Poll: Can you hate gay culture and not be homophobic?

[Agayek]

If Blondes had to put up with being insulted, terrorized, shunned, beaten, and killed for "being Blonde" they may need to put a little more effort into feeling pride. "Gay Shame" is a problem, so "Gay Pride" is an attempt at a solution. Removed from all context, yes, it makes very little sense. In a world where gays were NOT treated like lepers (or worse) by a significant portion of the population, you're absolutely right, it would make no sense whatsoever. We do not, however, live in that world.

As the saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right. People being attacked for being gay is wrong, as is taking pride in something you had no influence or choice in. Take a step back and realize that your sexuality is a complete non-issue. It has no bearing or relevance in anything except your choice of sexual/marital partner. Anyone that lets their orientation influence anything outside of that is doing it wrong.

If everyone stops treating a thing as a big deal, it becomes a non-issue. If you stop banging on about being gay and treat it as if it's completely normal, most everyone else will too.

There will always be some hold-outs and zealots who refuse to accept any individual person, if not for their orientation than for their skin color, cultural upbringing, political views or any number of other things. No one will ever be universally accepted. Stop giving the bigots power by validating their opinions.

Now, protests for gay marriage and/or outrage over unfair treatment is a whole different matter, do not confuse that. I'm purely talking about taking pride in something you had no choice or influence in.

 

[DarkRyter]

You just have to be completely clear.

"Whilst I hold no strong feelings toward your being a homosexual and am quite accepting of it, I still disapprove of your mannerisms and behavior, and once I again I must reiterate that this opinion comes with no regard towards your sexual orientation".

There you go.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Because it's totally irrelevant to the question. I don't give Bob any specific race because it's not implied.

Ugh..

'Markedness' refers to the way in which certain categories are not treated as possessing inherent value (positive or negative value) whereas others are. Assuming you genuinely did not picture Bob at all or did not exercise your imagination, which I'm prepared to accept since I'll freely admit my example was purely an experiment and may not have worked, even if this is true, you nonetheless did not remove from him the fact that he must have a race (everyone does). By assuming that his race was immaterial to his circumstances you inherently assumed he was white, because were he black his race would not be immaterial, it would be marked.

As I've already said, race is a difficult example of this, sexuality, however, is not.

Both condemn behaviour that is normal by labelling it undesirable?

And yet you treat normality like it's a meaningful concept..

I'm sorry, unless you can quote me an article which actually slags off all these miserable pariahs who like overweight women, as opposed to, for example, encouraging women to lose weight, I'm not accepting this point.

No, because men have never been the subject of beauty and sexuality in that form.

Why not?

There's a hanging thread here, follow it and see where it leads.

And you'd also be focussing purely on part of the problem rather than the whole. Again, you're focussing on "the right to be gay" rather than "the right to be."

...

Sometimes, I'm baffled by the interpretations people come out with of my arguments, this is one of those times.

The "right to be" could not be more irrelevant to me. To be honest, it kind of disgusts me that people feel they have to be personally defined by who they fuck, as if it has some big and sincere meaning which marks their very soul. It strikes me as 9/10ths of the problem. The "right to do" matters, that's meaningful and real, it has tangible consequences.

What's kind of weird to me is that you see these two things, being gay and having a socially maligned sexual preference, as somehow part of a completely distinct phenomena. The template for what we call 'perversity' was formed in 19th century sexological accounts of homosexuality, the model of thwarted desire culminating in unnatural perversion was laid down in Richard Von Krafft Ebbing's idea of the 'impotent masturbator' as the future homosexual. These theories appeared to explain homosexuality, not to explain men liking fat women or old women.

"The right to be gay" is really not a separate thing from the "right to like fat women". If you want that right, stop fucking closeting about it. The first step to not having it be a source of shame is to stop treating it like a source of shame, and stop expecting everyone else to treat their non-conforming sexualities like sources of shame too because otherwise they might win the race to become socially recognized first.

