Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Seriously Russ, fuck your mom.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If at a social occasion it should so happen that I introduce to my mother a work colleague who I know to be gay, then I'd expect him to respect her sensibilities enough to talk about his "flatmate" and not indicate by his public behaviour that they are more to each other than good friends.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
"Behind closed doors" follows from the secular ethic of doing what you like "provided it doesn't impact negatively on other people". Public behaviour should consider the feelings of other people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:

---

Originally posted by RooK:
Seriously Russ, fuck your mom.

---

Jesus no! That is what generated Russ.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Organ Builder:
I don't hear Russ being genuinely concerned about anyone's sensibilities but his own. I would suggest he introduce his wife as his "flat mate" sometime and see how that works out.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soror Magna:
The truth, at last:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
... Until feminism, this was a truth universally acknowledged...

---

---

Ok, I'm guessing this comes down to "I understand the foundations of life to be a certain way; but society seems to be turning all that upside down; it's extremely disturbing; and I have to keep those foundations intact". Is that a fair interpretation?

I sometimes feel that way about various things, myself. I think those are legit feelings.

The tangle comes when a) those changes are an attempt to correct injustice; and b) all the weight seems to come down on the people who don't like the changes, even if they're basically people of good will who just don't like change.

With feminism, LGBT equal rights, and ethnic group civil rights (clumsy term), A is definitely true. And sometimes B is true, especially with feminism. A lot of people realize that white men are catching a lot of flack for what previous generations did.

ISTM that things generally wobble back and forth, and eventually wind up somewhere in the middle. It can take a very long time, though, and people suffer in the meantime.

I have moments of wanting a full pendulum swing to matriarchy. It might be just, as far as redressing past and present wrongs...but more people (of the male persuasion) would get hurt. So ISTM we're better off in a middle ground, where no one group has the majority of the power, and where people try to treat each other decently, and also cut each other some slack.

Not being able to avoid changes makes them more scary. I don't have an easy fix. IME, sometimes it helps to approach the change a tiny bit at a time. With my fundamentalist Protestant background, at a little church where if anyone was LGBT, they were deeply, deeply closeted...well, I had a lot to sort out.

For me, it's helped a lot to know or hear about specific people. I watch documentaries on PBS, like "Anyone and Everyone", and the series "In The Life". One thing from ITL I found especially helpful (and embarrassing to mention!) was a segment about a couple of gay young men from farming country. There are outward cultural expressions of some gay men that I'm not comfortable with, and I've been harassed by gay men. But, AFAICT, these guys were just a couple of down-to-earth farm kids who happened to be gay, and in love with each other. (IIRC.) And I could wrap my mind and heart around that basic fact.

I don't think LGBT folks are going to go off and hide again--they've had enough of that already. As to feminism, well, we're people, too, and to quote the sitcom "Grace Under Fire", women "are never, ever giving back the vote!"


Maybe, to borrow a line from Madeleine L'Engle's "A Wind In The Door", the trick is to "adapt, while remaining wholly yourself".

FWIW, etc.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Organ Builder:
I don't hear Russ being genuinely concerned about anyone's sensibilities but his own. I would suggest he introduce his wife as his "flat mate" sometime and see how that works out.

---

Better yet... introduce his parents to his friend as flat mates.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
"Behind closed doors" follows from the secular ethic of doing what you like "provided it doesn't impact negatively on other people". Public behaviour should consider the feelings of other people.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
(Bear in mind that for three months solid I had to see stuff like this hanging on lamp-posts on every street I walked down, reminding me that my very existence is a threat to children ).

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
I speak as someone who is very directly affected by Russ's attitudes: a gay man engaged to another (wonderful!) guy, and who also lives in Ireland.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
...
"Gay marriage" takes some of the meaning of the word "marriage" and treats that part as the whole. Just as Soror Magna

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soror Magna:

is that really what defines marriage for you? Penis into vagina?

---

is taking part of the whole and treating that part as the whole (for rhetorical effect). Her argument tries to present a choice between p-into-v being the whole or the essence of marriage and being an unimportant part that can be discarded without affecting the essence of marriage. To which I suggest that the truth is in the excluded middle.

