Every joke offends someone, and not always because it’s offensive. I recall telling the “Blacks Into Whites For $99” joke - the message of which is that black people are fine as they are - and got labelled as anti-black because the punchline contains the word “nigger”.
So yes, I’m well aware that this joke offends some people. Normally I’d apologise for causing offence, but since in this instance the people getting offended are exclusively self-righteous dicks I shall forbear.
When the shoe fits, and all that. You are a shrill, one-trick-pony. Remember this?
So let me see:
(all gay people are democrats) + (all gay-bashers are republicans) / (it’s all just a political issue) * (brutal torture and murder of a young man because he was gay) + (clever pun on the fence on which he was crucified) + (with absolutely no context / in a thread about unfair treatment of homosexuals) - (supposedly knee-jerk reaction) == BIG LAFFS.
Hmm, I must still be in the wrong thread, because I still don’t get it.
I will admit, though, that I did over-react to duffer’s posts, because I took my frustration and complete inability to make any sense of what he was saying and extrapolated too much from that.
But that was because my irony meter had completely overloaded. In another thread, I went off for at least a page and a half about how fucking frustrating it is to have someone dismiss everything you say, not because of what you say, but because of who you are. Because they see you as one thing and one thing only (SolGrundy, one of the gay ones) and lump you in with everybody else who shares the same trait and acts as if you all think in lock-step or that you’re all mouthpieces of some nebulous thought-crime agenda. duffer made a snarky comment there that missed the point, he got called on it, there was a lot of back and forth, and I thought the whole business was settled.
Then, he says that because I yelled at him, he’s getting dogpiled by homos and he’s given up on his “tolerance” and he’s pretty much figured out how all gay people in America think. It was like I could hear the blood vessel in my brain popping.
Well, I concede that I’m coming late to the party. Maybe only four months being out isn’t enough to make me completely frustrated and discouraged. Hell, for all I know, I’m coming out exactly on schedule, and I’m still in my pissed-off phase.
But I’m not really trying to change everyone’s mind. I’m just speaking my own, trying to organize everything and make sense of all this for the times that I’m in my apartment at two o’clock in the morning and freaking out because the situation seems hopeless and I’m wondering whether it would’ve been easier just to stay in the fucking closet and be lonely, instead of being out and being hated by strangers.
I do know, however, that people have claimed to have changed their minds about the treatment of homosexuals based on stuff written on these boards. And I do remember how I used to think. It wasn’t until I listened to enough people – mostly online – that I realized that Queer Eye and the like were all fiction, that there are plenty of gay people who don’t fit the stereotype, and that just because you’re a homo doesn’t mean you have to think, act, talk, and dress a certain way. And I think that’s a message worth getting out there; if it had sunk in sooner I might’ve had a more enjoyable 20’s.
And I said in another thread that I would defend Bricker if he were insulted, and I’m going to make good on that. (This is to stuff said throughout this thread and others, not just to your comments, gobear). I do not believe that he is evil. He is clearly not an idiot. He’s not lying; he’s speaking with conviction and if pressed long enough will reveal exactly where he stands. And he sincerely believes that his position is a fair one to all people involved.
Of course, I believe he’s completely wrong on this issue. And I believe that the distinction that he and others support is wrong and, yes, reduces down to nothing more than unfair discrimination against homosexuals. Which, as much as the term offends them, is bigotry. But while there are many, many evil people who support a bigoted position out of malice, hatred, or fear, there are also many people who support a bigoted position because they honestly don’t see it as bigoted.
I just wanted to grab this and run with it for at least one post.
Staying in the closet doesn’t keep people from hating you for being gay. It only keeps them from knowing they hate YOU for being gay.
Sure, I understand. And for the record, once again, I sympathize with your plight. The way gays are treated is unfair, and it sucks ass. If I could change that, I would. In fact I’d like to feel I’m doing my part in some small way.
On the other hand, if someone is being a whiner or a rageholic (an accusation I made to SolGrundy, and now retract), I see no reason why sexuality should have any effect on whether that person gets called on it.
Can I put this on my
[quotes page]
(http://www.metrodemontreal.com/matt/quotes/gay.html)?
Be welcome. 
Sol, if you would allow me to correct a few things?
I didn’t meet an openly gay man until I was 17. Call it a sheltered suburban life, but there it is. In my 31 years I personally knew about 8 gay men and 2 lesbians. They were all acquaintances met through mutual friends or work. Some I hung out with, the others were nodding friends. (You give em the nod as you pass)
My first awareness of gays was the group Act-Up. Guess where a little planted seed came from? Over the years I was mostly indifferent to gays because, frankly, it just didn’t have anything to do with my life. By the time I started meeting gays, I was so dissassociated with them that it never occured to me to bother caring whom they slept with. Hence they got the same treatment as anyone else I met.
