Lest you forget or deny - on homophobia

[sniffa]

Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Thu Nov-04-04 10:30 PM
Original message

A few words about the discussion of gay rights and related issues.

Edited on Thu Nov-04-04 11:12 PM by Skinner
We find ourselves in a rather unpleasant situation here, because events outside of DU have raised a rather sensitive issue: How does the issue of Gay rights effect the national electoral prospects of the Democratic party?

I will spare you a long discussion about my point of view, and boil my opinion down to one sentence: I believe that some potential Democratic voters are turned off by Gay rights, but on balance I believe that the issue helps us more than it hurts us, and I believe we can win nationally without abandoning our support of equal rights for all. But the purpose of this post is not to tell you my point of view.

The purpose of this post is to remind everyone that Democratic Underground has rules regarding anti-gay bigotry. We expect *all* of our members to support equal rights for all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation.

We have very few litmus test issues on DU. We permit members to be pro-life or pro-gun or whatever, provided that they are generally on our side.

But this is a litmus test issue, because we are talking about REAL PEOPLE, our fellow members of this community. I simply will not tolerate the idea of some DU members arguing that other DU members are not deserving of full and equal rights. This is a moral issue. If DU had existed back during the civil rights movement, I hope that we would all agree that this was not the place to discuss whether blacks deserve civil rights.

But I also need to make something else clear: Democratic Underground is a message board dedicated to the discussion of political issues, including how political issues affect the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party. It is not homophobic to discuss whether the issue of Gay rights cost us votes, provided that you are not discussing the issue in a homophobic way. But it is homophobic to scapegoat gays and lesbians in an effort to answer an extremely complex question like "why did we lose?"

So, where is the line drawn here? What is acceptable discourse and what is not? I wish there were easy answers. I would prefer not to have to make calls like this, because invariably someone gets pissed off, but it comes with the job description.

Keep the following guidelines in mind:

1. We expect all of our members to support equal rights for all people, regardless of sexual orientation. That includes the right to marry.

2. If you want to discuss this issue, you need to do so in a manner that is sensitive to the values of this diverse community. Be as clear and as non-inflammatory as possible in everything you say.

3. If you are opposed to gay rights, you are a homophobe. Don't share that particular point of view here or else you're going to get banned. You've been warned.

4. If your explanation for why we lost is based entirely (or almost entirely) on gay rights, then you are scapegoating and you're probably a homophobe. You might get banned.

5. If you are arguing that the party needs to abandon support for gay rights entirely, then you might not be an outright homophobe, but in my opinion you are not sufficiently supportive of equal rights.

6. It is not homophobic to point out the obvious truth that there are large numbers of people in large regions of the country who are opposed to gay rights. ON EDIT: It also not homophobic to point out that political candidates, particularly those running in conservative areas, may have to compromise on the issue of gay rights for the purposes of political expediency.

7. I believe that we need to focus on the question of how our party can be competitive nationally without abandoning this core principle. I believe that gay rights is not a make-or-break issue for a majority of voters in any state. The opinions of hard-core homophobes notwithstanding, my impression is that most Americans are supportive of the idea that people should be able to live their lives how they like. How do we convince potential voters that they need not be afraid? How do we convince potential voters that they should care more about their job and their health care and their children than about who some stranger falls in love with? These are the questions we need to be asking.

We are right on this issue, I have no doubt. In 40 years, we are going to look back at opposition to gay marriage as something as bigoted and anachronistic as opposition to interracial marriage.

I am sorry if some of you feel I am putting too much restriction on the discussion of this topic. I am also sorry if some of you feel I am not restrictive enough. My goal is to create a place where we can discuss the issues in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1324374

[terrya]

1. I want to thank Skinner for posting that and you, sniffa, for posting it again.

I vividly remember the aftermath of the 2004 election. We gay and lesbian people were scapegoated incessantly here...like our entirely reasonable demands to be treated like full class citizens was some sort of selfish act. I remember that some people here were saying that either 1) we should shut up about our demands for full equality or 2) we should leave the Democratic Party completely.

Homophobia has no place here at Democratic Underground.

[blondie58]

2. thank you

thank you, both Skinner and Sniffa for stating the facts. Sometimes we all need to be reminded. Yeah, we should be able to discuss things without namecalling and prejudices.

I am finding that there seem to be a few people out there who like to 'pick a fight'. I have reread my things and did not find their argument viable. I, being a mellow Libran, have a hard time understanding that some people have a need to start trouble and arguments. I have always done anything and everything to avoid arguments. Different personalities, I guess.

In the wise words of Rodney King- "Can't we all just get along?"

[Ian David]

3. Kicked, rec'd, bookmarked and endorsed. n/t

[bicentennial_baby]

4. Kick!

I love you :loveya:

:kick:

[crispini]

5. Wow. I guess I missed that. Excellent thread!

K&R! :kick:

[bettyellen]

6. K+R and bookmarked.

[The Backlash Cometh]

7. How many adhere to my rule of thumb:

Liberal on gay rights(business, housing, employment, marriage), but conservative on social rules of decorum?

