I guess I still don’t understand what the “gay lifestyle” actually is.
With all respect, Scylla, your definition strikes me as being too vague to be useful. It’s like saying the “American lifestyle.” What’s that? Or the “WASP lifestyle.” Or, for that matter, the “heterosexual lifestule.”
Seems me that one commonality does not a lifestyle make.
You know, Poly, I adore you. Big hugs.
“Just to illustrate what a stupid term ‘lifestyle’ is, consider that in a strict sense, Atilla the Hun had an active, outdoor lifestyle.” – George Carlin (paraphrased from memory)
**
Ok. Let me try again.
The gay lifestyle is exactly like lifestyles of the rich and famous except without the women, money, or fame (though the latter two are optional.)
Does that help?
**
True. But, this is TV we’re talking about. Who said anything about being useful?
Think it through. That one commonality breeds other tendencies.
Many gay people share experiences that are not shared by straight people. These things effect their style of life.
Being gay bashed is one example. Lack of acceptance by family and friends might be another. Recognizing and coming to grips with the fact that your not like most other teens during your adolescence might be a third. Coming out of the closet might be a fourth. Maybe there’s even things like developing a gaydar to help you find other people like yourself. There’s the sense of being in a minority. There’s the stereotypes, some of which you may embrace, others you may reject.
Is the composite effect of growing up gay in america enough that it creates a commonality? Is that not a lifestyle thing?
None of which has anything to do with people using the term as a codeword that allows them to discriminate or belittle. That’s bad. I hate to see a word or phrase get beaten up undeservedly.
It’s not a super useful phrase, but it is descriptive, and I’ve always preferred tob e able to make my own choices about words and phrases I use without having to risk them getting overloaded with connotations not meant.
I mean, I look at the OP, and the fact is Fox did a good thing for Gay rights by airing the episode.
It’s strong content, and it’s unusual, and they thought they would cover their ass by showing a disclaimer.
Now, I don’t put Fox usage of the term “lifestyle” in the same terms as I see it in the Defense of Marriage Act. I don’t think that it was meant that way. But, their usage is being preloaded with a connotation they may not, and probably didn’t mean.
Give them too much crap about it, and what’s going to happen?
The religious right will be complaining about the immorality of the show. How dare they put gay boys on tv.
The activists will be complainin about the discriminatory disclaimer.
If these things happened, and I was a Fox executive, I might think twice about showing such content in the future.
OK, I’ll grant you that.
I think you’re confusing “lifestyle” with “community.”
Esprix
Both, at least to me.
As the OP states, if they’re not going to run disclaimers for the usual sex, sexism, violence, language, adult situations ad nauseum they normally show on prime time television without disclaimers (including a same-sex kiss between two women), why did they feel the need to put it on a show that merely implied same-sex male kissing?
If they knew a sizable portion of their audience wouldn’t want to watch it, why would they show it in the first place? What marketing executive would replace “Seventh Heaven” with a re-run of “Rocky Horror Picture Show?” Please - it’s about ratings hype, nothing more, which makes it even more insulting. “Look at us! We’re doing edgy, daring programming - you can tell, because we put a disclaimer on it!” :rolleyes: How I long for the day when homos are just as boring as hets (well, we are, but we’re painted as fabulous by the media thanks to the hard work of fabulous people like matt_mcl and myself - it’s a tough job…).
So if society is changing, based particularly on the content of this particular show (i.e., two men not even seen kissing), why on earth would they put the disclaimer? (HINT: The answer is “ratings.”)
Esprix
Well, community effects lifestyle.
I mean now that I’m off the farm and living with non-Amish neighbors closer than 2 miles away, I can’t go walking taking a leak in the backyard like I used to.
That’s a pretty major lifestyle change.
“Is the main objection that using the term “sexual lifestyle” somehow implies that all (or most) gays live in a certain stereotyped way? Or is the main objection the fact that the show felt it necessary to include a disclaimer at all? (i.e. “Watch out there’s icky gay things on tv!”) Or is it both?”
