Subject:
|
Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 18 Sep 2004 22:00:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4403 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Joakim Olsson wrote:
>
> Hi, this is a good post, but there is something I do not understand with it:
> You wrote: "where I would not feel comfortable sharing any LGBT related MOCS
> in a general forum"
>
> I have to ask: Why the heck not? What is a LGBT related MOC? How would it
> look like? I simply cannot understand how a MOC can represent a persons
> sexual preference without depicting actual sexual stuff? Sexual stuff does
> not (What I know off) belong on Lugnet.
Joakim,
No problem asking. Several examples of LGBT related MOCs were already brought
up, but to recap: there was a castle inhabited by lesbians, a gay bar, a gay
"ghetto" (most big cities have one - NYC's Chelsea, Seattle's Capitol Hill,
etc.), and in general any story driven MOC which is character based (for
instance, all of my MOCs are based in "The New Omicron Republic" and there is a
whole story behind all of the ships and buildings and what not. Some of the
people inhabiting this little world are gay (which would be described in the
descriptions of the scenarios or what not as probably the only visible clue
would be the one bed two same sex people thing).
I've found that a lot of people tend to think that gay = sexual stuff.
Obviously the difference between straight people and non straight people is the
difference in attraction to genders. But believe it or not, there are a large
amount of subtle differences that have absolutely NOTHING to do with sex. As a
gay person, I am just as disturbed as I am sure you are at children seeing
sexual images; its just not appropriate. Just because someone is gay does not
mean they have lost common sense (and I am not saying that you think anything I
said above, I'm just trying to clarify my point)
> Not everyone is building stuff to decorate wedding cakes with. (And this is
> the only MOC I can think of)
>
> Or is a need to discuss private matters regarding personal life with others
> that are in the same situation?
> My personal view is that I keep that kind of personal stuff by myself, or in
> other related forums. But that is my personal view, and probably not shared
> by others.
A short answer is yes; it is a need to discuss private matters regarding
personal life. Mind you, this is probably a hard issue to quantify as most
straight people (from what I have seen and there are exceptions) do not have to
think twice about mentioning casually "their wife/husband", or perhaps where
they got the idea for a MOC (for instance, I may not feel comfortable saying, "I
was in New Orleans at Mardi Gras and saw this great gay bar and decided to build
it" - I might censor what I say and just say that I saw a bar in New Orleans and
then omit any gay references (rainbow flags, same sex couples). Sublte
differences but they would be two different MOCs and, I think, one wouldn't be
as cool as it wouldn't be as accurate a description of something.
I would challenge anyone to read all of their past posts and not find one
reference to something which clues you in as straight (if you are). Thats my
only real point about wanting to share personal stuff. Otherwise, I have no
desire to tell you more about my life than that which effects what I build.
>
> Excuse me if I have missed something, but I had to ask.
> Be well! And play on!
> /Joakim
And Joakim, thanks for asking some intelligent questions. Thats what this
thread should be about.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
| "Jeff Pelletier" <jeff@studio7733.com> wrote in message news:I49Bsw.1BDI@lugnet.com... (...) it: (...) MOCS (...) it (...) does (...) brought (...) gay (...) Hill, (...) is a (...) the (...) the (...) clue (...) is the (...) large (...) As a (...) (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
| "Jeff Pelletier" <jeff@studio7733.com> wrote in message news:I496JG.Io6@lugnet.com... snipped some old stuff. (...) more and (...) to (...) in (...) No (...) is (...) think (...) would (...) speak (...) ignorant to (...) civil (...) can't (...) (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
