Brutus -
Do you have a wife? Do you mention that you are married/dating girl X? Do you talk about what you and the wife did/you and the girlfriend did over the weekend? Do you have a picture of the wife/girlfriend/children on your desk?
Guess what? You’re “pimping” your heterosexuality every time you do this.
Say the new temp is hot (assuming she’s a she and you’re a he)? “Pimping” your heterosexuality.
Insert rolleyes smiley here.
Brutus -
Do you have a wife? Do you mention that you are married/dating girl X? Do you talk about what you and the wife did/you and the girlfriend did over the weekend? Do you have a picture of the wife/girlfriend/children on your desk?
Guess what? You’re “pimping” your heterosexuality every time you do this.
Say the new temp is hot (assuming she’s a she and you’re a he)? “Pimping” your heterosexuality.
Insert rolleyes smiley here.
How can people come up with their own feelings towards gays if they’re not exposed to gay people, Brutus? Where would you have them get their information on gay people?
If gay people are to be accepted by society, and that has yet to be determined, we have to be able to let people know what gay people are really like. (For the uninitiated: just like everybody else, with a different sexual orientation and better decorating sense.) There have been a lot of lies about gay people which have been accepted by society, and if society is to accept us, it should do so based on what we really are, not on what lies have been told about us.
Can you define the term “pimp” as you used it above? Is it pimping out my sexuality to talk about my boyfriend and I going out to a movie? Are you pimping out your sexuality when you talk about your girlfriend and yourself going out to dinner? At what point does the conversation reach the level of pimping?
Just so you know, your whole post reads like a textbook example of classical homophobia. The “Of course they should have rights, they just should expect that we don’t accept them and why do they have to talk about it anyway” approach. At least you’re on board with the whole rights thing, I appreciate that. But if you’re still offended at seeing two men holding hands in public, while remaining indifferent to a hetero couple doing the same, you may want to spend some time examining those feelings.
Of course, it’s okay to feel prejudiced; I think everyone does, to some degree, toward some group of people. Overcoming those prejudices in order to treat all people based on their individual merits is one of the most noble, civilized tasks a human being can engage in. It takes work, but it’s worth it. You meet a lot of great people that way.
Oddly enough this throwaway comment by you gets back to the core of the OP.
Brutus, where in your opinon on the slippery slope of life does living one’s gay, straight or in-between everyday existence transcend to “pimping”? Mannerisms, attitude, clothing, musical tastes, ability to accessorize… what? Most (though not all) gay people I know are no more vocal or in your face about their sexuality than heterosexual people and many are less.
Please define your notion of “pimping” one’s sexual preference.
Errr… not all of us have decorating sense. Or fashion sense. Or an ability to cook. Damn it, I didn’t get any of the cool traits.
Kirk
What IS “Modernized British Colonial?” What does it look like?
And everyone knows Art Nouveau is the best.
I know - the sell-out!
Esprix
I live in Oklahoma, which is possibly worse than texas in terms of discrimination against gays, so I can definitely see where Homebrew is coming from in trying to guage how out he can be at work. This is not about “forcing his lifestyle” on anyone, it’s about being comfortable at your workplace- you know, where you spend half of your waking hours.
I agree with you that most “in your face” christians are scary fundies. But not all of them, especially not here in the bible belt where they assume we are all like them. In this very thread we have dreamer, who calls herself (it is her, right) a fundie- I would not be worried about what might happen if someone like her found out about my sexuality.
Here in the bible belt, it’s often times a lot harder to tell who is a christian and who is a “christian”, if you know what I mean.
I’m curious as to why you keep describing this as “forcing” an issue. How does leaving a magazine around that others may peruse or not according to their choice “force” anyone to do anything? Does an indication of the “gay” demographic on the cover “force” you to remember that gay people exist? Is there a similar discomfort from copies of Ebony or Bon Appetit reminding you that black people and people who like to cook exist? Of course, Homebrew is in Texas, so maybe copies of The New Yorker give people there the Screaming Willies. (Talk about a great band name. Or a great gay band name.)
As I mentioned in the other thread, it seems to me that the argument here is that The Advocate is, indeed, pushing some kind of agenda. In that vein, I, too, agree that we ought to remove all heterosexually-oriented magazines (which would be, I daresay, all of them) from the workplace. Shoving your weird sex life down my throat is wholly inappropriate, so I’d ask you perverted heterosexuals to keep your filthy sex lives in the bedroom where it belongs, thank you very much. And, indeed, that should go for wedding rings, pictures of your spouse on your desk, and all discussion of children as well.
Filthy, the way you flaunt your sexuality in public. It’s enough to make right-minded people feel all… oogie.
