California Supreme Court Overturns Ban on Gay Marraige

[quote name='lilboo'][size=+2]Actually[/size], the Gay Pride Parade ISN'T a march for civil rights.
It's about being gay and being OK and HAPPY..(PROUD) with yourself and who you are.[/QUOTE]

Oh trust me, I know. I wasn't trying to say it was. Those parades probably do more harm to their cause than help, as many gays will agree.

Funny story:

In 2001, about a month after 9/11, my company was acquired by a company in New Orleans. They wanted me to relocate there, so they offered a weekend trip out there to check everything out and see if I'd like to. I somehow managed to get them to pay for my roomate to to go as well.

So on the flight out there, we notice something "different" about everyone on the plane. My roomate is sitting next to a guy that pulls out a digital camera and starts showing him pictures of himself, naked, with other men. My roomate was kind of shocked and asked why he's showing this to him. The kid responded "oh you aren't gay?" and proceeded to explain that durring that weekend in New Orleans was Southern Decadence. For those that don't know, it's basically a gay mardi gras.

So we get to new orleans. Our hotel is right next to the French Quarter, and the gay people are everywhere 24/7. And I don't just mean light-in-the feet hairdresser types.... I mean they were almost all wearing leather, and not much of it. And they were built like pro-wrestlers.

Knowing that we were only there a short time, and we wanted to make the best of it, Saturday night we went walking around. Thousands upon thousands of half naked men in the street. A sea of them. We really didn't know what to think, as we'd never experienced anything like it. I saw a lot of things I have tried hard to forget. ;) But one that sticks out is watching men walk up to other men they didn't know and lick their asses.

My poor roomate probably had the worst of the experience though, because of the way he dresses (tight shirts) he was hit on constantly. It was all quite amusing in the long run and makes for some great campfire stories. To this day, I can embarrass the shit out of that roomate by talking about it. And, as you can probably guess, I didn't end up relocating.

But hey, on the bright side, I am sure a lot of those guys we saw there are currently looking at monster.com for jobs in California ;)
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I think government interference is required here, just like it was to end segregation.

Sometimes minority groups need to be protected from the tyranny of the majority.

I have problems with government's infringe on the rights of their citizens, but not when they interfere to protect the rights of some of their citizens in a manner than does not infringe on the rights of others.[/quote]

This is exactly what I was going to post. The entire point of the Constitution is to protect the minority's rights.
 
Bad idea: N'awlins is AWESOME.

Good idea: But not in the summer. Ugh.

As for experiencing decadence and being made to feel uncomfortable as a sexual minority, I think that's kinda cool. It certainly is a learning experience when you are confronted with a reality you aren't aware of: the embarrassment that you're surrounded by gay men who assume you're gay as well - that puts into light how we assume heteronormativity, the assumption that people are straight until they tell us otherwise.

Also, getting offended at decadence in the Quarter is like getting offended that a Catholic Mass has eucharist.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Bad idea: N'awlins is AWESOME.

Good idea: But not in the summer. Ugh.

As for experiencing decadence and being made to feel uncomfortable as a sexual minority, I think that's kinda cool. It certainly is a learning experience when you are confronted with a reality you aren't aware of: the embarrassment that you're surrounded by gay men who assume you're gay as well - that puts into light how we assume heteronormativity, the assumption that people are straight until they tell us otherwise.

Also, getting offended at decadence in the Quarter is like getting offended that a Catholic Mass has eucharist.[/quote]

I dunno what brough this up but that middle paragraph reminds me of when I went (with my bi-boss) down to Phantasy fest in Key West. It is basically one gigantic gay costume contest. It was a fuckin blast because I had a sort of "guide." Meh, being liberal I'm pretty open minded to begin with so I'm sure I would have had fun either way.

And I'll admit it, I was definitely attracted to some drag queens. Sue me, they were hotter than most women. I mean it, most straight men could have easily fucked one of em and not even felt gay about it.
 
[quote name='Hex']Off topic, but speaking of that fucking insane despot Savage, I took a trip over to his ghastly website- I haven't visited it in years but it's still blaring the same old horseshit. Anyway, this caught my attention:

thosshirtslz9.jpg


I'd rather be waterboarding? Are they fucking crazy?

Rhetorical question, I know. Good on California, here's hoping the rest of the country follows suit.[/QUOTE]

Why are you surprised? Republicans and Conservatives alike are pro torture, it is practically a platform now.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Those parades probably do more harm to their cause than help, as many gays will agree.
[/quote]


I don't agree. Villifying parts of gay culture that aren't physically harmful (like bugchasers/HIV+ who infects others intentionally, etc) is stooping as low as the non-gay people who detract it. Chris Crocker? He's fuckin insane, but as a gay person, to say he doesn't represent homosexuality as a whole- and often the rejection of feminine men like him- is as wrong as when a straight person insults that archetype.

I'm sick of the fragmenting nature of the gay community, 'cause right now we need to unite more than anything.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Oh trust me, I know. I wasn't trying to say it was. Those parades probably do more harm to their cause than help, as many gays will agree.