Stop for a moment and consider what a society which genuinely accepted same sex intimacy as equally valued, desirable and respectable would be like, if you think that wouldn't necessitate enormous changes in attitudes to beauty, to sexual desirability or to who constitutes a socially valued sexual partner, think again. If you think it would still be possible to take the experience of a small group of exclusively heterosexual men as 'normal' or ideal, also think again.

Yes we are. The ideal partner. Which is taken to be your opposing gender. And the person who is allegedly going to make you happy. This is the ideal. That is why being LBGT changes that aspect and causes confusion. Because no ideal exists for a LBGT because it's not based on centuries of evolved ideals.

A taboo is not an ideal.

People have been physically and chemically castrated for this, people have suffered clitorodectomies, imprisonment, lobotomies, electroshock therapy and forced drug and hormone treatment because the mere possibility of such desire even existing in human beings is so incredibly horrific. People are routinely murdered, raped, sexually abused or physically assaulted by people who simply cannot stand the existence of a homosexual person.

How do you explain this as the mere failure to conform to an ideal which, as you've said yourself, very few people meet anyway? Why do people who ideally want to sleep with porn stars settle for fat women but continue to find the idea of sleeping with beautiful men abhorrent?

Ideals are ideal. They can be compromised, so where's the compromise?

Swish-swish-swish, anyone who disagrees must be hiding something.

Sure, and anyone who disagrees also thinks they're better than me.

When you take the meaning of a clearly contextualized statement and assume you can imply some grandiose truth about how someone else feels about you from it, you're just being insecure. Maybe you think I mean something else by the term insecure, but I assure you that you're just being insecure about that as well.

I've no idea. Do you think the abnormally high suicide rates of young heterosexual men are marks of superiority and happiness?

Abnormal compared to what?

A comparative statement draws meaning from the comparison, there isn't a clear axis of comparison here so I can't find the meaning.

Let me stop you there. You don't know a thing about what I know, what I care about and what my sexuality is - but you've spent a good half page attacking what you think I mean when you admit not understanding what I'm talking about.

I understand the vast majority. I just don't really understand why you think this point about screaming in the street that you like fat women is in any way relevant to anything I said in my original post, or indeed to the original topic.

And considering you've consistently implied I'm gay despite my repeated assertions to the contrary I find this relatively ironic.

How about you put away that knife and talk to the "breeders" like they're other human beings that are not put on this Earth purely to condemn homosexuals.

..I really don't like passive aggressive shit, you know.

For all you know I could have a child myself or could be in the process of planning one, so I think implying that I think of anyone as a 'breeder' is slightly flawed, don't you? Again, I can and do have penetrative sex with people who have wombs.

The reason I have guessed (correctly, right?) that you are heterosexual is because at every stage of this discussion you have taken what I've said as an attack. You've constantly looked for things in what I say to beat yourself up with, to the point where my saying that it's practically impossible to live a "normal" life as a non-heterosexual is taken as me saying I'm better than heterosexuals.

This is the part of straight culture that upsets me the most, that somehow by daring to talk about our experiences, our lives or our relationships as if they're anything but woefully inadequate attempts to mimic heterosexual ones, that we're somehow aggressively intruding into your lives and belittling you or trying to imply that you're nasty people and we're better than you.

No, we're just talking about our lives as if they're just as good and meaningful and important as yours even though they're different. If your response to that is to try and tell people they shouldn't be so different, then maybe it's time to get over yourself.

 

[marurder]

Sounds like a tolerance vs acceptance thread.
I know some homosexual people (back in Australia - none in China) while I would tolerate a homosexual person in my company, I keep (personally) a clear line between my workplace and private life, if I owned a company I would ask that my employees do the same regardless of sexual preference or gender. I would not accept an employee that is overboard 'gay' and makes a point of being different because the law protects them so. In fact I think that is an interesting question, is it legal to say in an employee contract to force someone to not behave in a way that could be considered (overly) homosexual? OR should it be worded in other ways?

 

[CrazyGirl17]

I guess it all depends on how you express yourself on the matter... or... something.

 

[The Gnome King]

Well, can you? I know a few gay people, and I've called some of them my friends but never someone who makes 'I'm gay' a major part of their identity.

