Your Opinions on Dealing With Homosexual People

IMs. Ever heard of them? And you obviously don't know many gay people. They tell some of the best gay jokes. Of course, there are militant gays who want to push an agenda and the people who support them. I have no time for them.

 

The question of "How should they be treated?" does not imply that they should be treated differently. It more accurately establishes the fact that they are treated differently than other individuals because of their personal lifestyles.

Why are they treated differently by so many people?

 

How convenient. Of course, one wonders why you were congratulated on your wit via IM instead of in the thread. Sounds like typical human behavior in which people will say one thing (or nothing) in public, but can be downright gleeful about expressing their prejudices in private with those who share them.

Very relevant in a thread that asks for opinions on dealing with a group of people who are the target of bias - "just talk about them behind their backs" is apparently an answer that no one wants to give, as it would be too revealing.

Apparently you've forgotten that you're talking to a gay man?

We can joke about the stereotypes amongst ourselves because we understand that they're exaggerations of reality. (or in mockery of how completely divorced from reality they are, and how stupid the people who think they have something to do with the truth must be in order to believe such a thing). When people who aren't gay do it, we immediately have to ask ourselves whether they're laughing with us or at us. If there isn't an existing relationship of trust that informs our understanding that you "get it", then laughing at us is what we're more likely to assume.

"Why?" you might ask. Self-preservation. If someone reveals themselves to be a bigot who thinks jokes associating gay men with characteristics of anuses or anal sex is funny - because they think it represents some great truth about us and a great tool by which to mock us - then it's probably wise for us to protect ourselves in whatever way the context of the situation allows. That might mean clamming up. It might mean walking away. It might mean laughing at the joke while dying a little inside to make the bigot think we're on their side, and therefore less likely to focus on us personally as a target.

Funny, your off-topic joke has probably been more informative in answer to the question proposed by this thread than most of the other posts - not because of what it said, but because of the things that lie behind it when you peel back the surface.

 

It makes no difference to me whether someone is straight or gay. I talk to them the same way. However, the gay people I know obviously have a different perspective than straight people so our conversations are sometimes different. I must say that I was shocked when a gay man first told me a gay joke decades ago. It was something like "I can't look at you with a straight face." As with all human interactions, once you reach a certain comfort level you can say just about anything.

It's funny you would bring up the 'bigot' word. I've noticed that people who do that are usually bigots themselves and are just covering for it by assuming an attack position. Same with racists. But whatever. I don't know you and therefore don't know if you're a bigot or not. You do seem to be extremely defensive which you can either get over or not. Doesn't matter to me.

 

Funny that you would seize on that one word and ignore the substance of my post.

As for whether or not I'm a bigot, I'm sure that I have my prejudices just like any other honest human being. But that doesn't make me a bigot. A bigot is someone who refuses to confront their prejudices when presented with the truth and an opportunity to have a change of mind.

As for being defensive, walk a mile in my shoes and maybe you'll have something relevant to say about it that I should give some credence.

 

Any more than a few women who for some reason or other in gatherings once they are slammed they like to remove their clothing.

Sure it's neat to look at the first time but it gets to the point where you hope those people don't show up.

 

Oddly enough, the one really out there flamboyant gay I know (also a fair Diana Ross impersonater) is not the petty squeaky wheel type I mentioned earlier....just way out there flamboyant, but good sense of humor etc.

 

I can deal with the flamboyance, as long as it isn't the over the top "LOOK AT ME I'M GAY!!! LOOK AT ME!!" kind. I'm talking running around it women's clothing, singing "Hallelujah its raining men!" kind. The obnoxious loud idiocy that is just pandering to grab attention in any way. I just can't stand that.

 

Right! I'm just not attracted to that. I suppose some people like expressing themselves in that way... but it's not a turn-on for me. I'm a masculine guy that likes masculine men. Even so, there ARE certain gay guys who want the hyper-feminine, extroverted type of gay males.

In any case, gay/straight... the attention-seeker type of person DOES seriously annoy me. In this forum, the equivalent would be those who are always flame-baiting.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'm attracted to men. I'm not interested in a man who could double as a woman. Though to each their own and I have no problem with them. I don't mind the flamboyant types, the feminine gay men, or the fashion oriented gay men who always have to have matching everything for clothes.

That doesn't bother me one bit. It's more the attitude that gets to me. The pervasive idea that absolutely everyone HAS to know that they are gay. The loud obnoxious, often ignorant, shove it in everyone's face person. The type you see and instantly know drama will follow wherever they go.

Those are the people I just can't stand.

 

I'm relating totally.

 

I find the ladyboys no more odd than the macho men in buttless leather chaps who insist their ladyboys wear a dog collar.

 

It seems you have a real obsession with fetish sex.

You do realize that fetishes such as leather, bondage, and BDS&M are practiced by heterosexuals as well?

You can attempt to single out homosexuals, but you only show that you're attempting to gloss over reality.

 

The above reeks of irrational animus. It means no more than garbage.

 

Right! He probably wouldn't know the average homosexual, if he saw us. (Thank God.)

 

Two of my five daughters claimed to be lesbians. One discovered guys and is now heterosexual, went cold turkey from her homosexuality. The other, time will tell. She believes in God but does not have a relationship with Jesus. That is my hope, more than what her sexuality is.

All my daughters are good, successful and loved. I couldn't have been more blessed.

 

Who knows why some people are the way they are (or even change)?

Yes, there are many unknown complexities to human sexuality. It is the pounding and hammering of homosexual people (socially and sometimes physically) that concerns me most.

People who truly don't mean well, do a lot of permanent harm to gays. That kind of thing needs to be minimized or eliminated.

 

I think we should let others live the lives they want as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. Does this mean we also condone behavior that we consider immoral? No. There are many reasons people turn to whatever lifestyle they choose. Some good reasons, some bad reasons. But I do believe there is a price to pay for alternative lifestyles and I choose not to go down that path for I find my joy and peace in following the teachings of Jesus. Many religious people talk about the problems that a gay lifestyle can lead to but these are just symptoms, not the real problem. The real problem is living outside the Will of God. This would also be true of any willful sin.

As a Christian, I do believe homosexual activity is a sin, likewise adultery, fornication and other sexual activity outside of marriage. I do believe marriage as God defines it is between a male and female. But none of these activities or any other sin will send one to hell. The least or the greatest sin is still sin. I also believe that Jesus bore ALL sins on the cross and that God no longer judges sin. Rather, there are consequences for the sins we commit while here on earth. This is the tradgedy. Does this mean that because our sins have been forgiven that we continue to sin? Not at all. For the love of God restrains us from continuing to sin, the goodness of God leads us to repent.

Now, there is one sin that will send one to hell and this is a choice we all shall make. That sin is the rejection of Jesus as one's Savior. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

I'm relating. I was a "Christian" when I found out I was "gay" (rather a disappointing development as I perceived it then). I was raised Catholic, got into Assembly of God congregation (Pentecostalism) and have been very active in the church over the years. I tried for DECADES to 'not' be 'homosexual'.

I backed-off from it (organized religion), after it became very apparent that I was living more as a hidden 'germ' amongst the 'healthy' cells of the body. It literally led to me being depressed and seeking mental therapy; still... I believe in the teachings of Christ (most importantly, the meanings of the things He DID for others, including His sacrifice on the Cross).

 

Ohhh if it werent for gays insisting upon creating new rights in "gay marriage", gays insisting that our children be taught about gays in school, that special programs be implemented to deal with bullying directed at gays in schools, special hate crime legislation to include gays AND the highest level of scrutiny applied to any discrimination against them, elevating sexual orientation even beyond sex itself...... there wouldnt even be an issue for most of us to question. Sure, equal rights for gays but all this insistance on special right just because you are gay is just a little bit silly. Really nothing that special about being gay. But for the potential of procreation, nothing special about being heterosexual. Beyond that potential, ones sexuality towards others has no more significance to society than my relationship with my left hand.

 

What are the "new rights" you're talking about? (I'm very curious about those.)

 

"Gay marriage"

 

Do you have problems with same sex couples entering responsible , caring and loving partnerships?

 

I wouldnt have a problem with ANY two consenting adults entering responsible , caring and loving partnerships. "Gay marriage" implies tax breaks and governmental entitlements for entering those partnerships. Nothing special about being gay that would warrant such special treatment.

 

Okay.

Gay people pay taxes in this nation also. You may not want them to receive benefits... but you don't present any truly 'valid' reason to deny them the same as other couples. I can understand how you "feel", but that isn't enough to convince homosexual people to give up fighting for what you call "new rights".

You do not know what you are saying; but you have a right to say it.