It’s both, to me. The implication that there is one set way that all gay people live due to the fact that they are gay seems to me to be lumping all gay people into a generalization. And as we all know, all generalizations are false;) I have yet to find any one thing that all gay people DO that is a direct result of their sexuality:
All gay men go to clubs (nope)
All gay men love showtunes (nope)
All gay men have promiscuous sex (nope)
All gay men have sex (nope)
All gay men go to heaven … okay, no more using movie titles;)
Seriously, though. Here’s my question for anyone who feels up to answering it: what is there in every homosexual’s life that s/he does because of the fact that s/he is gay? Other than being attracted to members of their own sex, I’m drawing a blank.
Woohoo!
Gays VS Nerds
Being gay bashed ----> Being nerd bashed.
Lack of acceptance by family and Friends —> Yup, Nerds have that too! (well, we just change friends though. 
)
Coming to gripes with differences ----> Yah, definitely. “No, I am not interested in going to prom, I would rather stay at home and study. . . .”
Coming out of closet —> So many potential Nerds try and hide it that it is sad, sports and all. Boarder line cases are labled Geeks (though often times the term is mistakenly used as to be an equivalent to Nerd), sometimes the occasional smartjock is noted.
That beancounter who just jumped out of the window because he was terminally depressed at how meaningless his life as a corporate drone was? Potential Nerd.
Developing the ability to sense other Nerds is definitely a plus, those of us on top of things even learn how to convert potential Nerds over to our side. (hey, the fundies thing the Gays are dangerous, hell no, the Nerds are ACTIVLY recruiting, woohoo! 
)
Then the stereotypes. Yah they can suck. On the plus side after columbine I remember being able to walk down hallways and have others move out of my way though. . . .
(of course the jokes asking when I was going to kill everybody where kind of the downside to that. . . .)
I definitely fit the PFY profile, still do in fact. Heh. Damn f*cking acne. . . . (antibiotics may be nice, but damnit. . . . Scotty, we need more power!)
Loved reading, hated sports. Never did the whole entire HS social thing (uh, dating? Wait you mean let my emotions get carried away and bring me to inefficient actions with somebody whom I likely won’t give a shit about in a few more months? heh. Hehe. HHEHHAHAHOHOHO!!! Yaaaaah right, who the HELL would be stupid enough to do that? Everybody else. . . . oh. . . . this species is sooo fucked." )
Had serious troubles in middle school, you know how hard it is in the 7th grade to find somebody to debate the meaning of life with? Seriously debate it? Ugh.
Definitely a minority, potential from five to fifteen percent of society (Well, deriving from keirsey’s population statistics for personality types, but I wouldn’t even TRY and use that one as cite. . . .), but far less developed due to social stereotypes (“guys should beat each other up on the field when they are kids, get drunk and use drugs when they are teenagers, and settle down into nice labor/management jobs when adults!” “Girls should play with Barbies and why the hell would anybody give them a set of screwdrivers for their birthday???” And so forth. . . .), based upon personal interactions (hehe, once again not exactly proof level accrete but. . .) I would say closer to 1 in 200 to 300 or so.
Of course it is kind of hard to FIND other Nerds because;
well;
as the joke goes;
Q. What do you call a room full of Nerds?
A. You don’t.
This is then followed by one of the two following possible responses:
(Nerd) 1. ::laughs::
(Non-Nerd) 2. Huh?
(Joke Teller): Nerds do not gather in large groups, you could never HAVE a room full of Nerds, it is self contradictory in Terms.
(this is actually not true, Nerds and Geeks have Kick Ass parties, but nobody else would actually CONSIDER them to be parties so we don’t have to go around telling all the normal folk about them. 
)
In other words, we tend to stick to ourselves (not Anti-social, Asocial. Big difference. Against society VS neutral to society), which makes finding each other out a bit hard at times.
Of course once one does get amongst a group of Nerds for a length of time it can be quite a shock to go back to the real world. I mean actually having to EXPLAIN things to people. . . . ::shivers:: I do not mean the technical things, I just mean motivations and actions. If I have my digital camera in a fanny pack, my bike helmet strapped on, and the sun is setting, a fellow Nerd would be likely to note that there is a good chance I am taking the digital camera out to go take pictures of the sunset from some nearby hill.
A non-Nerd would play 50 questions with me.
“Where are you going?”
“To take pictures.”
“Of what.”
“The sun setting.”
“Why?”
“Because I want too.”
“Why?”
“Because the sunset looks beautiful.”
“Oh, is it for some type of project?”
“No.”