---

quote:

---

But I don't believe that "that type of being gay" is involved in every instance of Men having Sex with Men. Unless you've some evidence to the contrary...

I tend to think that people shouldn't be committing sexual acts until they've grown through whatever phases apply. Adultery is for adults...

I don't know what's going on in the heads of MSM. How much is a bisexual version of being permanently and biologically gay ? How much is confusion ? Or desperation ?

The "what else" here is that some of these people will in later life look back on what they've done in the absence of homosexual desire. With disgust.

---

quote:

---

... If on the way home from the party, in a context where they think themselves unobserved, said colleague and his partner should in a spirit of spontaneous affection hold hands, then I'm not going to make anything of it.

If they proudly and publicly hold hands in a spirit of defiance, as a deliberate political act, then any negative reaction they get from other people is probably deserved.

---

quote:

---

"Behind closed doors" follows from the secular ethic of doing what you like "provided it doesn't impact negatively on other people". Public behaviour should consider the feelings of other people.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
I speak as someone who is very directly affected by Russ's attitudes: a gay man engaged to another (wonderful!) guy, and who also lives in Ireland.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If at a social occasion it should so happen that I introduce to my mother a work colleague who I know to be gay, then I'd expect him to respect her sensibilities enough to talk about his "flatmate" and not indicate by his public behaviour that they are more to each other than good friends.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If at a social occasion it should so happen that I introduce to my mother a work colleague who I know to be gay, then I'd expect him to respect her sensibilities enough to talk about his "flatmate" and not indicate by his public behaviour that they are more to each other than good friends.

If on the way home from the party, in a context where they think themselves unobserved, said colleague and his partner should in a spirit of spontaneous affection hold hands, then I'm not going to make anything of it.

If they proudly and publicly hold hands in a spirit of defiance, as a deliberate political act, then any negative reaction they get from other people is probably deserved.

---

The presentation of these views as reasonable, civilised, sensitive and/or kind is somehow much more upsetting that would be out and out bigoted abuse.



--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If at a social occasion it should so happen that I introduce to my mother a work colleague who I know to be gay, then I'd expect him to respect her sensibilities enough to talk about his "flatmate" and not indicate by his public behaviour that they are more to each other than good friends.

If on the way home from the party, in a context where they think themselves unobserved, said colleague and his partner should in a spirit of spontaneous affection hold hands, then I'm not going to make anything of it.

If they proudly and publicly hold hands in a spirit of defiance, as a deliberate political act, then any negative reaction they get from other people is probably deserved.

"Behind closed doors" follows from the secular ethic of doing what you like "provided it doesn't impact negatively on other people". Public behaviour should consider the feelings of other people.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Ok, this you have to see:
Jesus and gender

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eliab:
It would be obvious to you that concealing an important personal relationship to avoid social awkwardness isn't an ordinary thing for ordinary people to do. You wouldn't readily consent to deny your relationship with your wife, or child, or parent, or best friend. Why do you think it would be any more acceptable to ask a gay man to deny that the person he most loves is his life partner?

---

How do you answer this Russ?

It's at the heart of this whole thread. The dear man in my family who married and had six children in the 50s/60s felt this kind of pressure deeply. He didn't just feel he had to conceal his homosexual relationship. He felt, most of his life, that he had to deny himself and live a whole life pretending.

Things have improved enormously since then, but not enough or this discussion simply wouldn't need to happen.

I blame parts of the Church

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Eliab, you overwhelm me with your eloquence and patience with Russ.

DJ. congratulations on your marriage. I'm curious whether you know any gay people who marry and pretend they are flatmates. I'm assuming not, so Russ and his Mother will just have to live with their offended sensibilities.

Since this was a majority vote, I'm wondering how it affects the already rocky relationship between the general public and the Catholic Church. I'm assuming that many see this attitude as another reason to dislike the Church as gay people go about leading ordinary lives. Have you noticed anything in this regard?

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Palimpsest:
Eliab, you overwhelm me with your eloquence and patience with Russ.

DJ. congratulations on your marriage. I'm curious whether you know any gay people who marry and pretend they are flatmates. I'm assuming not, so Russ and his Mother will just have to live with their offended sensibilities.

Since this was a majority vote, I'm wondering how it affects the already rocky relationship between the general public and the Catholic Church. I'm assuming that many see this attitude as another reason to dislike the Church as gay people go about leading ordinary lives. Have you noticed anything in this regard?

---

While I ponder a more full answer to this, I note that there is still a way to go.

Maybe the diner who complained was a relative of Russ's?

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If they proudly and publicly hold hands in a spirit of defiance, as a deliberate political act, then any negative reaction they get from other people is probably deserved.

---

quote:

---

Courtney Wilson and Taylor Guerrero, who were visiting Hawaii from Los Angeles in March, said in a federal lawsuit filed Tuesday that they were harassed and arrested because the officer didn't like their public displays of affection in a Foodland store on Oahu's North Shore.

They were walking through the aisles holding hands and at one point hugged and kissed, the lawsuit said: Officer Bobby Harrison, who was shopping in uniform, "observed their consensual romantic contact and, in a loud voice, ordered plaintiffs to stop and 'take it somewhere else.' "

The women complied and continued shopping, the lawsuit said. When Harrison again saw them being affectionate with each other, he threatened to have them thrown out of the store.

"We're used to people making remarks here and there," Wilson said of their two-year relationship.

While the women were in the check-out line, Harrison grabbed Wilson by the wrist, and she started to call 911, she said.

"He was bumping his belly against Courtney," Guerrero said. "He said, 'you girls don't know how to act. You don't know the difference between a motel and a grocery store.'"

When Guerrero tried to get in between her girlfriend and the officer, he shoved her. She kicked him as she was falling, she said.

"The whole situation got physical," Wilson said. "I got punched in the face by him."

Because Harrison didn't have any handcuffs on him, store employees helped restrain the women, as customers watched.

<snip>

The women were arrested and charged with felony assault on an officer. They spent three days in jail and each paid a bail bondsman $1,300 for bail that was set at $12,000 each, they said. They had to remain in Honolulu as a condition of their release.

The charges were eventually dismissed, said their Honolulu attorney, Eric Seitz.

In the meantime, they had to stay with family friends or strangers they befriended. At one point thought they would have to go to a homeless shelter. They found jobs cleaning vacation rentals.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:

If they proudly and publicly hold hands in a spirit of defiance, as a deliberate political act, then any negative reaction they get from other people is probably deserved.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:
Also, 'any negative reaction'? 'deserved'? Really? My God, man! Think what you say. Young men are still getting their heads stamped to a bloody pulp by crowds of thugs over their sexual orientation. Here's the thing: While I'm confident you're not actually advocating the actions of such people, by saying what you did above, you are nonetheless lining up down toward their end of the courtesy spectrum.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ariston:
do you actually think same-sex attraction is actually like what you or I feel? Is it the same thing?
<snip>
Is it generally a sort of perverted and temporary madness to be cured, a deviance that most people don't really want to indulge in and do to shock their parents or society?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
My Facebook keeps telling me that on openly gay referee has been selected to ref the Rugby World Cup Final. Is it really that important that he's gay? So important that it's the first part of the headline, before it gets on to what he's doing?

Howsabout "Bloody good ref to ref final, might mention his sexuality of we can be bothered"?

I guess I can understand that a certain amount of proselytising for positive gay role models is a good thing if it makes other people in the same boat feel better but it annoys hell out of me that the headline is "GAY! (did we mention the rugby?"

AG

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Golden Key:
Plus, in some cultures, it's appropriate for same-sex *platonic* friends to hold hands in public. And IIRC not so much for opposite-sex romantic couples.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Not only holding hands, but even kissing.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If at a social occasion it should so happen that I introduce to my mother a work colleague who I know to be gay, then I'd expect him to respect her sensibilities enough to talk about his "flatmate" and not indicate by his public behaviour that they are more to each other than good friends.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:
Most of us ere on the side of caution in social situations so as to not risk causing offence. Hence the old adage -- Don't bring up the topic of sex, politics or religion at dinner-parties.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:
Most of us ere on the side of caution in social situations so as to not risk causing offence. Hence the old adage -- Don't bring up the topic of sex, politics or religion at dinner-parties.

---