If anyone thinks I hate gays, you’re wrong. What I hate and what gets me almost irrational at times is the vocal minority that calls me a bigot if I don’t agree with everything they insist I agree with. And if I happen to disagree with any gay Dopers on an issue and come in with both guns firing, it’s **NOT ** because you’re gay. It’s because I disagree with you.
It’s true that most everyone here would enjoy having a beer with me. It’s much easier to see what I’m trying to say if you hear the inflection, tone, etc when I convey an idea. Such is the internet, though.
Whatever anyone thinks of me, know this. I don’t hate anyone based on a lifestyle or race or anything else. The people I hate give me damn good reason to hate them for them. And I have yet to find anyone here that would apply to.
Well, many of us are coming from a place where we are suffering under an injustice which involves the denial of our ability to be equal citizens. It’s not an abstract thing - it’s personal, immediate, and for all we know could be in place until we die.
To us, it’s not just an intellectual disagreement, something to bat around or try to get the best of in an argument. It’s our humanity, our equality, that’s in question, and it shouldn’t be. It shouldn’t be something about which reasonable people disagree.
We frankly can’t see how people can hold the positions you’ve expressed, and how much more evidence of our humanity is needed before we get to be equal.
matt, I don’t know what the laws in Canada are, but in the US gays DO have equal rights with regards to cilvil rights. The 2 biggest arguments I see here are marriage and Social Security benefits. Gays are allowed to vote, own homes, adopt children, recieve government assistance, attend public schools, et al.
What I see most of the arguments being about are bigoted people that hate gays outright. That’s not the same as the gov’t denying rights based on sexuality. As for marriage, I’ve already spoken out against the gov’t having anything to do with straight marriage as well. For the short term it looks like CU’s may have a chance, but full marriage is unlikely in either of our lifetimes.
I’m telling you, I could see myself supporting it, but the tactics used these days are putting me off. Of course, I’m one out of 300 million Americans so don’t think that I have a whole lot of sway. It’s only been recently that open homosexuality has been accepted in the mainstream. Things like this take a lot more time to get done than a few sessions of Congress.
I hate to break it to you, but in a lot of the United States, you can be fired for being gay, denied an apartment for being gay, be barred from adopting children because you are gay, be unable to sponsor your lover to immigrate because they are of the same sex, be prevented from seeing your lover in the hospital as you’re not ‘family,’ and have someone else make decisions about the disposition of his or her body should he or she die.
I honestly don’t understand how these don’t qualify as denial of equal rights. Do we just have different definitions? Do you see how urgent these issues are, or do you understand these as being morally right?
Some of us are having trouble thinking of a reason for the latter other than the former. You have to understand that the outcome of these things are misery, cruelty, and pain. I certainly don’t see what could possibly be so important a rationale for these kinds of exclusions that it would justify what they put gay and lesbian people through.
OK, all points conceded. Except the immigration one. Why on Earth would anyone want to bring a lover here if it’s so hostile to gays?
I guess the reason I can’t really get worked up over it is that I see other causes that are much more important to the general public IMO. It’s impossible to be able to be activist and care equally about every single issue affecting a minority group. I’m sorry if that sounds callous, and it isn’t meant to be, but I have more concern about the refugees in Sudan than whether or not two men are recognized as married by their state. Might be insensitive on my part, but seems more pressing.
As far as hospital visits, I don’t see how a hospital can deny a visitor if the patient has it set up ahead of time that a lover be allowed in. And with disposing of estates, a lawyer could set something up in about an hour to take care of that. Be it a living trust, estate administrator, or something else. Though with the hospital (don’t get me starting on them) it might be their rule rather than the government denying access.
Hey, I don’t claim to be an expert in this area, and don’t try to act as one. It’s just my opinion I post. And to be honest, I don’t want the responsibility of sorting it out. I have enough in my life to worry about. Apathy? No. Realistic? Yup.
But I’ll wish you luck on getting what you feel is yours. I just hope you don’t have an unrealistic expectation that people will agree with you because it’s what you want. If that were the case I wouldn’t have to mask my urine during a pot test.
Because relative to a lot of the rest of the world, gays have it pretty good here. I mean, it’s still technically illegal to just drag a homosexual out in the street and shoot him, so that makes it a pretty big step up from, say, most Islamic theocracies.
No one’s asking you to go find a pride parade and start marching. But if you see a proposition on a ballot that, say, is trying to alter the state constitution to make it illegal for gays to marry or form civil unions, would it be too much trouble to ask if you vote “no” on it? And maybe think twice about voting for candidates who are making their political careers on the backs of gays and lesbians?
Well, yes it would be too much, because it’s my vote. But I’ll make a deal. North Dakota is more likely to vote for the ban than Barney Frank would be to vote against it. So my vote either way won’t make a lick of difference. But as a mea culpa, I’ll forgo my personal beliefs and my religious beliefs and vote ‘no’.
Now would it be too much trouble to ask you to vote for Bush since CA is going Kerry anyway and I’d like to follow a war through to the end?
