| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, David Laswell wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Lee Meyer wrote:
> > I just love this abuse of the term "homophobic" to anyone who disagrees with
> > whatever homosexuals propose to do (and Alfred, this does not mean I am
> > saying you a homosexual because I don't know and don't care). No other
> > group exists - religious, racial, gender or otherwise - that wants to paint
> > anyone who disagrees with them at any level, homophobic.
>
> Of course not. If you disagree with women, you get labelled mysoginistic or
> male-chauvanistic, not homophobic. That wouldn't make any sense at all.
> Anyways, there is evidence that suggests that those who are rabidly homophobic
> are actually denying their own homosexual thoughts, and trying to do so in ways
> that prove to the world that it's not true (why else do you think that so many
> gays have been brutally murdered for suggesting that their murderers might be
> gay?).
>
> > No other group gets or deserves such a carte blanche pass on anything they
> > believe, espouse or desire to do.
>
> No other group gets so little protection against discrimination. No other group
> is so easily overlooked (intentionally or not) in everyday life. You can't walk
> up to a black man and think, "This person is white," without knowing that you're
> lying to yourself. Black people are black, and white people are white, but
> straight is the assumed standard, so unless a person makes a point of telling
> you their sexual orientation (either by stating it outright, or by making it
> unignorably blatantly clear through Jack McFarland-esque behavior), it's very
> easy to assume they're all straight.
>
> > And by the way, for those of you who like political correctness, if someone
> > actually WAS clinically homophobic, the types of sarcastic and biting
> > responses that are posted back to these people show that you're not above
> > demeaning someone who has a true pschological disorder - and how open-minded
> > and compassionate does that make you?
>
> I think it's safe to say that anyone who meets the clinical definition of
> "homophobic" would be unable to participate in this discussion in anything
> approaching a rational manner, so anyone who is able to present their views in a
> well-formulated way is fair game, right?
Really, give me a break. People in favor of this idea have tossed around the
term "homophobic" not in the clinical sense, but at anyone who hasn't embraced
this idea as being wonderful, and you know it. I was pointing out the fact that
those using the term 'homophobic ARE NOT using the clinical definition, but
whatever they THINK or FEEL what homophobia is (and in the various posts it
appears to be defined as anyone who raises any objection/opposition to whatever
homosexuals want to do.
All the replies I have received have not touched on my central points of what
sexual preference/orientation has anything to do with Lego (nobody has answered
this one), and the fact that GLBTI? Lego builders cannot recognize that right
now on LUGNET they are treated EXACTLY like any other Lego builder in this forum
- black, purple, Catholic, Muslim, boy or girl. You lament the fact other
LUGNET people won't know they're gay and assume they are not if they don't tell
them - if nobody asks you, why offer it? That's not hwo conversation works
anyways. If someone sends me a post about one of my ships and I send back a
reply and I stick a sentence in "FYI, I had sex with my wife today.", what the
heck does one have to do with the other? The other person's not interested in
this. Why force a subject on someone who didn't ask? And heaven forbid, let's
say a gay builder tells someone he's gay, has nothing to do with the person's
email, and the person replies back in the negative? Well I can just see the fur
flying and attempts to get that person censored or dropped.
In my own LUGNET experience, nobody's asking me anything personal about me! I
don't feel upset or hurt. Does it bother me that some liberal LUGNET builders
may 'project' me to be a liberal too? Does it bother me that conservative
LUGNET builders may picture me as conservative? Do I even care if they think I
may be female (as "Lee" can designate a man or woman)? Nope, not at all. I
don't need or crave or require anyone else here to validate me. I don't need
anyone here to like me, be my best friend, tell me everything I do is just super
and always right. I'm lucky because if I did some of the replies to my posts
would have really crippled my self-esteem.
Likewise, I don't ask anything about anyone else. Don't want to know. That's
not why I'm here on LUGNET, nad the vast majority of builders are not either.
They're checking out other peoples' designs. THey're finding out about events
and browsing sales for parts. They're checking out different themes. They
aren't using this as a dating service. They are not using this to book airfare
trips. They aren't using this site to get their daily web news. They aren't
finding fellow Episcopals or blacks or find the hottest nightclub in their area
is.
I say the same thing for any other group that wants to be defined by a non-Lego
characteristic - it's fair game for the off-topic area.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
207 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
