Heterosexual Pride Day

tunedout · 21-05-2013 11:27AM

1ZRed wrote: »

No, when we reach that point we won't complain about anything and we'll be like any other straight person. There'll be no need. That's the ultimate goal of all this.

Nonsense. I read a thread lately of a gay person who was sobbing because a house full of straight people had decided it would be best for everyone if the gay person didn't live with them because of the sexuality, and difference in interests.

The whole thread was moaning and complaining and screaming discrimination. I asked them if they would have the same complaints and would they feel discriminated against if they couldn't live in a house because it is "Female Only" or "Male only" and none of them had any answers only silly squabbling.

kunst nugget · 21-05-2013 11:28AM

Deleted User wrote: »

You know its going to get to the stage were gay people have absolutely nothing to complain about that they will have to make something up.

Just like straight people do? Because I'm straight and I complain about sh¡t all the time…

1ZRed · 21-05-2013 11:34AM

tunedout wrote: »

Nonsense. I read a thread lately of a gay person who was sobbing because a house full of straight people had decided it would be best for everyone if the gay person didn't live with them because of the sexuality, and difference in interests.

The whole thread was moaning and complaining and screaming discrimination. I asked them if they would have the same complaints and would they feel discriminated against if they couldn't live in a house because it is "Female Only" or "Male only" and none of them had any answers only silly squabbling.

So if I'm a perfectly normal and average guy and get kicked out because I was gay then how is that not discrimination? You're wanting me out only because I was gay. That "difference in interest" is bullshit, you wouldn't know if I was gay until I told you so the only difference in interest would be where I like to stick my dick, does that seem reasonable to you? Sounds thick as fuck to me tbh.

It's the same as thing as not wanting to live with a black person yet claiming not to be racist.

Kiwi in IE · 21-05-2013 11:34AM

Terry1985 wrote: »

The commitment you talk about for marriage is based on the idea of raising and supporting a family. Years ago people didn't know if they were infertile or not until after they married.

The reason the state recognised marriage was to protect the wife and kids.

Extending it's definition to let a lbgt couple play pretend families or seek it as an endorsement from society isn't right.

If the reason marriage was recognised by the state was to 'protect the wife and kids', then families where the woman is the sole earner, or significantly higher earner, should also be excluded from being allowed to marry for 'trying to redefine marriage', as it the the husband who needs protection.

Daith · 21-05-2013 11:55AM

tunedout wrote: »

Nonsense. I read a thread lately of a gay person who was sobbing because a house full of straight people had decided it would be best for everyone if the gay person didn't live with them because of the sexuality, and difference in interests.

That's a bizzare interpretation. Didn't get that he was sobbing just asking if people would say they were gay when visting place to house share.

To avoid living with people like you I imagine.

Obviously all straight people have the same interests and gay people dont have those interests.

tunedout · 21-05-2013 12:05PM

1ZRed wrote: »

So if I'm a perfectly normal and average guy and get kicked out because I was gay then how is that not discrimination? You're wanting me out only because I was gay. That "difference in interest" is bullshit, you wouldn't know if I was gay until I told you so the only difference in interest would be where I like to stick my dick, does that seem reasonable to you? Sounds thick as fuck to me tbh.

It's the same as thing as not wanting to live with a black person yet claiming not to be racist.

Hi there you seem to miss the point like the other gay people :rolleyes:

I'll try stay to the point and not entertain your other nonsense, so can you answer one simple question?
Do you treat the people living in a house that advertise a room as 'Female Only' with the same distaste you do as people living in a house that want straight people only? Are those people that are only looking for 'Females Only' "thick as fuck" ? They are sexists right?

tunedout · 21-05-2013 12:07PM

Daith wrote: »

Obviously all straight people have the same interests and gay people dont have those interests.

Yes and we can also come to the conclusion, seeing as it's socially acceptable to advertise a room as Female Only, that "all female people have the same interests and male people dont have those interests."
:rolleyes:

Daith · 21-05-2013 12:08PM

tunedout wrote: »

Yes and we can also come to the conclusion, seeing as it's socially acceptable to advertise a room as Female Only, that "all female people have the same interests and male people dont have those interests."
:rolleyes:

All female doesn't exclude gay people.

Rollseyes

J_E · 21-05-2013 12:11PM

Daith wrote: »

All female doesn't exclude gay people.

Rollseyes

Missing the point...

awec · 21-05-2013 12:12PM

Links234 wrote: »

today I learned if a guy is camp, it's LITERALLY SCREAMING IN PEOPLE'S FACES

...yeah

Who said that? I suppose you could twist what I said to try and make that point, but that's a stretch.

efb · 21-05-2013 12:13PM

Deleted User wrote: »

You know its going to get to the stage were gay people have absolutely nothing to complain about that they will have to make something up.

I long for the day

Daith · 21-05-2013 12:13PM

Cydoniac wrote: »

Missing the point...

That it is okay to discriminate based on gender and sexuality?

If you feel that strongly about not living with gay people, advertise your room share as "straight people" only. It's exactly the same as female or male only apparently.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 21-05-2013 12:29PM

awec wrote: »

Who said that? I suppose you could twist what I said to try and make that point, but that's a stretch.

And you could define what you mean by "screaming it in people's faces" to avoid the confusion?

1ZRed · 21-05-2013 12:34PM

tunedout wrote: »

Hi there you seem to miss the point like the other gay people :rolleyes:

I'll try stay to the point and not entertain your other nonsense, so can you answer one simple question?
Do you treat the people living in a house that advertise a room as 'Female Only' with the same distaste you do as people living in a house that want straight people only? Are those people that are only looking for 'Females Only' "thick as fuck" ? They are sexists right?

See you're forgetting that it is different. A house of women who only want women wouldn't want me either even if I wasn't attracted to them, I'm still a man. If a house of all males seeking another straight male doesn't want me that's another issue. We're all males so it's not like the male vs female dynamic at all. They wouldn't want me because of my orientation and I think it's completely stupid and is discrimination.

I still don't agree with only seeking men or women but that's a gender thing, not a sexuality issue. They're not one in the same.

So if you had your way I could get excluded by the "women only" ad and the "only straight" ads -even if the ads were "male only" and "straight only" I still couldn't apply. I don't understand why my sexuality would be so much of an issue.

And why didn't you answer my other question about not wanting a black person to live you with you, is that racism? If you think "only straight" ads would be ok then why not "only white" too?

Canard · 21-05-2013 12:45PM

I saw that thread about the roommates. What I remember much more vividly than the "sobbing" is someone's blatant homophobia. The name escapes me though.

I loved your "all the other gays" comment in this thread btw.

Do you also think bathrooms should all be unisex? Do you feel your rights are infringed upon because you can't pee with the ladies? If you were gay and forced to use a woman's bathroom when it was found out - that's a closer representation of what happened to that poster. Not that I agree totally with discriminating against housemates on gender, but its occurrence doesn't make it okay to dismiss a housemate you were getting on well with due to their sexuality.

J_E · 21-05-2013 12:47PM

Canard wrote: »

I saw that thread about the roommates. What I remember much more vividly than the "sobbing" is someone's blatant homophobia. The name escapes me though. I loved your "all the other gays" comment in this thread btw.

Do you also think bathrooms should all be unisex? Do you feel your rights are infringed upon because you can't pee with the ladies? If you were gay and forced to use a woman's bathroom when it was found out - that's a closer representation of what happened to that poster. Not that I agree totally with discriminating against housemates on gender, but its occurrence doesn't make it okay to dismiss a housemate you were getting on well with due to their sexuality.

Very big difference between kicked out of a flat and using gender-specific bathrooms. This post stinks of something...kind of bigoted, almost.

Thing is...what does being gay have to do with anything? most gay people keep it as a private aspect of their life. I think a lot of people have this misconception that gay people are sexual predators or something. I don't even like using the terms 'gays' and 'straights' as it just reinforces this idea that we're completely different beings. Thing is, I've shared a house with a bunch of straight men plenty of times and my sexuality never comes into question because it isn't even something to question about...

Annasopra · 21-05-2013 12:48PM

awec wrote: »

I have no problem with people feeling comfortable in self expression. But this sudden change of how people speak and act is attention seeking tripe.

Sentence 1 and sentence 2 completely contradict each other

Canard · 21-05-2013 12:56PM

Cydoniac wrote: »

Very big difference between kicked out of a flat and using gender-specific bathrooms. This post stinks of something...kind of bigoted, almost.

Bigoted how?

I know there's a big difference but I can't think of a better way to compare the two. I just don't see how someone can feel like it's okay to not live with someone because of their sexuality is all.

Thing is...what does being gay have to do with anything? most gay people keep it as a private aspect of their life. I think a lot of people have this misconception that gay people are sexual predators or something. I don't even like using the terms 'gays' and 'straights' as it just reinforces this idea that we're completely different beings. Thing is, I've shared a house with a bunch of straight men plenty of times and my sexuality never comes into question because it isn't even something to question about...

That's the point I was trying to make. It's like, maybe 4 girls would prefer to live with a fifth girl because their lifestyles are more similar or something like that, but the fact that being gay doesn't significantly affect someone's character/life, and the fact that in this case everyone got along before the guy said he was gay, makes it a bit more...sinister? (That word sounds a bit dramatic but hopefully the idea comes across.)

J_E · 21-05-2013 12:57PM

Okay, I probably misread the context of the post, apologies in that case.

tunedout · 21-05-2013 02:25PM

This is difficult work.

1ZRed wrote: »

See you're forgetting that it is different. A house of women who only want women wouldn't want me either even if I wasn't attracted to them, I'm still a man.

Yes, correct. That is the example I gave. Preference based on gender, sexism. Nothing to do with orientation in my example.

1ZRed wrote: »

If a house of all males seeking another straight male doesn't want me that's another issue. We're all males so it's not like the male vs female dynamic at all.

Yes ye are all males, but ye are not all straight. So now instead of being rejected because you are male you are being rejected on sexuality.

1ZRed wrote: »

They wouldn't want me because of my orientation and I think it's completely stupid and is discrimination.

My question again is, you say it's completely stupid and discrimination to reject you based on your orientation, is there some reason you don't think it's completely stupid and discrimination to reject you based on your gender?

1ZRed wrote: »

I still don't agree with only seeking men or women but that's a gender thing, not a sexuality issue. They're not one in the same.

So it seems you interpret sexism to be 'more correct' than discrimination based on orientation? I just wonder what makes your discriminatory guide right, and mine wrong?

1ZRed wrote: »

So if you had your way I could get excluded by the "women only" ad and the "only straight" ads -even if the ads were "male only" and "straight only" I still couldn't apply.

If I had my way people would pick who they want to live on whatever bases they want without being called negative things such as sexist, racist and discriminatory.

1ZRed wrote: »

I don't understand why my sexuality would be so much of an issue.

Many people don't understand why their gender is such an issue when it comes to finding houses either.

1ZRed wrote: »

And why didn't you answer my other question about not wanting a black person to live you with you, is that racism? If you think "only straight" ads would be ok then why not "only white" too?

I think "only white" ads would be perfectly OK if that's what keeps a person comfortable. It is their home, and their living space after all. I wouldn't reject a person based solely on skin colour myself but would have no problem if someone did want to do that. It is their home, it is who they want to live with.

tunedout · 21-05-2013 02:28PM

mango salsa wrote: »

Sentence 1 and sentence 2 completely contradict each other

Strange, I don't see any contradiction atall.

tunedout · 21-05-2013 02:40PM

As I've said previously, homosexuals are looking for a level of societal indifference that is completely unrealistic and unacheivable. We judge or make inferences about peoples intelligence and experience based on their age, their hobbies and friends based on their gender, their tastes in cuisines and their religion based on their nationality, their nationality based on their religion, etc. So many things we do daily that could be treated as 'discrimination' but it would just be absurd to make an issue of this. Why should sexuality be any different? What entitlement does sexuality have, as a means of classification, to be immune to these (logical and rational) tendencies we have?

Too many people have their heads up their ar*es complaining about dicrimination and racism to realise that it's normal. It goes on in every country. It's part of the human race to make judgements based on how people look, and it's a great skill we have, very often we can spot a trouble maker, or a good person. Yes sometimes we get it wrong, but it's a skill, not a failure.

When I went to a town in Morocco all the sales people and street merchants could tell I was a tourist, most certainly because I had light coloured skin. They would try to sell me lots of stuff and paid more attention toward me than the locals, and my girlfriend got plagued with perfume offers while noone tried to sell me perfume.

Was I walking through a town of racist sexist pigs? No.

It's nature.

Nodin · 21-05-2013 02:44PM

tunedout wrote: »

When I went to a town in Morocco all the sales people and street merchants could tell I was a tourist, most certainly because I had light coloured skin. They would try to sell me lots of stuff and paid more attention toward me than the locals, and my girlfriend got plagued with perfume offers while noone tried to sell me perfume.

Was I walking through a town of racist sexist pigs? No.

It's nature.

Not exactly comparing like with like, are ye.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/19/us-usa-gay-newyork-idUSBRE94I0DL20130519

Canard · 21-05-2013 02:50PM

I honestly can't understand how you have such views. I can't even think of how to explain to you why they're so twisted because you hold them so strongly. Do you think it was "natural" to stop black men marrying white women? Do you think antiquated "inferences" of intelligence which decided that women had no place in maths, science, technology and the likes were natural? Or do you think the kitchen is the natural place for a woman rather than politics? My mind is boggling.

The only reason such indifference is not achievable is because some proportion of the population seem to feel superior.

Also, I don't infer someone's intelligence level on their age or hobbies, personally. I know extremely intelligent people who fit the odd stereotype of being a bit socially awkward, and equally I know many who are the life of any party yet extremely smart. It's not judgemental or discriminatory to assume someone is a Muslim if they're from the middle east - it's a good guess. To assume they're an extremist, however, is judgemental. Are you implying you can deduce what kind of a person someone is based on their sexuality? Because you can't.

21-05-2013 02:57PM

1ZRed wrote: »

No, when we reach that point we won't complain about anything and we'll be like any other straight person. There'l be no need. That's the ultimate goal of all this.

That might be the way you feel then there are the others who wont be able to handle not being the center of attention.

Canard · 21-05-2013 02:58PM

A little bit like how there are also straight people who love being the center of attention, one might even say.

kunst nugget · 21-05-2013 03:02PM

Deleted User wrote: »

That might be the way you feel then there are the others who wont be able to handle not being the center of attention.

Amazingly enough, I know some straight people that always want to be the centre of attention as well. It's a crazy mixed up world we live in…

Daith · 21-05-2013 03:09PM

tunedout wrote: »

What entitlement does sexuality have, as a means of classification, to be immune to these (logical and rational) tendencies we have?

You might have. You might think it's logical and rational. Not everyone does so don't use we.

floggg · 21-05-2013 03:16PM

UCDVet wrote: »

I consumed alcohol before I was of age - but I had no alcohol pride.
I 'used to do' other illegal drugs - but again....no sense of pride.

I dunno - I don't mean to sound like I'm *against* gay/straight/BSDM/furry/whatever sex Pride anyone has. I just don't 'get it'.

I personally wouldn't attend; but I wouldn't have a problem with someone who did. If a sex-related pride parade were coming down my street - I wouldn't want my children to watch, but short of that - let adults do what they want.

The only actual experience I had with a gay-pride parade did have some people who were certainly inappropriately dressed (or not dressed) - since it was on a public street, I think it's only appropriate to respect decency laws...but short of that, fair play to 'em.

I think it's reflective of all lack of understanding of the purpose of pride, and of homosexuality in general, that you seem to be dismissing pride as a sex parade.

It has nothing to do with sex. If you only see it as an attempt to flaunt our sex life than you really have very little understanding of pride or the issues gay people have historically faced and still face today.

It is about the right to be yourself, to be respected and to have your relationships, orientation and choices respected and the right to live in peace and free from harassment.

There is a big difference. Unfortunately some people just seem to be preoccupied with the sexual aspects when they think of homosexuality.

I think it's difficult to really try and explain the point of pride though when they have reduced the sum of the gay experience to sexual acts.

tunedout · 21-05-2013 03:21PM

Canard wrote: »

Also, I don't infer someone's intelligence level on their age or hobbies, personally. I know extremely intelligent people who fit the odd stereotype of being a bit socially awkward, and equally I know many who are the life of any party yet extremely smart.

Yes, we all know outliers. This doesn't make categorisation redundant. Just because I know a girl who loves tractors and machinery, doesn't make it crazy to assume that a girl, picked at random, more than likely has no interest in machinery or tractors, where as there is a much higher chance with a boy.

Canard wrote: »

It's not judgemental or discriminatory to assume someone is a Muslim if they're from the middle east - it's a good guess. To assume they're an extremist, however, is judgemental.

Yes I agree with you here. However, you may say, that,statistically, there is a slightly higher risk that the person is an extremist due to them belonging to a certain religion. That would just be stating facts.

Canard wrote: »

Are you implying you can deduce what kind of a person someone is based on their sexuality? Because you can't.

Yes, I can make at least some inferences on a person based on their sexuality. Like for example which sex the person is attracted to.

If I am looking to live with a person, who I can discuss sexual encounters with (specifically heterosexual encounters), knowing that that person has been through similar experiences, and has an interest in those experiences (for example difficulties I'm having a girl in a heterosexual relationship) then it is my prerogative to choose a straight housemate. Noone should call me discriminatory or sexist or any of that nonsense for that. It is just one of the things I'd like to be able to discuss with my housemate. And while the homosexual can try to discuss it and listen to the problems or whatever, I can never be comfortable with the idea that they 'understand' because they have not been through something similar enough.

Heterosexual Pride Day

Comments