choice - hey, if Republicans can't CHOOSE to not be gay who can?

And I'd hope that people would begin to realize how STUPID it is to force people to live in the closet -- look at the good it did Foley and Haggard.

[mattfromnossa]

168. homophobia sickens me

"There is enough hate and oppression in society without taking out needless fears on gay people."

This is so true!

[hedgehog]

170. When I was in high school, I had no idea what a gay was.

When I was a kid, an interracial couple was literally risking life and limb for love. Now there are dozens of mixed race couples around town and no one blinks an eye. My guess is that more quickly than we could ever think possible, people will look around and wonder what all the fuss was about.

[Kerrytravelers]

181. I like to think so to, but there are days on DU that just sicken me to no end.

I can not believe what I have read here. I hope plenty of people alerted.

[demgurl]

192. hedgehog, I hope you are right.

We are wasting so much of our energy on hate when we could be working on real issues like hunger and global warming.

[Sabriel]

191. Straight teachers, instructors, educators, this is what we can do:

Always refer to your significant other as your partner; never mention the person's gender, either by name or pronoun. Post no pictures.

Include queer people in your curriculum as a matter of fact, rather than an anomaly, at all levels.

Put up a poster, a rainbow flag, a pink triangle, or a GLSEN sticker to show that you're aware and open.

Stop homophobic or ignorant language like "gay" and "faggy," but don't just outlaw it, discuss it.

If there isn't a Gay Straight Alliance at your school, find like-minded people to help you start one.

Make sure departmental documents and school-wide documents use non-biased language.

Encourage your administrative unit to have a discrimination policy. It if has one, report violations and follow up on them.

Attend local LGBTQ events and support them with your presence. Take your friends and family.

If you identify as "straight," as I do, you have tje power and the voice to do something for people who often fear to.