One's sexuality is a major part of their identity. If you don't like feminine, flamboyant gay men who are constantly talking about sex, that's fine and I don't think it means you automatically hate gays - though you might want to do some soul searching to figure out why it bothers you so much.

Every time a woman comes to work and has all her coworkers look at her wedding plans or invites them to a baby shower; she's flaunting her sexuality. Every time a man shows you a picture of his wife or girlfriend; he's flaunting his sexuality. Would you consider a man coming in to work being just as excited over his upcoming homosexual wedding to be "flaunting" his sexuality? What if he mentions his "partner" and shows a picture of the kids we adopt?

Like it or not, nearly every interaction in society includes sizing people up. One of the first thing women at bars do to me is check to see if I'm wearing a wedding ring. I am - two of them, one for my wife and one for my male partner.

I wouldn't say I'm too into the *youthful* gay culture of clubbing, drugs, and "hookups" but that's my personal taste - I know heterosexuals into a culture of clubbing, drugs and "hookups" and that's not for me, either. I have no problem with lust as long as there is no lust without commitment; that's just not for me.

My own male partner and I are fairly masculine men, I'm bi - he's gay - and we've never been accused of "flaunting" our sexuality. Still, at a party if he gives me a peck on the cheek or puts his arm around me and that freaks you out I think the problem is yours, not ours. It's not "gay culture" to show affection to your loved one. While making out in front of others can be considered poor taste gay or straight, simply putting your arm around somebody or introducing them as a partner shouldn't raise any red flags.

My take on it - if my wife and I could do it in public, my male partner and I should be able to do the same and if we can't that's a problem with society, not us.

But, the gay twink club culture of getting drunk and going home with random guys? That disgusts me as much as the hetero bar culture of getting drunk and going home with random women or men. I've had my fair share of one-night stands, mostly with women.

They seldom really enrich your life, in my opinion. I don't drink like I did when I was in my 20's, though. I used to be able to get sloshed, meet a woman, bring her home, and feed her breakfast in the morning without ever recalling her name. I find that culture just as distasteful as any gay one.

 

[The Gnome King]

Sounds like a tolerance vs acceptance thread.
I know some homosexual people (back in Australia - none in China) while I would tolerate a homosexual person in my company, I keep (personally) a clear line between my workplace and private life, if I owned a company I would ask that my employees do the same regardless of sexual preference or gender. I would not accept an employee that is overboard 'gay' and makes a point of being different because the law protects them so. In fact I think that is an interesting question, is it legal to say in an employee contract to force someone to not behave in a way that could be considered (overly) homosexual? OR should it be worded in other ways?

What is "overboard gay" to you? Do you have an "overboard straight" or is it fine if straights flaunt their sexuality?

Would it be fine for a woman to invite her friends to a bachelorette party but would you feel uncomfortable if a gay man invited you to his bachelor party if he were committing himself to a man? Would one be "normal" but the "gay thing" be over the line?

How much do gays have to hide around you in order to be acceptable? Must they never talk about their partners or interests? Would you have a similar problem with a heterosexual person talking about their spouse?

 

[emeraldrafael]

I think you're misunderstanding the gay culture. Really the "gay culture" isnt much different from the straight culture, or from whatever ethnic culture the gay person may be part of.

What you're having a problem with is the very vocal minority that unfortunately makes up the stereotype of gay people.

And if you mean a gay pride parade well... I dont know, Id say its a bit wrong to hate those. Thats like hating an italian for having an italian pride parade. if you can tolerate any other ________ pride or ________ heritage event, id say you may not be homophobic, but hypocritical and in the wrong.

 

[DannyBandicoot]

Of course you can, you are not disliking gays you are disliking campness. Disliking gays is like disliking someone who likes bananas, disliking someone just because they are camp is like disliking someone stuffing a banana down your throat..

Maybe banana was a bad simile..