Funny story:

In 2001, about a month after 9/11, my company was acquired by a company in New Orleans. They wanted me to relocate there, so they offered a weekend trip out there to check everything out and see if I'd like to. I somehow managed to get them to pay for my roomate to to go as well.

So on the flight out there, we notice something "different" about everyone on the plane. My roomate is sitting next to a guy that pulls out a digital camera and starts showing him pictures of himself, naked, with other men. My roomate was kind of shocked and asked why he's showing this to him. The kid responded "oh you aren't gay?" and proceeded to explain that durring that weekend in New Orleans was Southern Decadence. For those that don't know, it's basically a gay mardi gras.

So we get to new orleans. Our hotel is right next to the French Quarter, and the gay people are everywhere 24/7. And I don't just mean light-in-the feet hairdresser types.... I mean they were almost all wearing leather, and not much of it. And they were built like pro-wrestlers.

Knowing that we were only there a short time, and we wanted to make the best of it, Saturday night we went walking around. Thousands upon thousands of half naked men in the street. A sea of them. We really didn't know what to think, as we'd never experienced anything like it. I saw a lot of things I have tried hard to forget. ;) But one that sticks out is watching men walk up to other men they didn't know and lick their asses.

My poor roomate probably had the worst of the experience though, because of the way he dresses (tight shirts) he was hit on constantly. It was all quite amusing in the long run and makes for some great campfire stories. To this day, I can embarrass the shit out of that roomate by talking about it. And, as you can probably guess, I didn't end up relocating.

But hey, on the bright side, I am sure a lot of those guys we saw there are currently looking at monster.com for jobs in California ;)[/QUOTE]

I could understand you finding the sexual atmosphere aversive when you can't get away from it, but I get the vibe that you dislike being around homosexuality. That's our problem, societally.

I'm quite straight, but I don't find guys hitting on me and being around gays to be as awful an experience as you paint it. To me, a guy hitting on me is no different than an unattractive girl hitting on me. I'm not interested in them, but they're interested in me. That's all it is. If anything, it's easier than an unattractive girl hitting on you since all you have to say is "I'm not gay" and you don't have to deal with the awkward excuses for rejection.

My roommate's bi and when we go out, it's often to a gay club, since at straight clubs straight guys harass her all night. I prefer it as well, since there are usually less belligerently drunk frat douche bags, and since I don't want to meet bar chicks (super classy!) I'm not losing anything.
 
[quote name='Koggit']I could understand you finding the sexual atmosphere aversive when you can't get away from it, but I get the vibe that you dislike being around homosexuality.[/quote]

Does this surprise you? What else would you expect from a conservative who isn't Larry Craig?
 
[quote name='pittpizza']Does this surprise you? What else would you expect from a conservative who isn't Larry Craig?[/quote]

Or any other vehemently anti-gay Republican congressman? ;)
 
You know what, I feel for that dude. The media and papanazis do need to leave her alone, you'd go apeshit too (and pantyless, and lose your driving skills) if they followed and hounded you like they hound her.

I agree with his message, though question his methods: was the crying really necessary?
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']
How is it demeaning if it was voted by the people that the meaning of the word meant opposite sex only?
[/QUOTE]


Because it would have been approved by hetero voters. Gay voters would pass a law having marriage for straights and civil unions for gays. They want to be treated exactly the same. Any differential treatment because of their sexual orientation is demeaning to them.

So if it was voted on, the majority of gays would vote against, thus if it passed it would have been from the voting of heteros.
 
[quote name='Koggit']I could understand you finding the sexual atmosphere aversive when you can't get away from it, but I get the vibe that you dislike being around homosexuality. That's our problem, societally.[/quote]

It's more accurate to say I don't like being around sexuality, period. I think people that attach their identity to their sexuality, or vice versa, are pretty pathetic... any sexuality. We are far more than our genitals or what we like to do with them. I expect more of people than to behave otherwise.

I don't like being around anyone's open expression of sexuality, hetero or homo. It's silly, animalistic, and decadent all around. I don't find "decadent" things enjoyable. Sue me.

[quote name='Hex']I don't agree. Villifying parts of gay culture that aren't physically harmful (like bugchasers/HIV+ who infects others intentionally, etc) is stooping as low as the non-gay people who detract it. Chris Crocker? He's fuckin insane, but as a gay person, to say he doesn't represent homosexuality as a whole- and often the rejection of feminine men like him- is as wrong as when a straight person insults that archetype.

I'm sick of the fragmenting nature of the gay community, 'cause right now we need to unite more than anything.[/QUOTE]

FWIW, open sexual expressiveness is pretty stupid imo from hetero's as well. I think mardigras is equally as lame.

Having giant street level parties where everyone has an orgy is not my idea of a good time, on any sexual level. It's pathetic really. And the gay people I know agree.

And you all need to understand that my story was to illustrate that what I saw in New Orleans did not define what homosexuals are for me. I know gay people that are not like that.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']FWIW, open sexual expressiveness is pretty stupid imo from hetero's as well. I think mardigras is equally as lame.

Having giant street level parties where everyone has an orgy is not my idea of a good time, on any sexual level. It's pathetic really. And the gay people I know agree.[/quote]

Because the gay people you know represent the majority, right? Regardless, I could give a shit one way or another when it comes to open sexual acts. However when it comes to more (for lack of a better term) innocent expression, I think it's wonderful and can completely relate. I wear gay-oriented jewelry, basically because after being suppressed for so many years it's a very liberating sense of personal expression to be able to communicate one's nature. Naturally when it comes to legal things, one's romantic interests shouldn't matter, but casually being able to express who you are is a big part of people's lives. And for that reason I can see why people are so willing to be openly sexual when they can.
 
[quote name='Hex']Because the gay people you know represent the majority, right? Regardless, I could give a shit one way or another when it comes to open sexual acts. However when it comes to more (for lack of a better term) innocent expression, I think it's wonderful and can completely relate. I wear gay-oriented jewelry, basically because after being suppressed for so many years it's a very liberating sense of personal expression to be able to communicate one's nature. Naturally when it comes to legal things, one's romantic interests shouldn't matter, but casually being able to express who you are is a big part of people's lives. And for that reason I can see why people are so willing to be openly sexual when they can.[/QUOTE]

Well I'm happy for you.

I go out of my way to not "push" the way I feel, or believe, on others that have to pass me on the street. And I generally have more respect for those that do the same.

If you think it's a great idea to do otherwise, that's your prerogative. But just keep remembering that generally people have negative responses to "open expresion" in the form of making a spectacle of themselves, or stick out, in just about any way. If your ok with that, then cool.

The same goes with any form of "expressiveness" that's purpose is to call attention that wouldn't otherwise be there. Talking about hair, dress, piercings. The only thing they are proving to everyone else is how badly they need/want attention.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Well I'm happy for you.

I go out of my way to not "push" the way I feel, or believe, on others that have to pass me on the street. And I generally have more respect for those that do the same.

If you think it's a great idea to do otherwise, that's your prerogative. But just keep remembering that generally people have negative responses to "open expresion" in the form of making a spectacle of themselves, or stick out, in just about any way. If your ok with that, then cool.[/quote]

I'm so sure.

How is wearing a bracelet "pushing" myself on anyone? If they ask, I tell them. If a girl hits on me (and it happens) I tell her. I don't introduce myself as, 'Hi, I'm Hex and I'm a pillowbiter". You seem to confuse being open with being obtrusive.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']
Having giant street level parties where everyone has an orgy is not my idea of a good time...[/quote]

WTF is wrong with you?
 
[quote name='Koggit']
I'm quite straight, but I don't find guys hitting on me and being around gays to be as awful an experience as you paint it. [size=+1]To me, a guy hitting on me is no different than an unattractive girl hitting on me[/size]. I'm not interested in them, but they're interested in me. That's all it is. If anything, it's easier than an unattractive girl hitting on you since all you have to say is "I'm not gay" and you don't have to deal with the awkward excuses for rejection.
[/QUOTE]

THIS x 2228309138093098.
I ALWAYS say that. Well, I say "It's no different then a fat girl" LOL but still. I absolutely HATE when people say..
"That's cool that you're gay, just don't hit on me"

Because the guys who say that are always the fattest or ugliest OR BOTH guys you ever seen. What pisses them off is when I respond with "Don't worry bout it..if girls don't hit on you..why would I?. Then of course they get offended. Sigh.

[quote name='pittpizza']I dunno what brough this up but that middle paragraph reminds me of when I went (with my bi-boss) down to Phantasy fest in Key West. It is basically one gigantic gay costume contest. It was a fuckin blast because I had a sort of "guide." Meh, being liberal I'm pretty open minded to begin with so I'm sure I would have had fun either way.

And I'll admit it, I was definitely attracted to some drag queens. Sue me, they were hotter than most women. I mean it, most straight men could have easily fucked one of em and not even felt gay about it.[/QUOTE]

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: You are one of the gayest straight guys I know. (..online)
I know your engaged (or are you married now) and I don't questin that one bit.. but you def strike me as the kind that's on the curious side. Can I ask you if you ever actually tried something before?

My one friend, who I grew up experimenting with, is straight and has been with the same girl for the last 4 or 5 years and I don't question his sexuality. I know he's straight, he just said he was kinda curious earlier in life.

[quote name='thrustbucket']
FWIW, open sexual expressiveness is pretty stupid imo from hetero's as well. I think mardigras is equally as lame.

Having giant street level parties where everyone has an orgy is not my idea of a good time, on any sexual level. It's pathetic really. And the gay people I know agree.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't say it's pathetic. A party/good time is a party/good time.. as long as certain safety precautions are taken. That goes for anyone doing whatever, actually. I believe we as people (PEOPLE) are very sexual beings..but it's the gays who are more open & comfortable with their sexual wants/desires/fetishes/turn ons. This, IMO, is what makes straight people kinda uncomfortable.