[bicentennial_baby]

8. Meaning what, exactly?

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. I'll leave it up to you to frame.

But, I'll just say, that I truly believe that it's the key to making everyone happy.

[bicentennial_baby]

10. How can I frame it if I have no idea what you're referring to?

"Social decorum"? :shrug:

What does that mean in the context of this discussion?

[The Backlash Cometh]

11. Use history as your guide.

We've gotten this far at least twice before, but failed. So ask yourself why we failed.

Of course, if you're younger than 50, you're at a disadvantage.

[bicentennial_baby]

12. Ok, you're being deliberately obtuse, so I'm done

You could just say what you mean in plain english, but since you won't, I'm done. I can imagine that there's a good reason why you won't though... :eyes:

[The Backlash Cometh]

14. I've already been through this debate before.

I read things in the original post which made me feel that someone is finally thinking along the same lines that I have been, but, maybe I made a mistake.

[bicentennial_baby]

15. Again, just say it!

Jeebus!

[Pale Blue Dot]

16. he thinks, essentially, that gay people should have rights,

but that they should know not to hit on him.

:eyes:

[bicentennial_baby]

18. Ah, I see

I knew there was something familiar about this poster.... :think:

Hey you! :hi:

And btw, I don't know if you saw his reply last week, but Sniffa totally wasn't harshing on you and Sarah last week, that was an oopsie, posted in the wrong part of the thread. :)

[The Backlash Cometh]

19. You know, you can belittle the situation,

but it's not helping your case.

In fact, I've done enough to try to represent the other side's view, but if what you really want on DU is a mutual admiration pep rally, I'll respectfully bow out.

This issue doesn't really involve me, anyways. Put up your candidate, I'll vote for him or her. It's done.

[Pale Blue Dot]

20. I'm not belittling the issue.

I am a straight man who has been hit on by more gay men than straight women in my life. I find it kind of flattering, and I have an extremely hard time understanding why a straight, progressive male would get so uptight about it. So uptight, in fact, that you feel the need to make the argument in many, many threads about this issue.

But that's for you to decide. I'm not going to change your mind.

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. So you're saying that there are issues that I shouldn't discuss on

DU?

Or better yet, that if I dare say that I believe in progressive ideals for everyone, but adhere to traditional rules of behavior in my personal life that it means I'm a flaming latent homosexual? Oh, maybe you didn't say it, but it's been said too often and admit it, it's what you're thinking, isn't it? And you can't see how threatening that is to someone who just needs more space in their comfort zone?

You know why I write so much about this issue? Because I have a degree in Sociology and this kind of thing interests me. Even your argument, though predictable it is, I find interesting.

[Madspirit]

52. HaHa

**Because I have a degree in Sociology and this kind of thing interests me.**


I love it when people tote out their degrees to try to bolster their points. My field is psychology and I think most of what you say is based in homophobic fear.
Lee

[The Backlash Cometh]

72. You're entitled to your opinion.

Of course, I would consider that a lazy diagnoses. I would say that I suffer from Middle child syndrome and just don't like people treading into my space.

[Madspirit]

83. If

If it's just that you don't like ANYONE in your comfort zone, why are you posting it on a thread about homophobia?
Lee

[The Backlash Cometh]

84. Oh, puhlease.

I think you're fixated. The ole, if all you have is a hammer, then every problem must look like a nail.

[Madspirit]

87. Hit dog howls.

That was a valid and rather mild question. Do you feel uncomfortable when anyone is in your comfort zone? What's controversial about that question. Jeez...maybe you do need some therapy.
Lee

[Madspirit]

88. Lastly

It really doesn't matter how you feel. It's the RULES here. Homophobia is not welcome. Period. Not debatable, not "maybe"...the rules.
Lee

[The Backlash Cometh]

95. I don't consider myself homophobic.

If I apply the same rules to heterosexuals, as I do to homosexuals, how is it homophobic? Please quote my posts when you respond so that we can be sure you understood exactly what I said.

[Madspirit]

100. For One Thing

You had a big 'ol problem answering a simple and sincere question. Do you feel uncomfortable when anyone is in your comfort zone. You were claiming your "comfort zone" problems had to do with being a Middle Child not homophobia so it was a valid question and you just freaked. Issues much.
Lee

[Madspirit]

111. Once again

It was a sincere question based on your claim. I was interested. I don't like anyone I don't know in my comfort zone either. Man, woman, straight, gay. I am a survivor of some pretty severe childhood abuse. You get in my face and I jump straight up ten feet and back five and my hair stands on end. Or I slug you. Depending whether my PTSD goes into Fight or Flight.

So I just wanted to know.
Lee

[The Backlash Cometh]

115. Well, that's a bit more civilized.

I didn't experience severe childhood abuse. But, when you're raised in a household with few amenities but lots of siblings you don't really get to develop your own independent self, until you break away. Siblings have a way of thinking that you belong to them, and that whoever you were forty years ago in the pecking order, you must still be as you get older. I absolutely want nothing but the best for them. We had some good times, but we are very different individuals. Unfortunately, I seem to be the only one who realizes it. So, it just feels like the only way to maintain my sense of "self" is to protect my space. Because, yes, when someone intrudes too much it does bring back memories of a repetitious cycle of people who continually think it's okay to take things from you without asking.

