Flaunting Sexuality

[Michael]

Just like all them uppity Negroes ramming their PC "civil rights" jollies down everybody's throat after World War II.

Ah, no. Enslaved Black Americans whose ancestors were directly captured or bought in Africa, the natives of America, the Caribbean and the South Pacific, and then shipped there from, sold here, bought again, treated like cattle, rapped, bred, their children beaten, enslaved, hung, burnt, raped (sometimes by their white pedo fathers), murdered, sold, made to be illiterate and finally freed who were protesting in the 60s for equality are NO WHERE NEAR the same type of people as these whinny little bitches, bitching and whinning about "Merry Christmas".

Any connections whatsoever would be even more tenuous and construed and only see light or reason from the most whiniest and bitchiest of the lot.

To suggest otherwise would be a great slap in the face of those black Americans who risked their neck, literally, protesting in the 1960s.

 

[Tiassa]

Welcome to the ... uh ... twentieth century

To suggest otherwise would be a great slap in the face of those black Americans who risked their neck, literally, protesting in the 1960s.

Tell it to Huey Newton.

I do not remember our ever constituting any value that said that a revolutionary must say offensive things towards homosexuals, or that a revolutionary should make sure that women do not speak out about their own particular kind of oppression. As a matter of fact, it is just the opposite: we say that we recognize the women's right to be free. We have not said much about the homosexual at all, but we must relate to the homosexual movement because it is a real thing. And I know through reading, and through my life experience and observations that homosexuals are not given freedom and liberty by anyone in the society. They might be the most oppresed people in the society.​

____________________

Notes:

Newton, Huey P. "The Women's Liberation and Gay Liberation Movements". August 15, 1970. HistoryIsAWeapon.com. December 1, 2010. http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/newtonq.html

 

[pjdude1219]

Ah, no. Enslaved Black Americans whose ancestors were directly captured or bought in Africa, the natives of America, the Caribbean and the South Pacific, and then shipped there from, sold here, bought again, treated like cattle, rapped, bred, their children beaten, enslaved, hung, burnt, raped (sometimes by their white pedo fathers), murdered, sold, made to be illiterate and finally freed who were protesting in the 60s for equality are NO WHERE NEAR the same type of people as these whinny little bitches, bitching and whinning about "Merry Christmas".

Any connections whatsoever would be even more tenuous and construed and only see light or reason from the most whiniest and bitchiest of the lot.

To suggest otherwise would be a great slap in the face of those black Americans who risked their neck, literally, protesting in the 1960s.

I like the irony you complaining about whiny little bitches while all the while acting like well a whiny little bitch. how would you like it to see people do something that for them is taken for granted that they would be able to do but for your is a highly risky propostion thank could ruin their lives?

 

[Michael]

1) People are whiny little bitches.
2) That person is a whiny little bitch.

Spot the difference?

 

[Tiassa]

Bitchmonger

Spot the difference?

Ooh! Ooh! I know!

Someone can't get over their urge to call people bitches.​

Met your quota yet?

 

[Michael]

almost .... bitch

 

[pjdude1219]

1) People are whiny little bitches.
2) That person is a whiny little bitch.

Spot the difference?

it changes nothing about the argument and I used the plural because you have the tendency to be rather whiny about things you dislike

 

[TW Scott]

Just like all them uppity Negroes ramming their PC "civil rights" jollies down everybody's throat after World War II.

Look, we get it. When people are conditioned to accept and enforce bigotry, the one thing that won't work is pointing out injustice, double standards, or the bigotry itself.

Are you kidding me? Your comparing the systemic oppression of an ethnic group with christmas trees and holiday greeting? Oh come on.

If people do not wish to celebrate christmas, chanukah, kwansa, yule...etc, they do not have to. However thy should not have the right to make anyone else not celebrate it. We are a democracy that is based on freedom of religion, free speach, and the right to defend ourselves. Slowly it is all being taken away.

For the marriage proposal above, the one dissenting commenter is just being petty and vindictive, tryin to turn a beautiful moment into something crass. There is no doubt in my mind about this. Sure it fits their current gripe, but they are still just sullying a beautiful thing. If they wanted to further their cuase they should have applauded the whole event and made an appeal that hopefully one day a same sex couple could do the same.

 

[Tiassa]

(chortle!)

Are you kidding me? Your comparing the systemic oppression of an ethnic group with christmas trees and holiday greeting? Oh come on.

No, actually, the whole Christmas thing is just a heterosupremacist's false equivalence in an attempt to diminish the institution of marriage, defend open bigotry, and justify his profane and sexist condemnation of equality.

Follow the discussion, Mr. Scott.

For the marriage proposal above, the one dissenting commenter is just being petty and vindictive, tryin to turn a beautiful moment into something crass. There is no doubt in my mind about this. Sure it fits their current gripe, but they are still just sullying a beautiful thing. If they wanted to further their cuase they should have applauded the whole event and made an appeal that hopefully one day a same sex couple could do the same.

Does this mean we can finally do away with the heterosupremacist rhetoric about gays flaunting their sexuality by getting married?

See, that's the thing, Mr. Scott. I find it very interesting how bigots simply can't cope when their arguments are applied equally, instead of exclusively in the bigoted fashion they prefer.

 

[Michael]

No, actually, the whole Christmas thing is just a heterosupremacist's false equivalence in an attempt to diminish the institution of marriage, defend open bigotry, and justify his profane and sexist condemnation of equality.

Follow the discussion, Mr. Scott.



Does this mean we can finally do away with the heterosupremacist rhetoric about gays flaunting their sexuality by getting married?

