Racism wrong, Homophobia acceptable?

I had nearly forgotten just how hedonistic TV and movies in the 80's were.

Yes, and aside from it annoying prudes like me , it also misrepresented promiscuity hugely. I have met maybe 3 people in my whole life who can chat with someone at a bar for two hours, go home and have wonderful sex with them. It takes an amazing level of well-adjustedness combined with certain personality traits. Most people who behave promiscuously have problems, and the promiscuity doesn't help. I'm all for people doing whatever they like, but most promiscuous people I've known are NOT doing what they like, but rather something they feel compelled to do.

This applies to people of various orientations, by the way.

 

Promiscuity is defnitely a pitfall for many people. While I feel that, as you say TreeCave, there are likely people who can do it and be happy doing so, I don't feel that most people can.

The problem is that the vast majority of people who flounder about, trying to find random sex, are often doing so to fill some sort of void: They need to feel loved or wanted, they need some kind of intimacy, even if it is fleeting - they aren't really connecting with the people with whom they are sleeping - simply filling up a space, temporarily.

 

Very true. And sometimes they simply don't know how to enjoy intimacy (emotional, physical and mental intimacy can all be tense, scary, frustrating, etc), but assume it's a deficiency in their partner. As I said earlier (I think), a lot of women who don't climax assume their lovers just aren't very skilled, when in fact they can't climax on their own with no lover present!

But this doesn't just apply to sex. Your fulfillment is your own thing to achieve. No one can "make" you happy or fulfill you. Ideally, we should be able to enjoy ourselves, being alone and intimate with our own thoughts, feelings, memories, instead of being afraid of them. Then we enjoy other people simply because it's a good experience to do so.

But this is getting way off-topic. Sorry.

 

Yeah, we're getting off-topic, but I know what you're talking about: Removing the intimacy from sex makes it empty.

Back on topic:

When we ware in line to see Episode II, my boyfriend and I ended up being next to another fan, who happened to be gay.

Whatever. You know; it really didn't matter to us, we just wanted to see AOTC.

At any rate, when he found out that were were a couple and not just "two friends waiting in line for Star Wars", he started cajoling us to join his "Gay Sci-Fi Fans" social group.

Call me crazy, but that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. As if both Star Wars fans and gay people aren't segregated enough, this guy wanted to break them down into smaller, more specific groupings.

I debated with him about it for a while and he eventually said, "But wouldn't you love to go to a gay bar with a bunch of Star Wars fans?"

I said, "No, not really. I don't particularly like gay bars as it is. How would they be any less annoying if I was with Star Wars fans?"

Then, right on cue, he said that I obviously have "internal homophobia" and that I dislike gay clubs because I'm ashamed of my sexuality.

I get sh** like this a lot: I was once called an internal homophobe because I said that Janet Jackson was fluff. I got the same for saying that Madonna was overrated.

Some gay people slap this label on me because I "sound straight", whatever the hell that means. I apparently dress like a homophobe, too. Go figure.

I find it funny that so many in a group who have banded together because they were ousted from the mainstream for not following convention, have created so many rules and conventions of their own.

The second a gay youth gets off the cross of straight conformity, he/she is given a bright, shiny new cross to bear.

I've never understood this.

Anyone have any ideas as to why this happens?

 

"When we ware in line to see Episode II, my boyfriend and I ended up being next to another fan, who happened to be gay."

Was his name Ethril?

 

Nope. That wasn't his name ;c)

 

Nevermind, I think Ethril was before your time

 

Okay, babe - I'll take your word for it.

 

I think I can empathize with your getting stereotyped by other gays who themselves seek to conform to a stereotype.

Today, I quit a temp job so I can go back into film. A girl at the job was asking me all about my life and why I was doing this and how could I not be scared by giving up secure employment to risk the entertainment world? I explained that "secure employment" had really betrayed me the last couple of years - I was living in a place where I could not get a job for any amount, not even in retail (I would have starved to death if it weren't for my mother, seriously - couldn't even qualify for unemployment). Therefore, no risk could worsen my current situation. She kept pressing for more "problems" from me, so even though I hate sharing my problems, I figured I'd never see her again and was curious what she was after. I explained about this guy who scammed me that I'm going to have to sue, and some other things that happened - basically, the last two years of my life have been one thief after another, against a backdrop of no employment. Given that money is the only real survival issue we face nowadays, this was all truly terrifying, and it's going to take me a while not to be suspicious of everyone and not to hoard every penny I get. It's been traumatic.

So what does she ask? "Are you dating anyone?" I frowned and said, "No, I just moved back recently, and I've been focused on that and working and all." She says, "Oh, so you feel incomplete because you aren't dating anyone?"

Jeez! I made under $10k last year and don't know if I can afford groceries next week, and she thinks my whole problem is that I'm not dating?

I took this as a female stereotype becuase I can't imagine anyone would ever ask a man if he feels incomplete because he doesn't have a girlfriend, when they know he's out of work and all that.

 

I certainly hope you smacked her.

 

LOL! I was so stunned I just kinda said "No" in a very gruff voice.

See, people in "oppressed" groups buy into the stereotypes themselves, and this is where bigotry really becomes a problem.

And on a slightly separate vein, I was thinking today that perhaps using terms like "minorities" and "opressed" and "empowerment" to describe a group just reinforce the idea that the group is second class and a victimization target. I think PC language has the same effect as derogatory slang, because they both call attention to the alleged "freakishness" of the people being referred to.

And this is why there is some honest confusion over the difference between equal rights and special rights (though I do think politicians and media moguls choose not to see the difference because it suits their agenda). Once you make yourself into a "freak" group, it seems logical to assume you have special needs that others don't have. The only "minority" I'm aware of getting special treatment is people who have physical handicaps - they need special bathroom stalls, close parking spots, etc. We accommodate them even though many of them have indeed brought their disabilities on themselves through their lifestyle choices.

 

Morning.

I was just thinking on the problem of the media and celebrities, especially in concern to homosexuality and bisexuality. There are a ton of gay entertainers out there who get cajoled all the time. Like it's any of the media's business.

Then there are the other performers who have tabloids always trying to make them out to be gay, when they're not. Why the heck would someone want to do this? You know, maybe they don't have anything against gays, but no one wants to be labeled as something they're not. I saw a tabloid just the other day talking about "Britney's Gay Sex Tape!" Please. This kind of crap disgusts me.

Why can't the media learn to let celebrities alone? If I were famous, I wouldn't be able to take half the questioning and badgering that celebs do. Besides, if you really enjoy a particular celebrities music/acting/etc. why do you care if they are gay or not?

Sure, I don't approve of homosexuality personally. I admit, I don't like it. But that doesn't mean it's my business to presume things about people I don't know. It doesn't mean I should shun them and their work for something in their personal lives.

When we suspect someone is gay (even if they're not) we shrink away from them. When we suspect someone is having sex with a minor, we practically applaud them and their ratings go up. It's a sad world we live in.

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

TreeCave:

I think PC language has the same effect as derogatory slang, because they both call attention to the alleged "freakishness" of the people being referred to.

Yes, there's a fine line between distinction & seperatism. It's tricky. Certain groups of people have a need to set themselves apart, to an extent, in order to illustrate how they are being treated unfairly, but this can get out of hand.

PC language and derogatory slang... I honestly don't care about either. I'm not so insecure that a few words are going to hurt me and I by no means need and "nice" terms to "empower" me. People on both sides of that issue are too uptight about it, if you ask me.

Once you make yourself into a "freak" group, it seems logical to assume you have special needs that others don't have.

A good observation. It may be prudent for special interest groups to shy away from that title. "Equal Interest Groups" would be more fitting.

The only "minority" I'm aware of getting special treatment is people who have physical handicaps - they need special bathroom stalls, close parking spots, etc. We accommodate them even though many of them have indeed brought their disabilities on themselves through their lifestyle choices.

And let's not forget that some of these people were once rejected by religion:

"And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron, saying, Whosoever he be of thy seed in their generations that hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God. For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God. He shall eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy. Only he shall not go in unto the vail, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that he profane not my sanctuaries: for I the LORD do sanctify them."
-Leviticus, 21:17-23

Praise God.


SoloJones:

Then there are the other performers who have tabloids always trying to make them out to be gay, when they're not. Why the heck would someone want to do this? You know, maybe they don't have anything against gays, but no one wants to be labeled as something they're not.

The media is evil and sees celebrity scandal as money in the bank. Simple as that.

I saw a tabloid just the other day talking about "Britney's Gay Sex Tape!" Please. This kind of crap disgusts me.

*chuckles* I don't know. I kind of find that to be somewhat funny. Honestly, Spears herself disgusts me more than any lies that could be told about her.

Why can't the media learn to let celebrities alone? If I were famous, I wouldn't be able to take half the questioning and badgering that celebs do. Besides, if you really enjoy a particular celebrities music/acting/etc. why do you care if they are gay or not?

Unfortunately, that is the price one pays for fame. You no longer have true privacy and if someone slaps a label on you, true or not, everyone hears about it - often before you do.

When we suspect someone is gay (even if they're not) we shrink away from them.

We do? I don't. Maybe you do, but I don't think everyone does.

When we suspect someone is having sex with a minor, we practically applaud them and their ratings go up. It's a sad world we live in.

What? Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

cwrn-

I agree that I detest Britney.

What I meant about shrinking from gays was in the media. I don't personally shrink from them, or else I wouldn't be talking to you I just think that we feel less inclined to be their fans and some feel less inclined to hire them. But then you go and have some sex scandal like Rob Lowe, or a drug problem like Robert Downey Jr., and the whole country is watching your shows/movies because they heard about you. And many of the public don't condemn those things.

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

Clinton's approval ratings during Monica-gate got as high as Bush's during 9-11.

 

Man, I wish Bush would have simply gotten himself some intern booty, rather than having a BBQ in the middle east, if he needed high approval ratings....

 

We've had a few off-handed discussions about gay marriage in this thread - but does it have its own thread already?

If not, should we make one?

It could be an interesting debate.

 

Actually, I believe there is a thread somewhere around. If I'm remembering something else, feel free to make a new one.

 

I thought I saw one once, but I can't find it now, if it ever existed...

 

...I'm wondering if Force_User has forgotten to respond to this thread....

 

Maybe someone could do a topic about homosexuals in the boy scouts??

 

I think people may be daunted by the size of this thread...

If we started a new one, we could simply make it version 2.0, I suppose: Or find a more specific, yet related topic (like the boyscouts one)

Should we throw out a few more ideas and then decide by vote?

 

I'm still here, just so you know .

 

I don't really have a preference as to the topic

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

Any suggestions, KnightWriter?