Actually, that last part, seems to be the theme of my life.

[The Backlash Cometh]

113. Let's review your sincerity:

"I love it when people tote out their degrees to try to bolster their points. My field is psychology and I think most of what you say is based in homophobic fear."

Second post:

"If it's just that you don't like ANYONE in your comfort zone, why are you posting it on a thread about homophobia?"

Third post:


"That was a valid and rather mild question. Do you feel uncomfortable when anyone is in your comfort zone? What's controversial about that question. Jeez...maybe you do need some therapy."

Fourth post:

"It really doesn't matter how you feel. It's the RULES here. Homophobia is not welcome. Period. Not debatable, not "maybe"...the rules."

There is nothing simple and nothing sincere about anything you've posted. But I shall try to answer what appears to be an inquiry. Do I have issues? Absolutely, and I dare say that in this complicated world, so do most people. And what I've found is that it's easier to accept everything, including my flaws, than it is to be unhappy worrying about trying to please everyone all the time. I believe that the key to being happy with oneself is accepting your own identity, whatever that may be. Flaws and all. So, do I have hang-ups. I'm sure I do. I recognize them, and I accept them and my friends would too.

[Madspirit]

119. well

This was before my more sincere one. ...and I wasn't being insincere above. I was being snarky. ...but I am not now.
Lee

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Colobo]

27. It has happened to me

And I think the reason I have felt a bit uncomfortable in those situations in the past is because my upbringing. When you are taught since you are a kid that your masculinity/heterosexuality is inversely proportional to the degree in which you are in contact with gays, that kind of situation might be a bit hard for someone to handle.

It's hard to "detoxify" ourselves from the cultural hatred we have learned... and it's sad.

[The Backlash Cometh]

35. I don't know if it's always cultural hatred that drives it.

I think it's important to form your own identity. And if you feel comfortable seeing yourself a certain way, it's very disconcerting to have someone tell you you're wrong. That applies to everyone here on DU. Heterosexual and homosexuals. If someone feels comfortable being traditional in their own personal behavior, they shouldn't have to feel like they have to defend that decision, or even explain it. I bet that often, this has nothing to do with sexual orientation at all, but whether someone is extroverted or introverted. Would we tell someone who is introverted that they're wrong because they don't like to be touched a lot or because they are uncomfortable when someone breaks their comfort zone? No. That's ridiculous.

[Moochy]

39. Are you still in your Comfort Zone?

Or do you need to keep explaining it? I think that you misinterpreted someone's comments about obsessing on this issue. People obsess on sexuality for many reasons, it defies simplistic analysis, and your "flaming homosexual" remark was off the mark, IMO.

Liberals and Progressives who feel they are "socially conservative" are probably in for a lot of "disconcerting" moments, being told they are wrong, or worse Regressive.

[The Backlash Cometh]

44. Don't put words in my mouth.

I said, "flaming latent homosexual." Read some of the rebuttals that I've received on this and another recent thread. Some progressives believe that a person is hiding some deep dark desire to be homosexual if they disagree with them. I think they are so persistent in that criticism, that the term, "flaming" is proportionally warranted.

[Moochy]

91. Flaming as in..

Trollish, not flaming as in Ann Coulter's favorite new f-word. I get it... :eyes:

Hmm the only deep dark desire I have is to disagree with you.

[The Backlash Cometh]

97. We can mutually disagree with each other.

I'm fine with that.

I find it interesting how you all are allowed to sling the taunt, "homophobe," without it having to do with any part of the conversation.

[Moochy]

98. Take some of your own advice

> Now please go back and read my posts carefully and quote what I've written before commenting
> please, because you are the one who is crossing the line here.

Did I call you a homophobe?, no I said that was overly simplistic analysis.

[The Backlash Cometh]

104. I see, a translation is necessary.

What I said was, "I find it interesting how you all are allowed to sling the taunt, "homophobe," without it having to do with any part of the conversation."

Notice I didn't say "you," I said "you all," which is the long version of "ya'll." It's a general term to mean a group of people and was not directed at you in particular. Just pointing out something I had noticed in regards to this entire thread.

Sorry you took it personally.

[Moochy]

105. Apology accepted

You can you use Y'all. or You all, or "dirty liberals" would do too. Heathens?

[The Backlash Cometh]

108. OH, I had a great comeback, but I'm afraid to get booted off the

newsgroup. I bet you would have chuckled, too.

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[foreigncorrespondent]

30. You know what's funny?

Being queer we get to hear the "other sides view" constantly in our every day lives. It would be nice to be able to come to a place that is meant to be progressive and not have to face the "other sides view."

[The Backlash Cometh]

34. I don't find anything funny about this at all.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

45. I find it pretty funny.

I find the whole "I'm OK with gays as long as they're not shoving it down my throat" rather... Freudian.

[The Backlash Cometh]

47. Well, that's me. Uptight and off-white.

I'm okay with brawny heterosexuals too, as long and they're not shoving it down my throat.

[Morgana LaFey]

79. But she wasn't talking about YOUR perspective -- but from hers

of course you wouldn't find it funny. She's complaining about YOU, and YOUR attitudes.

[The Backlash Cometh]

82. Your post was unnecessary.

I responded to the most neutral part of her post, since what she was suggesting is that she would be happier if DU would not have people, such as me, expressing opinions that are contrary to hers. I do my best not to post to the Gay forum, for that reason.

I have every reason to question if it makes sense, that I'm here to support you all on the major bills that matter: marriage, work, housing etc.and it doesn't seem to be enough. If something doesn't feel right in a social setting where it involves heterosexuals, why would it feel any more right in a social setting where it involves homosexuals? You know, I see an uphill battle for you all, and with all due respect, I'm sitting this one out because I just don't see any sign of compromise.

[Morgana LaFey]

86. Well, "necessary" isn't the standard here

is it?

BTW, I'm straight. Very straight. Just not narrow, as they saying so aptly goes.

As for compromise, no, there should be no compromise where equal rights are concerned.

You have a lot to think about, lady. I hope you'll take this opportunity to do just that. Until gays and lesbians are free to behave in public in any way you and your intimate partner(s) behave in public, they're not free at all. And neither are you, but that part is just less visible.

[The Backlash Cometh]

93. Excuse me, where are you pulling this information from?

It certainly isn't from my posts. Where did I say that gays were not allowed to behave in public in the same way that I would with my intimate partner? All I have been talking about has involved how to instigate the original overture in a bar so you won't risk offending someone. And now you've blown that out of context to frame what I would say once you have found a willing partner. That's just intentional mis characterization on your part.

Now please go back and read my posts carefully and quote what I've written before commenting please, because you are the one who is crossing the line here.

[LeftishBrit]

122. What puzzles me is why you are raising this in a thread that concerns homophobia

I'm not that keen on people intruding too much into my personal space either; but I've never seen it as more of an issue with gays than with heterosexuals.

It seems to me that you are making either of three points and I'm not sure which:

(1) Intrusive behaviour, or sexual harrassment at worst, are more undesirable when they come from gays than from heterosexuals. (Strongly disagree - both are undesirable).

(2) Gays are more likely than heterosexuals to intrude on others' space or to harrass them sexually. (Strongly disagree; and yes, that would be a homophobic statement!)

(3) The rules are less clear about behaviour of gays than of heterosexuals. (Disagree - it seems to me that the same rules of etiquette and against sexual harrassment are equally applicable to both.)

[NorthernSpy]

124. when I was in college, the police arrested several men who were having sex in a public bathroom...

... and some activists on campus objected to the arrests. Their complaint was that the men faced severe homophobia in the larger society, and that our public bathrooms were the only places where these casualties of our intolerance could come together. And that the rest of us were guilty of homophobia for being so unsympathetic as to want them stopped so that other men and boys could urinate in peace.

I've never forgotten how melodramatic, manipulative, and all-around stupid those activists sounded:

First they took the doors off the stalls, and I did nothing...

:eyes:


The thing is, lots of people get accused of homophobia -- even goodhearted people who have valid concerns about what sort of public behavior might be too grossly inconsiderate for our society to tolerate.

[Name removed]

145. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[foreigncorrespondent]

116. Neither do I.

It's sad and pathetic actually. Just pointing out that debating the "other sides" opinions really does offend some of us who have to put up with hearing their opinions on an almost constant daily basis in the real world, let alone finding it right here.

[Zuiderelle]

134. Oh crap, it's you again. Equating everything to the few gay people in your life who've made you

uncomfortable. That's tiresome. Very tiresome. I have to wonder about the agenda of someone who pretends to support equality for gay people while condescending that somehow we need to fit into your idea of what is socially acceptable.

[Skittles]

68. well I just think it is strange

guys to whom most women will not give the time of day are soooooo convinced every homosexual is out to nail them - ya right

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[northofdenali]

78. I am way older than 50, and my mother is 92 -

neither of us have problems with gay or lesbian couples.

What's yours?

[ProfessorGAC]

43. Liberal Point Of View

A conservative social decorum is one that adheres to time honored traditions of polite company. In other words, be nice. Discuss whatever you please. Hold whatever views you wish. Believe in justice for all. Don't stomp on anyone or their thing. That's what it means, i would think.

The Professor

[The Backlash Cometh]

46. I didn't want to use the word, "traditional."

"Traditional," would imply that it was closer to the norm, and I was shooting for "old standard." That's why "conservative" seemed correct.

I disagree with you that "conservative" gives you unfettered leeway to discuss whatever you please, or hold whatever views you wish. What you describe, "Hold whatever views you wish. Believe in justice for all. Don't stomp on anyone or their thing." That's the liberal philosophy of the 60s.

So, I think it's far removed from conservative. Remember what we traditionally use to say? Don't talk about politics, religion or...what was that third thing? Was it sex? That's tradition for you. Because those subjects tend to be divisive

Obviously, we're onto the next stage. How do we talk about politics, religion and sex without offending? Or do we just accept that it's not possible?

[ProfessorGAC]

48. It's A Razor's Edge

Some topics are edgy. The point of that adjective is to suggest that one is pushing the boundries of acceptability. So i suppose some egg breaking is needed to break an omelet.

At the same time, you misunderstand me. I didn't say that one should never discuss things that might make others uncomfortable. I said discuss them. Just don't stomp on people. Disagreeing with them and saying so isn't stomping. Name calling is stomping. Stomping is stomping.

I don't agree with everything said here at DU. But, i do my absolute best to not call names. I might tell someone that i flatly believe they're wrong, or they have no clue as to what they're discussing. If someone says that's name calling, then fine. But, i don't think it is and it's not rude to tell someone, "Boy, do i think you're off base." But, saying "You're a lying blithering idiot!" would be rude. And unproductive.

So, my take is that one can have whatever social positions one wishes, can discuss them with whomever, but don't let it degenerate into a screaming match of personality over topic.

I would think you agree with that.
GAC

[The Backlash Cometh]

50. Oh, I agree.

But did you happen to notice that I'm the one subjected to the name calling?

All, and all. This has been a very civil exchange. I think I'll stop while I'm ahead.

[Zhade]

146. No, that's the liberal philosophy since the country formed. Jesus.

You don't think people can hold whatever views they wish? Too fucking bad, you don't have the power to make that call.

Your insignificance in that regard is a relief.

[bear425]

13. Equal civil rights should not be viewed as liberal or conservative

They should be viewed as constitutionally American. As far as the "social rules of decorum"... they should be followed by all,IMHO.

[The Backlash Cometh]

17. Yes, they should.

But for some reason, conservatives don't think so. So, what I think you have to ask yourself is, what in the gay community overlaps on a social basis that threatens them?

Look, the fight for gay rights is going to start with the Lawrence case, which is that everyone has a right to do whatever they like in the privacy of their homes. It's hard to believe that's even in question, but that part of Gay Rights should be supported by everyone on DU.

Next is the same rights for jobs, marriage etc...

But what goes for heterosexuals will definitely apply to homosexuals and I don't think that point is getting across.

[GOTV]

26. So, I can go up to a girl at a bar...

... tell her she's pretty and start talking to her and trying to get to know her. I'm a heterosexual guy by the way. She's free to rebuff me, or to talk to me. We may talk for a bit and then either one of us may decide we're not interested or we might become more interested.

This is all allowed since I am hetero.

What applies to heterosexuals applies to homosexuals as well.

Therefore a homosexual male could come up to either one of us in a bar and tell us we're attractive and try to get to know us better. We're free to rebuff him or to talk to him. Being hetero, we'd probably rebuff him but in any case, that's all cool right?

Is that your point?

[The Backlash Cometh]

37. First, you're in a bar. That's a clue.

What happens in a bar, doesn't necessarily apply at work or in a grocery store. Second, what kind of bar is it? I assume you're in a bar where heterosexuals abound. And you know it, and she knows it. So what is likely to happen in a bar where heterosexuals abound? Just what you describe.

Are all bars the same? No. There are gay bars, there are even lesbian bars, there are metropolitan bars, there are country bars. You know what, the rules of decorum seem to change depending on where you are, don't they? They're dictated by the people who the bar is trying to attract. I bet you that in a major metropolitan city, that it would be far more acceptable for the gay community to feel more relaxed about "hitting" on someone in a bar, than it would be if they were in a country bar that they know little or nothing about.

I don't know that for a fact, just a hunch.

[GOTV]

41. So it's cool then - you're in a bar....

... a bar that is open to the public, straight or gay.

I could go into a lesbian bar and freely do the exact same thing. My odds of success might be low, it being a bar full of lesbians. But she might be bisexual or she might be the straight girl out with some lesbian friends. I don't know unless I ask.

She might be annoyed by my interruption but I'm still within reasonable and acceptable bounds to ask.

Either way, it's cool right? That's your point right?

[The Backlash Cometh]

49. I believe it depends on the bar.

Though, bars are a safer bet than an office place to "hit" on someone.

Frankly, just try this for a month or two. Don't "hit" on someone in a bar, until you make eye contact and that eye contact looks promising. You see, if someone feels uncomfortable, they won't glance in your direction again after the first accidental meet. There are other cues that someone is interested, but you'll figure that out.

Also, the only people that I met in bars that turned out okay, were people I already knew.

[GOTV]

57. Ok, then it's not cool for you. I though I could support you but I guess not.

If it's cool for heterosexuals it should be cool for homosexuals. A guy can't tell by looking if you're gay and there's nothing wrong with them trying to meet you. If you're not interested, you say so. If you're offended, you've got a problem.

You're not in some higher class. We're not living in some Jane Austin world.

You want different rules for homosexuals. Not cool.

[The Backlash Cometh]

60. Er, I was telling you the rules that I lived by, and I'm a heterosexual.

How did you miss that? By your bias, maybe?

Let me recap:

A) The only people I ever met in a bar that I really hit it off with, I already knew beforehand; and,

B) Though I am incredibly reserved, one gin and tonic and I was playing the eye game just like any single person would; and,

C) It was in a bar that my husband and I bumped into each other (we already knew each other before then) and it was the eye contact that sold the deal.

What, you think I'm playing Dr. Ruth without doing some field tests of my own?

Listen, do the hell whatever you want out there, just don't act like you don't understand why you're not well received. It is going to be hit or miss, just like it is for heterosexuals. Some guys are going to love you for it, and some guys are going to let you know that you have crossed some serious tabu that they don't want any part of. As long as they limit themselves to words, it's all fair game. Don't think there are guys in the heterosexual world who aren't thrown into the dumb jock category just because of their abrupt manner.

[GOTV]

61. Did I miss something?

I can approach a girl and be within acceptable bounds, (which has nothing to do with whether or not I'm well received) but it's unacceptable for a guy to approach a guy or a girls to approach a girl?

Is that not what you said?

If that's what you said then I didn't miss anything and that's not cool.

> and some guys are going to let you know that you have crossed some serious tabu

And some guys might beat the crap out of their approacher, tie me to a fence and leave me to die.

That makes those guys wrong, not the gay guy.

[The Backlash Cometh]

63. Painting by the numbers.

Okay, we'll bring it down a step. You're a boy, interested in a girl at a bar. You don't know if she's interested. You make eye contact across the room. You keep looking to see if she looks back. She does and smiles. Go over and buy her a drink.

Now, you're a boy, interested in a boy at a bar. You don't know if he's interested. You make eye contact across the room. You keep looking to see if he looks back. He does and smiles. Go over and buy him a drink.

Now, where was the disconnect? Where did you get the impression that I was telling you that the rules were different for heteros and homosexuals? Please explain that. Here let me help you: I PROPOSED THE SAME RULES FOR BOTH.

And, I'm sorry, but if you're going to go up to someone and "hit" on them without doing some fieldwork on how they would receive your advances, then verbally, they have the Freedom of Speech to tell you whatever they want to say. And that goes both ways too.

[GOTV]

69. Maybe I follow your rules, maybe I don't....

I'm not asking for tips on how to be successful picking you up personally. I understand you require an eye game first and so the direct approach would not be successful with you. Not all girls require that. It's acceptable for a man to talk to a girl with out an eye game first in most places in America. he might just walk up to a girl and say "Hi". Or he might say "can I buy you a drink" or "What's your name" or "Is this seat taken" or "You're very pretty".

It might work or it might not work. I understand it won't work with you, we can stop going over that what your rules are. I'm not interested in what works. I'm asking what should be acceptable and is it different for straights and gays.


> I PROPOSED THE SAME RULES FOR BOTH.

Not when you started bringing the type of bar into the argument a few posts ago. Were you not saying there are different rules for straight bars vs. gay bars? Are you now retracting the statement "it depends on the bar"?

Are you willing to admit that it's equally acceptable for men to approach men in any bar where men may approach women?

I'm not asking how to improve their odds of success, I'm not asking how gays can avoid being beaten up and I'm not asking for tips on how you liked to be picked up when you were single. I'm just asking about what is right.

Do you think a gay guy should be able to approach another guy in any situation where a straight guy would be comfortable approaching another girl. If it's the same rules for both, the answer is 'yes' don't you think? Or do different rules apply to the straight guy than to the gay guy?

[The Backlash Cometh]

71. I do believe I said, that you can do whatever you like.

As long as you're willing to accept the consequences.

I do not believe you have a right to decide for others what they should determine is socially offensive behavior. You can decide to tread lightly where you're unsure, or go recklessly headlong. It's your personal choice. Just be prepared to accept the consequences.

[Morgana LaFey]

80. What a shame

You were almost about to pull it out of the fire. I'm disappointed.

[The Backlash Cometh]

81. Well, at least now you'll understand why I don't consider myself

a liberal.

[motocicleta]

120. TBC, I really don't want to put you on ignore

but "off-topic" doesn't begin to describe your output on this issue. Can't you just, one time, say everyone should act nice and play by the rules? Then we, as postmodern humans, can say, "No", and we can all move on? Why all the prevarication and redundancy? I mean, I play nice most of the time, but not everyone does, and your continued bleating about social niceties on a thread about civil rights is a disgusting embarrassment. I'm sorry, but if you're a physically, mentally, emotionally, or otherwise attractive person, you can expect to get hit on by at least one person you wished wouldn't at least once in your life. Deal with it, and quit going all sheeple on us every time gay rights are brought up. You're better than that.

Matt

[Zhade]

148. TBC appears to believe the world should act on her vanity demands.

To which I say, fuck that.

[Zhade]

147. And you find those "consequences" acceptable?

"I do not believe you have a right to decide for others what they should determine is socially offensive behavior."

Guess what - same goes for you (I'm sorry, "others"). You don't have the right to decide what's acceptable - the world doesn't fucking revolve around YOU.

[marshall]

21. Don't ask, don't tell

Or in other words, look the other way and pretend it doesn't exist.

[The Backlash Cometh]

23. Wouldn't that also apply to heterosexuals?

The "don't ask, don't tell" part, that is. It forces you to really get to know someone, which I realize can be a pain sometimes, but what happened to getting to know someone, before you ask them out?

Is there something here we're not talking about that creates a need for spontaneity and anonymity?

[Kingshakabobo]

32. I know. It's hard out there for a "traditional" straight man.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/34118

[The Backlash Cometh]

38. Cute. Exaggeration is often entertaining.

[Moochy]

40. Coffee on Keyboard

Coffee out the nose hurts. :spray: :rofl:

[NMMNG]

117. OMFSM

:spray: :rofl:

[NorthernSpy]

51. me, for one...

I'm all for equal protection under law for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation. And at the same time, I don't smile on everything that comes out of the gay rights movement. I've witnessed gay pride parades that featured some content that really was an affront to public decency.

What's so terrible about valuing discretion and decorum as much as we value tolerance? I don't want there to be no standards of proper conduct -- does anyone, really? So yeah, I think I get where you're coming from on this.

[Madspirit]

54. I've been hit on

Lesbian here and I've been hit on by guys so many times I can't count. Damn I wish heteros would follow rules of social decorum.
Lee

[uppityperson]

76. You mean no one should "hit" on anyone?

I am confused. Reading this whole thing so far you seem to be saying you don't like getting hit on by someone with homosexual orientation. Are you saying no one should hit on anyone or just some people should not hit on others?

[kdpeters]

99. Sure. I always say 'please', 'thank you', and 'sir' during raunchy, sweaty, mansex

Anything else would just be un-Southern. Mama taught me better.

Y'all come back now! Y'hear?

[Name removed]

139. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sniffa]

24. kick

for any Losing sight of why this was posted.

[Moochy]

94. Evidence in this very thread for the need of this thread! n/t

kick! :kick:

[GoneOffShore]

25. Thanks for putting this up.

Maybe it should be pinned for awhile?

How about it mods?

[Straight Shooter]

28. I am not free in spirit to enjoy my rights until all my brothers and sisters have rights.

How people can blithely go about their lives while others are being suppressed is just beyond me. It's just plain unChristian, and I don't care what a few scattered passages in the Bible say. The main theme of the Bible in relation to others is love, but the Bible has always been cherry-picked to death for the convenience of personal agendas, ever since it was first constructed.

I wish the right wing would get as outraged about child abuse and violence against women as they do about homosexuality. :(

[VelmaD]

29. the right wing only gets outraged...

about child abuse and violence against women when we try to pass laws that stop them from engaginig in those two activities.

Sorry...it was too easy a shot to resist. :)

I agree with your post 100 percent. None of us are really free as long as any of us are denied the right to full humanity.

[Skittles]

66. YOU KNOW IT, STRAIGHT SHOOTER

AMEN TO THAT

[foreigncorrespondent]

31. K&R n/t

[sniffa]

33. gracias

:hug:

[bicentennial_baby]

36. Kick

:kick:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

42. Kick.

[Maven]

53. Kick

[David Zephyr]

55. Kick!

:thumbsup:

[Madspirit]

56. kick n/t

[bicentennial_baby]

58. Not letting you fall off the page so fast!

:kick:

[Kingshakabobo]

59. kick

[Madspirit]

62. Up to the top...(kick)...n/t

[Jax]

64. Big Time KICK

Big Time :toast: to sniffa.

Thank you so much for reviving this.

[Skittles]

65. sadly, a lot of DUers need to be reminded of this

I'm appalled by some of the homophobia I see on the DU and it reminds me how long and how hard gay folk have to struggle for their HUMAN RIGHTS

[Madspirit]

67. Is there a way here

...to make a post "sticky" so it will just stay at the top?

These RULES should be at the top of the site and stay there for a while.
Lee

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

75. Define Your Perception Of 'A Lot'. Is It 5 People? 10 People?

Just curious what your definition of 'a lot' was in this context.

[Madspirit]

85. In all the groups I belong to

...whether they have ten members or a million members, only a certain percentage post regularly. I would say closer to 20-30 regular members, minimum, at DU, display homophobia. That's just out of the ones who post regularly. That's a lot.

Besides, what is it that the homophobe defenders don't get about:

IT'S ACTUALLY AGAINST THE RULES HERE. It's simply NOT progressive and this is a progressive site. Ask Skinner about it. Sniffa's OP made it really clear.

Lee

[Madspirit]

89. Actually

I just threw out those numbers because I find the question absurd. There is enough homophobic behavior here that the gay and lesbian members FEEL it. That's all that really counts. Once again...ASK SKINNER.
Lee

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

90. 20-30? I Consider That To Be A Huge Exaggeration. I've Seen I Think A Total Of 4?

No way have I seen anywhere near 20-30 regular DU'ers display genuine homophobia. I doubt that's for my lack of reading threads either, since I'm kinda here all the time.