See, that's the thing, Mr. Scott. I find it very interesting how bigots simply can't cope when their arguments are applied equally, instead of exclusively in the bigoted fashion they prefer.

Perhaps a lifetime of politically correct brainwashing has doomed you to a perspective trapped in a heterophobic box, wrapped in a homosupremacist cloak - thus, it now seems you sympathize and side with the verbal homoterroristis. Using your high-tech internet gadgetry, you dare to slam with political-incorrect nuclear tipped verbal insults a wedding pre-party of the purest innocents .... obliterating all their cherished happiness like a mushroom cloud of whinny bitchiness.

It seems you have come to resemble that which you once dared to stand against.

You are................... Darth Tiassa.

 

[pjdude1219]

Perhaps a lifetime of politically correct brainwashing has doomed you to a perspective trapped in a heterophobic box, wrapped in a homosupremacist cloak - thus, it now seems you sympathize and side with the verbal homoterroristis. Using your high-tech internet gadgetry, you dare to slam with political-incorrect nuclear tipped verbal insults a wedding pre-party of the purest innocents .... obliterating all their cherished happiness like a mushroom cloud of whinny bitchiness.

It seems you have come to resemble that which you once dared to stand against.

You are................... Darth Tiassa.

the only whiny bitchiness involved in this thread is yours. the fact you lack the ability to understand the pain it would cause a homosexual person to see something happen that they(heterosexuals) take for granted that for a homosexual would be impossible is sad. that you would mock that pain is reprehensible.

 

[Tiassa]

(Insert title here)

Perhaps a lifetime of politically correct brainwashing has doomed you to a perspective trapped in a heterophobic box, wrapped in a homosupremacist cloak - thus, it now seems you sympathize and side with the verbal homoterroristis. Using your high-tech internet gadgetry, you dare to slam with political-incorrect nuclear tipped verbal insults a wedding pre-party of the purest innocents .... obliterating all their cherished happiness like a mushroom cloud of whinny bitchiness.

It seems you have come to resemble that which you once dared to stand against.

You are................... Darth Tiassa.

Michael, I owe you an apology; I hadn't realized you were doing a comedy bit.

Sorry about that. Really. My bad.

 

[visceral_instinct]

I think it's fine for either sexual orientation.

I agree with Fraggle's point about seeing people show love being a lesson in itself.

What IS romantic, is something elusive, yet people know it when they feel it. A moonlit walk along a river bank? Romantic. A rotting landfill at high noon? Not so much. A young prince charming and his princess held in an embrace under an umbrella in the rain, romantic. Two studly hairy buff men holding hands going for a walk while working out. . . not so much.

Maybe I'm just utterly naive and impervious to society and its norms...But I thought it was really beautiful when I saw two young gay men walking around hand in hand (and yes, romantic). Especially as I don't exactly live in the most enlightened area, so being open with their sexuality took some courage.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

. . . . the bi/gay/trans-gender community . . . .

NOTE FROM THE LINGUISTICS MODERATOR

The press and academia have standardized on the term lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender. This column-inch and broadcast-second resource hog was almost instantly abbreviated to LGBT. Watch for it if you live in a big American city.

Just one second here, you ARE joking right? POLITICALLY INCORRECT opinions have to be legislated against and POLICED?

That's the only way they can be suppressed, since popular support for suppression is weak.

I'm pretty sure the 13 colonies were not founded on enforcing political correctness.

If I'm not mistaken, American culture has changed quite a bit since the founding of the colonies and the Declaration of Independence. Oh just a few little things like slavery, perhaps?

 

[The Esotericist]

NOTE FROM THE LINGUISTICS MODERATOR

The press and academia have standardized on the term lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender. This column-inch and broadcast-second resource hog was almost instantly abbreviated to LGBT. Watch for it if you live in a big American city.

Thanx.
I knew this, just slipped my mind. I'm not real good with acronyms all the time. . . :m:

 

[TW Scott]

Does this mean we can finally do away with the heterosupremacist rhetoric about gays flaunting their sexuality by getting married?

See, that's the thing, Mr. Scott. I find it very interesting how bigots simply can't cope when their arguments are applied equally, instead of exclusively in the bigoted fashion they prefer.

First of all, my given name is Scott. Thus Mr. Scott being incorrect. Mr. Scott brings abck memories of constant, though loved, Beam me up Scotty and other such jokes.

Secondly I actually support a system where there are two type of marriages.

Religious Marriage: Whereas two or more people are bound together through the laws of their faith.

Legislative Marriage: Where two people are bound together under the laws of the land.

The two marriages should be seperate. The first should not be interfered with in anyway as long as the participants ae conseting adults who have reached the age of majority and are mentall sound. The second is a legal marriage that gives all the legal rights and protections. A couple can have one or both.

This dual system allows any type of alternative lifestyle to have their marriage without infringing on legal or religious beliefs.

Want to marry your two best friends and can find a church that will support your marriage, you can doo the first. Want to marry your samesex lover to gain the rights and protection a married couple have you can get the second.

It's the best of both worlds.

 

[CrystalineGoddess]

I think that the only reason homosexuals sometimes flaunt their sexuality is because it is still such a controversial thing. It's like a shiny new toy; once it's worn in they won't flaunt it anymore.

Heteros don't need to flaunt it because people already assume that hetero is their orientation. It's society's current 'default'. Homosexuals have to say they are gay or it is assumed they're straight (with the exception of the flamboyant). It's kinda hard to get a date with someone of your own gender if no one knows that that is what you want.

I think over the years and with acceptance it will fade out. As long as they aren't being completely obnoxious about it I don't have an issue. :shrug: