Eh. No two oppressions are identical but there are certainly grounds for comparison sometimes. Marriage inequality is not exactly the same as restrictions on interracial marriage but the legal history of that idiocy is sometimes a useful point of comparison.
It is not civil rights to decide that a group you are unfamiliar with, or familiar with by stereotypes, are always oppressed by their head coverings. For example I am familiar with women who would find it insulting for you to decide they had not made a choice to wear the hijab.
And as Ibn Warraq points out it can also be the ban on head coverings that is oppressive, so when you perceive that everyone in the group is painted with the same social construct, it can turn into a phobic perspective.
Someone is “supportive” of equality, but squicked out actually seeing the minority exercising their expectation that they are finally equal. No comparison at all…
Actually, I think interracial marriage is a perfectly good analogy for same-sex marriage. I’m talking about D-bear’s “average white male” thing vis-a-vis people who might be a bit squicked out by gay people kissing.
Well, do you agree with my total lack of sympathy for a person who complains about how much it bothers them to see interracial couples kiss and arguing that they shouldn’t do it in on the TV (even as that person protests their support of marriage rights)?
If so, I suppose there’s some agreement. Still not exactly the same, though.
That was a 1950’s average white male, not a modern day average white male. Society has progressed to discriminating against another minority in the last 60 years…
Sure. I don’t think he was really asking for sympathy, though. Valteron asked what straight people thought, and astro told him what he thought. I imagine he thought he was being helpful, and not unreasonably. I know it sucks for you that he feels that way, but he took pains to point out that it’s not a conscious response and it doesn’t affect his attitude toward gay people.
He took pains to make clear his opinions about what we should show on TV commercials and why we are wrong if we disagree, so again, I’m still not clear on your point. If he thought that was useful, and he actually cares about gay rights, then he shouldn’t act like an asshole upon being told how blatantly unuseful it was, especially given how obviously that it wasn’t useful.
And astro blatantly whined about his viewpoint not being regarded with the respect he thinks it deserved, with statements like “Apparently any opinion re the potential real world advertising impact of that commercial other than a strongly pro-PDA position is going to be wholly unacceptable to you” and of course his accusation that I had accused him of being “brutally oppressive”, and even false accusations that I had called him names.
Now, again, if you were gay, this sort of endless whiny bullshit would be familiar to you and you would not be inclined to indulge it, because you would have seen it a hundred times before. You’re not, which goes to support my general ideas about how for the most part, straight people don’t have the familiarity with gay rights issues to have be able to comment on them seriously. Some straight people do, but for every one who does there are a dozen astros whining and whining and whining about how their totally quotidian “insights” are not being taken seriously, and then whining that it’s “name-calling” when someone doesn’t treat their “ideas” seriously.
I hope that commercial airs a lot. Because it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if a lot of viewers - even otherwise gay-friendly ones - felt some revulsion the first five or ten or fifteen times it aired. But eventually “Oh my god GROSS” would morph into “Oh, it’s those gay soldiers again - I wonder what’s on next.”
I look away from same-sex couples kissing. I look away from different-sex couples kissing.
Does that make me loveophobic? (No need to answer, it’s just what’s considered manners where I grew up: DAs are considered a private matter, so even if they happen to be taking place in public you treat them as private except if you’re 15, but even then, you’re not supposed to stare).
Now seriously, if it’s appropriate for a heterosexual couple to do in public, it’s appropriate for a homosexual one, and if it’s inappropriate for one it’s so for the other.
Re your central concern and the hobbyhorse you keep riding through this thread -
You seem utterly obtuse as to what the whole point of the OP’s question in this thread was about to begin with and what I was responding to. I’ll re-state the OP’s question to refresh your memory -
Your fantasies aside, I responded politely and factually to the OP re my opinion that the intimate kissing scene in the commercial might well make a substantial portion of the heterosexual component of the viewing audience uncomfortable, and that if the intent of the commercial was an appeal for mutual respect and tolerance, that including this intimate PDA moment might interfere with that message.
This was not a discussion of what should, or should not be, public policy with respect to the struggle for gay rights, or the proper ethical posture to hold on these topics. It was about how effective the commercial was as a piece of message advertising. That was the topic at hand.
You are now straining every muscle to contort that statement into my taking a position that is dismissive of gay sensibilities vs being an opinion about the potential effectiveness of the commercial. If you deem my opinion about the effectiveness of the commercial as a piece of message advertising politically “unuseful” that’s a tragedy, but one I will struggle to live with.
Either way, it sure beats freecreditreport.com.
You can’t universally expect people to enjoy or even find it comfortable to watch other people doing whatever it is that floats their boat - especially when that activity is one that engages visceral/emotional reactions.
I sometimes cringe a bit when I see people eating weird stuff (yeah, despite the username), even though they’re clearly enjoying it, and there’s no reason why they shouldn’t - and I guess the reverse is true - I mean, I like eating (not all in the same meal) black pudding, steak and kidney pie, liver and onions, braised heart, pork scratchings, etc - and I know for a fact that some people find that icky to witness, or even in concept.
So I guess it’s OK for a hetero person to be squicked by something a gay couple is doing, but unless it’s a public decency issue (that is, something indecently special that nobody else does - so, not kissing), other peoples’ reactions are not a reason to stop.
The video doesn’t bother me any. It’s pretty nicely done, though that kiss was about as lame as they come. Though I do have one question; what the hell is “marriage discrimination”?
Why?
JMHO
How is kissing advertising? When I kiss my wife, what am I advertising? Seriously?!?!?!
In some of the gay pride parades, it seems to me people are trying to exhibit offensive behavior. This hurts the cause.
However, being a Nelly isnt advertising, it is the way they are.
You don’t see any difference between a black character simply appearing on television and two people kissing in a political advocacy commercial?
Why would the nationality of a homophobe matter?
It might matter to the extent that it’s relevant to what RNATB had originally written, and then deleted.
Probably not worth making an issue of it.
Just seems odd that it was worthy of comment when he thought it was a British person, but not when he realised it was a Canadian.
You’re right; probably not important. I’m just curious.