Esprix
In response to the statement made by Astro that “personal sharing” is a chick-thing, I beg to differ. One guy in my office talks about his kid getting a baseball scholarship and what school he’s going to attend, my boss told me he’s divorcing and the carpeting in his new place will have to be torn out. And I wasn’t talking about details of a knock-down drag-out fight…I was referring to, “We went to a party at John’s boss’s house, and John and the guys in his dept. talked shop all night.” This is all common conversation. You may be like my husband, who socializes with no one at work because he dislikes all of them, but most people aren’t like that. Men do it as often as women. Maybe different subjects, but all personal, nonetheless.
Shodan: i, for one, would love to hear about a sighting of a tufted titnmouse.
Even its sex life might be interesting.
You never know what will offend some people til you say it.
I apologize that I wasn’t stating myself clearly in making the distinction between personal and PERSONAL . There’s everyday “personal” chit chat about what you did over the weekend, the kids schoolwork and athletics, local and national news topics etc. etc., and then there’s deeply personal stuff about your emotional feelings, complex and conflicted relationship issues with significant others rendered in excrutiating detail, the intimate details of what happened on a date, and often scathing group discussions about some other person in the office that you (and potentially others) have some perceived personal conflict with.
These are not exclusive categories and some men are more chatty on these subjects than some women, but overall these are topics that are generally far more likely to be avoided by men, and, to the extent they are discussed it’s generally a female to female(s) discussion in the vast majority of cases. Men who are going through a painful divorce will occasionally glurge to a trusted confidant, but these are one of the few exceptions to the rule and men (if they do this) are usually very cautious about it.
This more profound level of deep personal sharing and interpersonal detail that many (though not all) women feel comfortable (even eager) to engage in is something your standard issue man generally avoids if at all possible. It’s quite possible that your experiences are different, but I have been working in professional office environments in the US for over 20 years and this is my take on the conversational dynamics in these contexts. It’s not right or wrong it’s just different. Mars-Venus behaviors and differences are not determinative of male female interactions but it’s just as false to claim they do not exist.
Astro, I agree that women tend to go deeper into personal stuff at the office because we generally forge different types of relationships than men do. And a lot of it is uninteresting to me, as well. I don’t want to hear the sordid details about anyone’s sex life, but, getting back on subject here, gay life encompasses more than sex.
Issues that are timely and important (and pertinent not only to the gay community) are evidently what is covered in the magazine in question. All I’m saying is that gay folks should feel free to talk the same way the hets do (whether they do the “guy” thing or the “chick” thing is irrelevant), including topics such as adoption, trips, evenings out, and all the rest of the blah, blah, blah that makes us human and also allows us to fit in. A guy shouldn’t be afraid to say that his SO made him a wonderful, special meal for their anniversary, wheter the SO is a woman or another guy.
Someone else said it and I’ll second it…the less we integrate people who are different from us into our lives, the longer they will continue to appear alien (read: less human). What a gay couple does between the sheets shouldn’t interest you any more than what the het couple next door does in the sack. Focus on the similarities and celebrate the differences.
I just now noted that I made reference to my wife in the earlier post in this thread during the time when we were discussing the content of the magazine referenced in the OP. My apologies for pimping my heterosexuality to all who might have been offended!! :rolleyes:
The reason people are so apprehensive about the gay lifestyle is that it IS IMMORAL! Now I know what is coming. I’m a bigot, right? Well, then so is God, evidently. Anyone remember the story of Sodom and Gomorrah?
The sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
So-called “homophobes” are usually just people who are attuned to hear the whispering of the Holy Spirit which reminds them of what an abomination homosexuality is to the LORD.
Truth is truth. It is absolute, not subjective. Homosexuality has been immoral since the beginning of time and it won’t change just because it is now more socially acceptable.
Who died and made YOU god, Dude? And you’re not a so-called “homophobe”…you’re a homophobe. Period. Buh-bye.
"Ah, no, Reverend Davidson, your God and me could never be shipmates. The way you got God figured out, he’s nothin’ but a cop, and the next time you see him you tell him for me that Sadie Thompson is on her way to hell!"
. . . Sorry, MrMcPlad up there just gave me a Rain moment . . .
^^ Oh lovely.
Dude, it’s been done. Repeatedly. To DEATH.
You know, I’m going to start leaving my Royalty magazines lying around…
Sacred powers, huh? I guess that’s why they say, “Oh, God, Oh, God!”
Ever hear of Zeus and Ganymede? Gilgamesh and Enkidu? David and Jonathan?
One heck of a god you got there, buster. He disapproves of same-sex horizontal mambo (along with bacon, oysters, and cotton/polyester blends), but He’s all right with slavery, genocide, and slaughtering disobedient children. Sorry, but I won’t be lectured by someone who worships something so evil.
Bwa-ha-ha-ha! Take a philosophy class, kiddo; you’re out of your depth here.