 

[Rin Little]

don't worry about it dude, I'm bi and I hate people like that. I went to college with a gay guy who was very "I'm gay and you'd better fucking love me for it or else you're a hater." And he hated anyone else who tried to say that they were discriminated against too, cuz he had to have the monopoly on it.

 

[Shock and Awe]

Yeah, a lot of what is considered "gay culture" is really fucking annoying to me, but I have no problem with homosexuals themselves.

 

[Yopaz]

You don't want to hear my opinion, then why did you bother to comment on my post in the first place? Why did you enter a thread where people share their opinions?
Now when cheerleaders perform when do they shout slogans stating they are straight? Can you prove that 100% of all cheerleaders are straight? Are all football games about showing off heterosexual pride?
If you want to know the answer to why they have cheerleaders is that it's a way to entertain the crowd while the team gets some rest. They chant the team's name to raise team spirit and to make the crowd do the same. It's a mild form of brainwashing. Horny men gets turned on by it and are more likely to go to the game to get a closer view.
Also you might be unaware of this, but not only straight men like women.

I know very few lesbians that are interested in football or cheerleaders because they get turned on by women in skimpy outfits gyrating and doing gymnastic routines, maybe they are into women's gymnastics but not football, not for that reason. More importantly, the concept of cheerleaders and their outfits was created specifically to appeal to heterosexual men both on and off the field.

Sure there is more to cheerleading than that. As you mention they do provide entertainment. Likewise, there is more to gay pride parades than just gay people telling straight people that they are gay. There are floats that make thoughtful commentary about social issues or appeal to causes of charity. There are floats that are humorous, there are floats and marching bands that play music for entertainment.

Many if not most LGBT people spend part of their lives hiding who they are from a society that at times seems violently if not homicidally opposed to who they are. Maybe you are just part of the intended audience. Maybe pride parades are about the LGBT community telling each other that they are proud to be out and free to express themselves as extravagantly as they want to.

You could not tell I am gay just by looking at me, but I have been to several gay pride parades. The first parade I went to also happened to be the first time my hometown hosted a parade. That time and EVERY time since, it simply felt good to be amongst my peers publically expressing an essential part of my being without fear of reprisals and to share the overall happy and festive spirit of the event.

Opinions are fine, but hearing someone constantly complaining about something that some people enjoy and causes no direct harm does get rather tiresome. You do believe in the freedom of speech, yes?

OK, so you clearly didn't see anything I have said except for the parts that could be interpreted to me being a homophobic. You say a football game is a a straight parade. Is there anything more to a football game than cheerleaders? Like anything? Cause I was under the impression that there was a football game played there too. As I said, cheerleaders are used to attract straight men. I didn't deny the fact. It's a marketing thing. They earn money from crowds. It's a mild form of brainwashing. You did not bother to answer if you can prove that 100% of all cheerleaders are straight. You did not bother to answer if every football game is all about sexuality. Good for you that you didn't, because the answer is no to all of it.

As I said I find it obnoxious to flaunt sexuality even if you're heterosexual or homosexual, but that might just be me. I went to donate blood 2 days ago and I thought myself obnoxious because I got a bag that said with big letters that I donated blood so this might just be me having a problem with pride in things I find pointless to pride yourself in.

I must also say that I find it funny that you hate my opinions with a fiery passion and tell me so in every post that you do not want my opinions nor care what they are. Yet you started this debate between you and me. You're the one complaining about free speech, but has the constant need to inform the one you're talking to that you would prefer that person to shut the hell up. You get the choice between replying or ignoring. If you hate seeing opinions why do you visit a forum? I'm an atheist. I believe in evolution and strongly so. I get annoyed when someone question it and saying it's a load of bogus, but I often ignore it rather than engage in a pointless debate over it. I don't look for religious people to tell them that they're wrong.
Why do you use time and energy debating against a person who thinks homosexuals are worth as much as everyone else, deserves all the same rights as anyone else, do not have any ideas that homosexuals are perverts or sex addicts rather than discussing this with an actual homophobe?

 

[excentric22]

Depends on what you mean by gay culture and flamboyant. Some people on here seem to think that flamboyance is a reaction to straight culture.