You know you have some kind of fetish. We ALL have them.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Well I'm happy for you.

I go out of my way to not "push" the way I feel, or believe, on others that have to pass me on the street. And I generally have more respect for those that do the same.

If you think it's a great idea to do otherwise, that's your prerogative. But just keep remembering that generally people have negative responses to "open expresion" in the form of making a spectacle of themselves, or stick out, in just about any way. If your ok with that, then cool.

The same goes with any form of "expressiveness" that's purpose is to call attention that wouldn't otherwise be there. Talking about hair, dress, piercings. The only thing they are proving to everyone else is how badly they need/want attention.[/QUOTE]

But see, the problem is this.
We can be co-workers you and I. It's Monday morning and we are getting coffee in the break room. We make chit chat, you ask me.. So what did you do this weekend? Then I tell you about what me and my boyfriend did. Some people classify THAT as rubbing it peoples faces..which is bullshit.

You know what pisses me off? (See my avatar). It's the SAME thing in the office where all the people sit and have their desks COVERED..COVERED in pictures of themselves, their husbands/wives and kids. But lemme guess, I would be WRONG to say they are pushing their heterosexuality in my face? Yet, If I put pics of me and my bf around my desk, I WOULD be pushing it in people's faces?
 
[quote name='lilboo']I absolutely HATE when people say..
"That's cool that you're gay, just don't hit on me"[/quote]

I agree. Get off your high horse, it's so presumptuous to think I'd hit on you just 'cause you're a guy.

But, you know all those straight guys have to go out of their way to make sure their brohas know they ain't the least bit queer, right? :roll:

If I went out of my way to make people know I'm not straight, I'd catch shit. If Trevor goes out of his way to make sure people know he's straight, he's cool bro.

fucking retarded.
 
[quote name='lilboo']


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: You are one of the gayest straight guys I know. (..online)
I know your engaged (or are you married now) and I don't questin that one bit.. but you def strike me as the kind that's on the curious side. Can I ask you if you ever actually tried something before?

My one friend, who I grew up experimenting with, is straight and has been with the same girl for the last 4 or 5 years and I don't question his sexuality. I know he's straight, he just said he was kinda curious earlier in life.[/quote]

LOL, no offense taken at all. The wedding is Sept 13th.

You certainly can ask and I don't mind; I've never tried anything, nor questioned my sexuality in any serious manner. I will tell you this though (again), those drag queens were fuckin' smokin hot. That was probably the closest to bi-curious that I've ever been, though it may not be proper to call it that since they were hotter (to an open-minded hetero male) than most women, lol.

Here is the thing: I'm not gay but LOVE gay people. Generally they're much nicer, kinder, more open minded, like-minded politically, smarter, better-educated, take care of themselves better, have better tastes in almost everytyhing, and are just much more interesting to talk to. All JMO.

Pittsburgh doesn't have a large homosexual population relative to my original home in S. Florida, but these are generalizations I've picked up from being around homosexuals in both places.

I offend a lot of people I come across by sticking up for minorities. I'll usually say some variation of "You said (insert slur or racial name here) and I just wanted to let you know it offends me and that you shouldn't assume I share your prejudices. You can keep saying it if you want, but I just wanted you to know it bothers me." It pretty much kills any conversation with that person, and except with close friends it usually staves off any further relationship with that person. Still, if that person is a little more hesistant in voicing their bigotry in the next conversation they're in, my mission has been accomplished.

This, and my affinity with homosexuals and their plight may be due in large part to my bi-ex-boss, who told me he was offended when I called someone a "$$$", I didn't do it to call them gay or because of anything related to homosexuality, it was just a word I used in jest. After a few times of being reminded the word was removed from my lexicon; so I figured if it worked on me (I admit, I'm stubborn) it might work on others too. He was a really cool dude and the first bi person I got to know well.

THere have been a couple posts in this thread that made me want to remind people of that Neimoller poem: if you don't stick up for the minorities, nobody will be around to stick up for you when they come for you. EVERY individual's human and civil rights must be protected, no matter how the majority feels about them.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']It's more accurate to say I don't like being around sexuality, period. I think people that attach their identity to their sexuality, or vice versa, are pretty pathetic... any sexuality. We are far more than our genitals or what we like to do with them. I expect more of people than to behave otherwise.

I don't like being around anyone's open expression of sexuality, hetero or homo. It's silly, animalistic, and decadent all around. I don't find "decadent" things enjoyable. Sue me.

FWIW, open sexual expressiveness is pretty stupid imo from hetero's as well. I think mardigras is equally as lame.

Having giant street level parties where everyone has an orgy is not my idea of a good time, on any sexual level. It's pathetic really. And the gay people I know agree.

And you all need to understand that my story was to illustrate that what I saw in New Orleans did not define what homosexuals are for me. I know gay people that are not like that.[/quote]

Right on thrust!

I really don't give a shit if a person is gay or not. Go home and have your neighbor, "Bruce," blow you or hire someone to pound you... heh, it's on your dime and I don't care, but at least be discreet about it...

...the whole GAY PRIDE bullshit and activism pisses me off. It seems like there are two types of people promoting that crap:
1.) Activists and socialsts who kow tow at the altar of cultural relativism and want to further destroy the traditional nuclear family unit in America.
2.) Attention seeking homosexuals who define themselves by their sexuality above all other things.

How ridiculous would it seem if I started a "white heterosexual professionals" rally with me and a bunch of my white collar "cronies" walking around, adjusting our ties and pretending to do something on our blackberries all day (that's pretty much our equivalent of an orgy :D).
 
[quote name='Hex']I'm so sure.

How is wearing a bracelet "pushing" myself on anyone? If they ask, I tell them. If a girl hits on me (and it happens) I tell her. I don't introduce myself as, 'Hi, I'm Hex and I'm a pillowbiter". You seem to confuse being open with being obtrusive.[/QUOTE]

If that's the case, then I stand corrected. A bracelet is nothing. But I think you know the types of "obtrusives" I am referring to. They are the same ones that drive hummers with american flags on them that liberals can't stand. Same mentality I find repulsive.

Not referring to you.

[quote name='pittpizza']WTF is wrong with you?[/QUOTE]
Guess you'll never know, cuz you only see my posts out of context now.

And by the way? Is it logical to pose questions to those you have on ignore?

[quote name='lilboo']THIS x 2228309138093098.

I wouldn't say it's pathetic. A party/good time is a party/good time.. as long as certain safety precautions are taken. That goes for anyone doing whatever, actually. I believe we as people (PEOPLE) are very sexual beings..but it's the gays who are more open & comfortable with their sexual wants/desires/fetishes/turn ons. This, IMO, is what makes straight people kinda uncomfortable.[/quote]

You know, that's fine if you like that type of party/expressiveness. That's your right, and I would defend that right. I would defend anyone's right to party and be sexual in whatever way they like, if that's what gets them off. As long as it's out of the public and I have fair warning so I can stay away.

Keep in mind, just because that stuff doesn't turn my crank, doesn't mean I would want to harm the rights of those that it does.

You know you have some kind of fetish. We ALL have them.
Click to expand...

Maybe. I can't honestly think of any for me. I'm fine with people having them, just keep them to yourself.

[quote name='lilboo']But see, the problem is this.
We can be co-workers you and I. It's Monday morning and we are getting coffee in the break room. We make chit chat, you ask me.. So what did you do this weekend? Then I tell you about what me and my boyfriend did. Some people classify THAT as rubbing it peoples faces..which is bullshit.[/quote]

If you and I were coworkers, and that came up. I'd listen, and I'd laugh. We are interfacing and I'm tolerant of that stuff.

The type of obtrusiveness I refer to is if you were dressing like a spectacle in public, or behaving in as a spectacle, and I had to see you because of where I was - and I DIDN'T know you.

You know what pisses me off? (See my avatar). It's the SAME thing in the office where all the people sit and have their desks COVERED..COVERED in pictures of themselves, their husbands/wives and kids. But lemme guess, I would be WRONG to say they are pushing their heterosexuality in my face? Yet, If I put pics of me and my bf around my desk, I WOULD be pushing it in people's faces?
Click to expand...

That stuff agitates me too. And actually I would agree that it does push heterosexuality in your face, and I would understand if it bothered you. I think it's really tacky to have a picture of someone and their lover kissing on their desk. But that's just me.

It's their right to do it, but I think it's pretentious and annoying.
 
[quote name='BigT']Right on thrust!

I really don't give a shit if a person is gay or not. Go home and have your neighbor, "Bruce," blow you or hire someone to pound you... heh, it's on your dime and I don't care, but at least be discreet about it...

...the whole GAY PRIDE bullshit and activism pisses me off. It seems like there are two types of people promoting that crap:
1.) Activists and socialsts who kow tow at the altar of cultural relativism and want to further destroy the traditional nuclear family unit in America.
2.) Attention seeking homosexuals who define themselves by their sexuality above all other things.

How ridiculous would it seem if I started a "white heterosexual professionals" rally with me and a bunch of my white collar "cronies" walking around, adjusting our ties and pretending to do something on our blackberries all day (that's pretty much our equivalent of an orgy :D).[/QUOTE]


[quote name='lilboo']But see, the problem is this.
We can be co-workers you and I. It's Monday morning and we are getting coffee in the break room. We make chit chat, you ask me.. So what did you do this weekend? Then I tell you about what me and my boyfriend did. Some people classify THAT as rubbing it peoples faces..which is bullshit.

You know what pisses me off? (See my avatar). It's the SAME thing in the office where all the people sit and have their desks COVERED..COVERED in pictures of themselves, their husbands/wives and kids. But lemme guess, I would be WRONG to say they are pushing their heterosexuality in my face? Yet, If I put pics of me and my bf around my desk, I WOULD be pushing it in people's faces?[/QUOTE]

^^ Now respond to that. I'm dying to see how I'm wrong in this.
 
And we love you too, PP. :D

[quote name='BigT']I really don't give a shit if a person is gay or not. Go home and have your neighbor, "Bruce," blow you or hire someone to pound you... heh, it's on your dime and I don't care, but at least be discreet about it...

...the whole GAY PRIDE bullshit and activism pisses me off. It seems like there are two types of people promoting that crap:
1.) Activists and socialsts who kow tow at the altar of cultural relativism and want to further destroy the traditional nuclear family unit in America.
2.) Attention seeking homosexuals who define themselves by their sexuality above all other things.
[/quote]

I'll be discreet when I stop hearing "yah bro I just totally banged this smokin hawt chick last night, dude...". People are obtrusive about sex regardless of gender. This hearkens back to Thrust's stance, which in some ways I can understand. Still, I'm sorry thrust but you seem sort of boring. :p

Traditional nuclear family? Because that's just the paragon of human existence, isn't it? Workaholic fathers, cheating mothers, children brought up on Xbox and Pepsi. Man, I think I'll just aspire to snag that wonderful white picket fence and trophy wife. Traditional nuclear families are a thing of a past because society has thankfully moved past that paleolithic shenanigans. :roll: Do you rag on straight couples who never marry or have children too, just because they aren't traditional?
 
[quote name='pittpizza']LOL, no offense taken at all. The wedding is Sept 13th.

You certainly can ask and I don't mind; I've never tried anything, nor questioned my sexuality in any serious manner. I will tell you this though (again), those drag queens were fuckin' smokin hot. That was probably the closest to bi-curious that I've ever been, though it may not be proper to call it that since they were hotter (to an open-minded hetero male) than most women, lol.

Here is the thing: I'm not gay but LOVE gay people. Generally they're much nicer, kinder, more open minded, like-minded politically, smarter, better-educated, take care of themselves better, have better tastes in almost everytyhing, and are just much more interesting to talk to. All JMO.

Pittsburgh doesn't have a large homosexual population relative to my original home in S. Florida, but these are generalizations I've picked up from being around homosexuals in both places.

I offend a lot of people I come across by sticking up for minorities. I'll usually say some variation of "You said (insert slur or racial name here) and I just wanted to let you know it offends me and that you shouldn't assume I share your prejudices. You can keep saying it if you want, but I just wanted you to know it bothers me." It pretty much kills any conversation with that person, and except with close friends it usually staves off any further relationship with that person. Still, if that person is a little more hesistant in voicing their bigotry in the next conversation they're in, my mission has been accomplished.

This, and my affinity with homosexuals and their plight may be due in large part to my bi-ex-boss, who told me he was offended when I called someone a "$$$", I didn't do it to call them gay or because of anything related to homosexuality, it was just a word I used in jest. After a few times of being reminded the word was removed from my lexicon; so I figured if it worked on me (I admit, I'm stubborn) it might work on others too. He was a really cool dude and the first bi person I got to know well.

THere have been a couple posts in this thread that made me want to remind people of that Neimoller poem: if you don't stick up for the minorities, nobody will be around to stick up for you when they come for you. EVERY individual's human and civil rights must be protected, no matter how the majority feels about them.[/QUOTE]

Ok ok. I'll go dress in drag.
Would you want me as a fiesty red head and I'll myself Camilla Toe? Or would you rather have a hot asian named Terri Aki ^_^

Or my favorite: A skanky brunette named Venerial Denise
 
[quote name='pittpizza']LOL, no offense taken at all. The wedding is Sept 13th. [/quote]
Congrats to you pp.


Here is the thing: I'm not gay but LOVE gay people.
Click to expand...
Here is the thing: I'm not gay, but I LOVE all people. Even you, buddy. ;)

This, and my affinity with homosexuals and their plight may be due in large part to my bi-ex-boss, who told me he was offended when I called someone a "$$$", I didn't do it to call them gay or because of anything related to homosexuality, it was just a word I used in jest. After a few times of being reminded the word was removed from my lexicon; so I figured if it worked on me (I admit, I'm stubborn) it might work on others too. He was a really cool dude and the first bi person I got to know well.
Click to expand...
This is funny because our assistant producer is a very open lesbian (pretty cute too)... But she sets the presidence for everyone by using homophobic slurs all the time. She's very cool like that. She's also probably the most perverted person on our team.



[quote name='Hex']

Still, I'm sorry thrust but you seem sort of boring. :p[/quote]
Shit dude, I won't argue there. I doubt my wife would either, lately.

Traditional nuclear family? Because that's just the paragon of human existence, isn't it? Workaholic fathers, cheating mothers, children brought up on Xbox and Pepsi.
Click to expand...
Actually I agree with this, and it troubles me to a great degree, how the family has devolved. But that's outside the scope of this thread....
 
ROFL @ Lilboo&Hex.

Honestly, I'm a sucker for blondes.

I ate at this restaurant in South Beach one time called Lucky Cheng's and they had names exactly like that! Everyone working there there was a drag queen.

Well to be fair I didn't see the back of the house, but everybody in the front: Servers, the host (or is it hostess?? lol) was in drag. Funny to imagine a sioux chef and dishwasher in drag huh?

Some were hot, others I couldn't get past their Adam's apples. They also put on a show (dance/sing) every so often. It was definitely a meal you would never forget. I wonder if it's still there.
 
Uhm. I have to do it.. Thrustbucket would be an awesome drag name. Think about it.

Plus your little subtitle says "the master of meat". That's just asking for it! ;)
 
[quote name='lilboo']
1227.gif
MAH NAME ANITA MANN[/quote]

Thank you for proving my point!

I don't care what you've got between your legs, how could you not find that sexy?

Had to post this: (My favorite is Wilma Ballsdrop)
Della Catessen
Anita Mann
Patty O. Furniture
Gloria Hole
Lois Commondenominator
Candy Ass
Joan Jett Black
Lypsinka
Pagan Holiday
Misty Cologne
Crystal DeCanter
Kitten Kaboodle
Amanda Reckonwith
Miss Inglink
Miss Construe
Marsha Dimes
Eileen Dover
Madam Ovary
Rachel Tensions
Semi Sweet Charity
Tess Tosterone
Lilly White
Holly Mackerel
Karen Carpenteria
Helen Heels
Sofonda Cox
Hollee Luja
Hope Heelcum
Orna Mint
Sharon Needles
Holly Goheavily
Marianne Unfaithful
Jean Pool
Eva Destruction
Amber Waves
Nequelle Anne Dyme Bridgette of Madison County
Visa Gold
Marsha MellowAgnes of Gosh
Bea Reasonable
Bessie Mae Mucho
Candy Wrapper
Catherine the Above Average
Dee Flaytable
Clare Boothe Luce Change
Rhea Listik
Rosie Cheeks
Snow White Trash
Venus de Mile-High Lo
Gail Force
Mary K. Mart
Jenny Tonic
Juan Nightstand Amanda Peon
Miss Diagnosed
Hedda Lettuce
Wilma BallsdropAmanda Playwith
Devoida Taste
Iona Sextoy
Ivana B. Queen
Kaye Wye
Sharon Husbands
Paige Turner
Shanda Lier
Anna Rexia
Bertha Venation
Penny Tration
Anita Cocktail
Tequila Mockingbird
Ivana Cockatoo
Barbra Seville
Glenda Bender
Layona Davenport
Ivana Kutchakockoff
Winnie Baygo
Ginger Vitis
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='Hex']Uhm. I have to do it.. Thrustbucket would be an awesome drag name. Think about it.

Plus your little subtitle says "the master of meat". That's just asking for it! ;)[/QUOTE]

I've heard that before. I've used it since Starcraft 2 came out, and I've heard a number of references like that ;)

It's all good, I will lend to any drag queen that wants it.
 
Personally I know the best solution to the Gay Marriage issue. Follow what John Stossel said about it which basically puts up the final barrier between Church and State.
Marriage is a RELIGIOUS institution and has no business being legislated or regulated by our government. It should be up to the Churches PERIOD! Now in the governmental sense Civil Union's should be as they grant rights to those who choose to enter in one mutually, both Gay and Straight.
The Supreme Court should basically invalidate all marriages not held in a Church or presided by someone given the authority by a Church or a religious institution. Also the government would change all the terminology to those marriages in their governmental records to Civil Union's as they should be.
The side benefit of this is simple: the Religious Right will go broke trying to stop all the individual Churches that grant marriage to their Gay parisioners. As a governmental issue they can easily afford trying to stonewall Gay's being granted Marriage at every turn.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I've heard that before. I've used it since Starcraft 2 came out, and I've heard a number of references like that ;)

It's all good, I will lend to any drag queen that wants it.[/quote]

I do have a question, if you don't mind since it's sort of personal. I don't want to make any assumptions, but based on my perception from reading your post, you don't seem to be into much personal expression, regardless of gender or sexuality. Why is that, if such is true?
 
But I love how the big fuss about gay marriage..isn't quite about the concept, it's about the whole fuckin argument about the definition of a WORD. It's really childish.
 
[quote name='Hex']I do have a question, if you don't mind since it's sort of personal. I don't want to make any assumptions, but based on my perception from reading your post, you don't seem to be into much personal expression, regardless of gender or sexuality. Why is that, if such is true?[/QUOTE]

I'm happy to try and answer. Or try. I think it might have more to do with my own personality than any real personal belief. Ever since I was a kid I've kind of despised those that go out of their way to get attention in any way.

I believe very strongly that respect and positive attention from others should and does only come from one's actions. That's true personal expression. If you want to make a statement, or change peoples minds, do it through example and action, not through shock.

That's part of why PETA pisses me off. I respect their campaign and beliefs, but their methods are tactless and only make people hate them more rather than rally more to their cause.

Now in addition to this, I have always felt "sexual identity" was an oxy-moron. I just don't think a persons penis or vagina helps them define who they are. And when people try to define themselves with that stuff, I find it repulsive somehow. Everyone has sexual feelings of some kind, and that's natural. But advertising it is just disrespectful and tasteless to everyone else around you, imo.

After all, other natural things, like the fact that I really enjoy taking a shit sometimes, isn't 'something I feel necessary to make known to everyone all the time. It would be tactless for me to talk about my shits, describe my shits, and always brag about my shits, then start wearing pro-shit taking shirts just because I enjoy it so much. I do enjoy a poo here and there, but it doesn't define who I am.

(please remember when I say "you" when I talk, I am not talking about you. Just mr. example.)

[quote name='lilboo']But I love how the big fuss about gay marriage..isn't quite about the concept, it's about the whole fuckin argument about the definition of a WORD. It's really childish.[/QUOTE]

Bingo. That's been my point all along.
 
[quote name='lilboo']But I love how the big fuss about gay marriage..isn't quite about the concept, it's about the whole fuckin argument about the definition of a WORD. It's really childish.[/quote]

IMO for the most part it's just a smokescreen. This kind of "separate but equal" nonsense is the last bastion of heterosexist people. When those people start to realize that they might not be able to refuse a right anymore they have to come up with something to separate "them" from "us."

Not that there aren't people who actually buy into the definition nonsense and actually think that it really matters. The fact is if you really think of homosexuals as equal you'll have no problem using the same word for your union as theirs. The only real reason to use a different word is to separate people.
 
[quote name='SpazX']The fact is if you really think of homosexuals as equal you'll have no problem using the same word for your union as theirs. The only real reason to use a different word is to separate people.[/QUOTE]

Exactly the point I was making earlier.

It's more than the meaning of a word because:

1. There are rights tied to marriage.
2. If you put the same rights on marriage for straights and civil unions/whatever it's demeaning in that "separate but equal" stigmatizing manner.
 
[quote name='SpazX'] The fact is if you really think of homosexuals as equal you'll have no problem using the same word for your union as theirs. The only real reason to use a different word is to separate people.[/QUOTE]

I respect this point of view. I really do. But the difference is, some people literally include the ability of those two people to pro-create in their union definition called "marriage".

To them, a "marriage" is not merely two people that get together because they like each other. It's two people that get together to form the foundation of creating a family. Without the intent to procreate, a marriage really is just a civil union.

I'm not defending it, just pointing it out that is the issue for some.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I respect this point of view. I really do. But the difference is, some people literally include the ability of those two people to pro-create in their union definition called "marriage".

To them, a "marriage" is not merely two people that get together because they like each other. It's two people that get together to form the foundation of creating a family. Without the intent to procreate, a marriage really is just a civil union.

I'm not defending it, just pointing it out that is the issue for some.[/quote]

I'm sure there are, but that on its face is a pretty bullshit concept. There are myriad reasons why a heterosexual married couple would have no intention to procreate and/or could not possibly procreate. But they are still called married regardless and no one would tell them that since they're not going to have kids they have a "civil union" rather than a "marriage."

Marriage also used to be prearranged and was more about property transfer and heirs than love, but that's not true today (in this culture) and you can't use that as an excuse as for why homosexuals can't get married. Marriage for decades has been about two people loving each other and wanting to spend their lives together (along with various legal reasons), regardless of intentions for having children.

The reason why marriage means "a man and a woman" to so many now is simply because homosexuals have been oppressed for centuries. Using a definition of marriage that was created because of a heterosexist past is no defense against heterosexism and no reason not to include them in it now. That's just circular reasoning.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Personally I know the best solution to the Gay Marriage issue. Follow what John Stossel said about it which basically puts up the final barrier between Church and State.
Marriage is a RELIGIOUS institution and has no business being legislated or regulated by our government. It should be up to the Churches PERIOD! Now in the governmental sense Civil Union's should be as they grant rights to those who choose to enter in one mutually, both Gay and Straight.
The Supreme Court should basically invalidate all marriages not held in a Church or presided by someone given the authority by a Church or a religious institution. Also the government would change all the terminology to those marriages in their governmental records to Civil Union's as they should be.
The side benefit of this is simple: the Religious Right will go broke trying to stop all the individual Churches that grant marriage to their Gay parisioners. As a governmental issue they can easily afford trying to stonewall Gay's being granted Marriage at every turn.[/quote]

I agree to some extent. But why should the government even recognize civil unions? Just fully take marriage or civil unions out of the government's sphere. Keep it in the religious sphere and whatever sphere would marry homosexuals... if they want to call it marriage, so be it...

If the government continues to define marriage, then there will always be a new group of activists to fight for new redefinitions, first miscegenation, now gay marriage, what's next?!?! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top