Subject:
|
Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 15 Sep 2004 13:41:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2830 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Trobaugh wrote:
| |
I think the point was that why should sexual orientation of any kind be a
topic on a LEGO hobby site such as LUGNET. I believe it’s the love of LEGO
that has brought us together on here, beyond that I don’t think we need to
single out folks based on their other love interest outside of LEGO be it
heterosexual, homosexual or other.
|
I happen to not understand why the homosexual AFOLs would want to ghettoize
themselves that way either. And I’m not going to cry about it if there’s no
support for creating such a club. It doesn’t affect me particularly. AND, I
think it’s clear that some of the responses to the original post were saying
what you just claimed “the point” was. But that’s not what Mike wrote, and
thus, can’t be what he meant. He meant that any discussion of sexuality
would be seen as family-unfriendly. And that’s true in America. And a
shame. And worthy of debate. And since I hold very strongly opposing views,
I’m sharing them.
Sex should be just one more filter that colors all other conversations.
e.g. It is perfectly acceptable to discuss cars here. “Look guys, I built a
model of my little brother’s Porche!” Why? Shouldn’t our vehicle
orientation be left off LUGNET? After all, it’s the “love of LEGO that has
brought us together here.” “We don’t need to single out folks based on their
other loves...”
Why should sex be any different?
|
Hmmm, I think we’re in agreement but it’s not coming out clear. My point is why
do we need to have a separate group for gay MOCs (not sure what a gay MOC would
be). There is pretty much an correct group for pretty much any MOC, including
Porches. (I know a gay MOC group wasn’t requested directly but just trying to
address the example above)
My point was that I didn’t really see how sexual orentation effects one’s LEGO
hobby. I’ve been a member of a LUG/LTC with a gay member and his stuff was no
more gay than anything I built. So his sexual preferences really made no
difference to me, I just enjoyed seeing his great LEGO work. And I don’t think
he thought any less of my work because I wasn’t gay.
Either way, if a group is desired then fine, but I don’t see why it would be
needed.
jt
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
| (...) I happen to not understand why the homosexual AFOLs would want to ghettoize themselves that way either. And I'm not going to cry about it if there's no support for creating such a club. It doesn't affect me particularly. AND, I think it's (...) (20 years ago, 15-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
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
|
|
|
|