One more post to respond to this. (I really need to learn how to respond to multi-quotes).
Going back to my post of not being able to care equally about everything, it’s a little more than tecnically illegal. It’s illegal no matter whom it is. I’m sure this is going to sound wrong no matter how I say it, so take it with a grain of salt. No animosity. And not that gays should hide themselves.
It is much easier for a gay to avoid being killed than a black man. (I can’t beleive I have to answer this as if it happens everyday.) When you look at a person you can generally tell what race they are. Sexuality issues are much easier to mask.
Therefore I’m much more inclined to get fired up over violence against blacks than I am for gay-bashing. Both are appalling, and in both cases I’d love 5 minutes alone with the attacker. But in the case of the black I’m putting more energy into. Again, this isn’t to say gay-bashing doesn’t exist and isn’t abhorrent, but there is only so much you can do.
I hope I’ve cleared this up. I don’t hate gays as has been claimed. And, really, it pisses me off to be labled in such a horrendous way. For some I’ll take it as righteous anger and forget about it, but for one or two it may take awhile.
Maybe I’m just not ready to enter the gay-issues debate and should avoid it completely. I’m obviously not helping anything. Like I said, I don’t have any answers, so it may be best to just hold my opinions to myself.
Duffer, I’d like to believe you, I really would, but yesterday I read a post in the Bricker pitting which looked to me like you were enjoying the idea of gay marriage being made illegal in North Dakota. I grew up in a sheltered, small town in the late 1970’s where, as far as I knew, homosexuals didn’t exist, and we teenagers didn’t even really understand what it was. I met my first openly gay man when I was in my early 20’s and living in Waikiki. I enjoyed his company, and he’d point out good looking guys to me (you do know I’m a straight female, right?). Eventually, I moved back to the small town I grew up in. One evening, I was talking to an old friend, a guy I’d known since 5th grade and one of the few people who was nice to me when I was growing up. He told me he was gay, and, what really bothers me is he sounded afraid when he did so, as if that one aspect of his character would negate years of friendship. He and his partner have been together 11 years now, and I like his partner almost as much as I like him. They do intend to stay together for the rest of their lives, they own a house together, and they’ve taken all the legal measures to make it work. The legal measures it took for another old friend, one I’ve known since 10th grade, to do the same with the man she loves, consisted of getting a marriage license.
I am in love with a wonderful person, an engineer who’s stubborn, brilliant, funny, kind and a lot of fun. There’s no one who’d condemn me for this, and, if things get to that point, no one would object to both of us getting married, even in one of my city’s more conservative parishes. If the only thing that were different about this wonderful person was that he was a woman, not a man, there are those who’d call what we share “unnatural” and an “abomination”. Not only are there those who’d consider my old friend’s 11 year marriage less honorable or moral than a heterosexual marriage of similar length, they’d consider it less moral than Brittany Spears 55 hour Las Vegas fling marriage. To me, that isn’t right.
Two last points. I was told about one thing driving Vermont’s attempt to legalize homosexual marriage. Half of a couple who’d been together for over 20 years had died after a long hospitalization. His partner wasn’t allowed to visit him in the hospital, but his family, from whom he was estranged because of his homosexuality was. When he died, his family had his body moved and refused to tell his partner where he was buried. Because his partner had no legal standing with relationship to him, his partner was not able to find where he was buried.
Finally, if you want to do multiple quotes, but the text you want to quote in quote tags, something like this:
{quote}(I really need to learn how to respond to multi-quotes).{/quote} only replace the {}s with s. I usually try to imitate the board’s style of doing it by adding something like “Originally posted by duffer” at the beginning of it.
CJ
You either read it wrong or I typed it wrong. I was trying to point out that the percentage of voters voting against it in LA would be lower than in ND. Please let me know if it seemed I was revelling in glee that it was voted down. I’ll be willing to apologize if that’s what I was doing, but it certainly wasn’t my intent.
As an aside, the night-long apologizing and placating to almost no avail is making me rethink becoming totally polarized on this issue.
I’ll give you a link at lunch time. Believe me, I do sympathize. You see, a year ago, I was getting accused of “leading people to hell” here and on a Christian message board because of my refusal to condemn homosexuals or homosexuality. My beliefs are every bit as legitimate and based on the Bible and my experience with Jesus as any hard-core Fundamentalists, yet they are different, and I’ve felt less inclined to agree with them because they weren’t nice people, or at least, not nice to me. We have had quite different lives and quite different experiences. When things got heated with the Fundamentalists, I did try to see and respect their points, even though I didn’t always succeed. Please, try to see Sol Grundy’s, Matt McCl’s, and even mine. I realize changing your mind might not be easy, and it might not be my place to ask you to. I know I have no intention of changing mine. Still, please try to understand that for them and, to a lesser extent for me, it is personal, and it does directly affect them in a way it won’t affect either of us.
Respectfully,
CJ
Fair enough.