“Then why are you going out to take the pictures?”
“Because the sunset looks beautiful.”
“Oh, what project is it for?”
“It is not for a project.”
“Oh yes, you already said that. Well why are you going to take the pictures then?”
At about this time it would be a good idea if the person wants to get out of the house at all to take the pictures, to tell the questioner to fuck off and leave it at that. . . .
(Nerd’s don’t ask why other Nerd’s stop in the middle of whatever they are doing and wander off into a void, they just accept it. )
Nerds do have a rather length tradition of accepting in darn nearly any alternative belief system, from (unfortunately. . . .) early communism in the early 20th century, to hippies in the 60s, to Goth in 80s.
Nice to know that everybody remembers our past actions. . . .
::sighs:: oh well.
Nerds tend not to care about sexual preference, or gender, or age, or nationality, or anything else. . . . material.
It is all in your mind, if your brain can do it, then we will accept you.
(unless you are a flaming hypocrite who likes to murder babies and commit genocide. You can kindly Fuck Off then, Knowledge comes from Life, and thus Without Life there is No Knowledge. The pure random sacrificing of lives based solely upon some mere physical world manifestation about a person is Ass Bone Stupid, it is impossible to tell what repercussions the killing of that person might have, if some a-hole killed the next Einstein or a child who would otherwise of been destined to go on and cure cancer. . . . ahh, as I said, indiscriminate killing == bad, though I may SAY otherwise often, those are the guidelines by which my actions are dictated)
I thought those were geeks. And yes, we do have parties, very fun parties at which i’ve gotten laid multiple times. So yeah. Um.
Anyway, the chief, 80-90% bothersome thing for me is the fact that they decided to put a warning label on it because of the icky gay boys, when they wouldn’t have for the same thing involving icky straight people.
Damn those icky straight people! Damn them to hell!
Esprix
Yeah! And why can’t they keep their lifestyle out of my face?
I know - what’s up with that? I mean, they were wedding bands - like, “ooh hoo, look at me, I’ve got a wife!” And all the women at work have pictures of their husbands on their desks at work! I mean, really - can’t they just keep it in the bedroom where it belongs? I don’t need your sex life shoved down my throat, lady! And every morning it’s, “Oh, me and my husband did this,” and “Oh, me and my wife went there” - shut up already! I don’t need to hear about your perversions! All these disgusting hets need to just get over their sexuality already! :mad:
Esprix
[sub]NOTE: For the humor-impaired, take that with a big :rolleyes: [/sub]
Goddamn mother fucking breeders! Death to them all!
Heterosexuals fuck their mothers? :eek:
Esprix
motherfucking breeders?
Does that mean in order to be born they had to fuck their mothers?
::boggle at that little paradox::
What I don’t like about “Homesexual Lifestyle” and similar constructs is that when I first heard it being used it was exclusively on religious (Christian) programming*. This was at least five years ago, before it started cropping up in every other article involving the word homosexuality (why does this word need a modifier again?).
Instead of saying “You’re going to hell for being homosexual”, they got to say “You’re going to hell for chosing a homosexual lifestyle.”, and automatically include their opinion that any form of non-married-heterosexual-missionary sex is a chosen perversion, not a natural preference some people have.
So I see it as intended to make the terminology a swipe against the many people who hold different positions (pun intended ), so it pisses me off too. I don’t scan it as neutral, and don’t think it’s originators intended it to be, either.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_term.htm
Obviously this site is not neutral, but a quick Google brought it up, they also associate the usage with “conservative christians”.
And not just the Homesexuals (oooooh, berber carpet! double glazing! I feel all tingly!), neither…
:rolleyes: at myself
“Instead of saying “You’re going to hell for being homosexual”, they got to say “You’re going to hell for chosing a homosexual lifestyle.”, and automatically include their opinion that any form of non-married-heterosexual-missionary sex is a chosen perversion, not a natural preference some people have.”
Well they couldn’t exactly imply that sexuality is an existence. They had to make it some horrible thing you choose because you want to disobey God. See, if you can put it in terms of God’s plan for you, and somehow imply that any person A) knows what that plan is or isn’t and B) is willfully disobeying it, then you can judge them right to the seventh circle of Hell.
:rolleyes: as needed (not at snermy but those who would do that).
What was the context? 