First, "straight culture" in the sense that it is directly constructed around heterosexuality (i.e. Beer commercials, Axe body spray commercials, and the like) are just as annoying as the out loud and proud aspects of gay culture. Straight up. I prefer gay clubs to clubs because of how much I hate that macho hetero bullshit.

Second, I think when a lot of people here talk about flamboyant gays or out loud and proud gays, they arent talking about gay people who hold hands or kiss or are seen in public together. Those arent flamboyant or out loud in any way. theyre just living their lifes. What theyre talking about is the people who go out of their way to display their sexuality as part of their identity. Almost like their holding it over your head. And that isnt limited to gay people, straight people do it too.

 

[mxfox408]

Yes. Because hating anything that has to do with any minority is discrimination! No matter what! You don't like that that redneck guy just punched his wife? Well, your a hillbillyphobe! Don't like that Black kid talks "street" to the point that you can't even understand a damn thing he says? Racist!

In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm.

No, it's not homophobic, hell, there are Gay people who hate that shit! I know I would. Those are the kinds of Gays who do the most damage to those who want people to just look at them as normal people.

Same way with Blacks who constantly pull the race card. Your doing more damage to your "cause" then you are helping it.

The problem is that there are straight people that wont accept me no matter what I do, even if I was celebate. If I am not accepted, I dont want to fit in, and I certainly dont care about/dont have a perception that certain people are "ruining it" for me. BTW equal rights granted by the goverment because I am a citizen of that country are not conditional on me strictly conforming to the societal norms of that country, as long as I am not breaking the law.

What you and a lot of people here fail to realize is that you have no right not to be annoyed or offended. Tolerence is funny concept here. You dont tolerate things you like. You tolerate things you dont, things that make you uncomfortable, etc.

I can agree with the OP to a degree. After I saw a trailer for "Bruno" (the 2nd Sasha Cohen movie) I said something to the effect of "there's one gay man that deserves to be gay-bashed".

I feel I can ruun a hundred different directions with this, so I will try keep it simple. I think a lot of you "I dont like the flamers" are confusing intential antagonization (like Sasha) with accidental antagonization. I know it happens and I dont condone it. However, I think some peopleare SO SENSITIVE about anything that can or is labeled gay, effeminant, or camp that they fly off the handle as soon as they witness something that can be percieved as such. Meanwhile you take you own culture for granted to such a degree that you fail to realize that some "in your face" homosexuals are only copying the version of heterosexual culture you both live in everyday.

If you hate your own culture so much, why dont I see more threads like "I hate men that talk about women." "OH god, I saw a guy kissing a girl at the bus stop toady and nearly threw up" "Why do guys flaunt their (hetero)sexuality so much". People only seem to bring these issues up when they are talking about homosexuals, and that is suspect. If this happens all the time and you really do hate it why dont more people speak up about it. Why is it always the burden of the homosexual to make up for and somehow conform to somes aspects of society while somehow having the clarvoyance not to emulate the aspects of your own culture you apparently loathe.

Firstly I'd like to start out saying you shouldn't lean towards acceptance. Instead do what you want, its you choice so fuck what anyone else thinks, be yourself, and don't try to fit in. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has them. So live your life based on your own accord and screw what people think about your lifestyle, as long as you separate it from your professional life, that goes for everyone not just gay people. Secondly, the point your missing is people are more concerned with the in your face I'm gay and proud and you can't do nothing about it gay types. Those are the immature bastards that you should be going after as they are doing harm toward gay rights as they act like they speak for the whole movements behalf. More people get turned off when people act like assholes and rebels about their lifestyle and those are the douchebags I believe most of us are talking about. When was the last time you saw someone prancing around saying I'm straight and proud, or straight pride parades?

Personally, I can care less about your lifestyle but I'm not pushing my religious beliefs and lifestyle down your throats so why should anyone else be the exception to the rule? If you gay your gay, if your straight your straight, if your bi your bi, just STFU about it already, that goes go all lifestyles emo, goth, straight, gay, whatever just grow up about it already.