Could it maybe be a problem with too many people being classified as being homophobes that really aren't? :shrug:

[Madspirit]

92. So Typical n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

96. You Mean Being Honest And Factual? Absolutely.

But if you're going to make this personal rather than sticking to context in a mature manner, then I have no interest in continuing this conversation.

Goodnight.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

102. I Was Just Posting My Honest Observation. Sorry That Upsets You. But It Appears I'm Accurate, Or

I would've expected to see some actual rebuttal on your part rather than emotional attack. Since it seems you are only engaging in the latter, I would think it to be reasonable that you didn't have substance to provide for the former.

You want to post about rules, well maybe you should try reading them sometime. Your mode of personal attack instead of responding to substance just happens to be against them.

[Moochy]

103. The reward for longest subject of 2007 goes to OMC! Step right up OMC and collect your reward!!!!n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

107. With All Due Respect, Your Empty Attack Looks Pretty Silly When Your Subject Was Longer Than Mine.

I haven't seen you zip in just for sake of childish attack on me in a while. I had foolishly thought that meant you grew up a bit. My bad.

[Moochy]

109. Aww such a mild jest too

No need for a whole subthread old pal. I guess check back on my next birthday, to see if I've aged to your f@#!ing satisfaction. :P
Cheers!

[Madspirit]

106. That's right

Okey dokey. Whatever you say. I know you're right. Uh huh. I am so so wrong about this homophobia thing and so are all the other gays and lesbians on here who start all these threads discussing it and complaining about it and all the Right On straight brothers and sisters like Midlodemocrat who make pleas here regularly for the homophobia to stop. ...and Skinner, who feels it happens enough that he has to re-post the rules. We are just sissies and way toooooo sensitive. I am so so sorry. Yes, we are all so so wrong. We just couldn't be wronger and you are so so right, in your infinite and boundless wisdom. Thank-you for gracing us with that. I am humbled.
Lee

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

110. What An Absolutely Silly Way To Debate A Point. Jesus.

I see no reason for your getting so defensive and passively aggressive. I made a simple point voicing my own opinion on the matter. That is no reason whatsoever to warrant your attacks and defensive tone.

Furthermore, I couldn't help noticing that you keep referencing Skinner's post, as if it was just posted today or something. It was posted like 2 1/2 years ago for chrissake.

[Madspirit]

112. You are SO right.

I just can't express my impressedness at your rightness enough. Your wisdom stuns me.
Lee

[Zhade]

150. If you were right, Skinner wouldn't have needed to specifically address the issue.

QED.

[terrya]

121. I don't give a damn if it's only one person.

Homophobia on what we all, I hope we believe is a progressive website, is wrong. Period.

But it IS more than one person. And if you're too blind to see that, then that's very sad.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

123. Of Course It Is Wrong. That's A No Brainer. But That Also Had Nothing To Do With My Point Either.

The statement I replied to implied that there are a lot of DU'ers here who are homophobes. Since different people have different perspectives on what 'a lot' stands for, I found it to be a reasonable question to inquire as to what the poster's definition was.

Personally, I think saying 'a lot' is a huge exaggeration. I've seen maybe 3-5 posters who could legitimately fall into the category of homophobe? Sure, that's most definitely 3-5 too many and that behavior should absolutely not be tolerated here. But I'd consider those to be a miniscule exception as opposed to 'a lot'. That's why I was curious as to what the poster meant numerically by their opinion of 'a lot'.

[Skittles]

127. MY DEFINITION OF "A LOT"

enough to where I find it disturbing, OK? In many threads where gay marriage is mentioned, the bigots come of of the woodwork....very often suggesting that the struggle for human rights for gay folk needs to be DROPPED because WE CANNOT WIN WITH IT :puke: Terrya is right - even if it was one post it would be disturbing but it's NOT one - I see it over and over and over and being a straight gal I doubt I even pick up the nuances our gay DU brothers and sisters do.

[LostinVA]

128. Thanks for this post, Skittles

It truly is very nice when straight DUers step up and say something like this.

:pals:

[Skittles]

129. I am sick of it, LostinVa

I served in the military with plenty of gay folk - damn I get tired of hearing people suggest homophobia and sexism are not rampant in real life or are not noticable on DU - THEY F***ING ARE!!!!! :grr:

[LostinVA]

130. I'm sick ot it, too

It's bad enough to hear it and see it IRL, but on here? And to be told we're "too sensitive," "thin skinned," get over it," "stop being such a clique"... when all we're doing is calling people on their garbage.

Again -- thanks! It really is much appreciated.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

135. Well, I Have To Disagree With Your Premise Then.

Though I think it's absolutely ridiculous when posters say that politically it shouldn't be brought up because it hurts us, those that do so are not 'homophobes' nor bigots. Calling them such is an extreme inaccuracy if based on that alone. They probably merely have their priorities backwards more than anything else, since equal rights for all trumps any political fallout; period.

Furthermore, your initial reply to the OP was stating that the explanation of the rules as per Skinner was something that 'a lot' of DU'ers needed to be reminded of, with an insinuation that 'a lot' of DU'ers were violating them. I'd challenge you to find me 'a lot' of DU'ers who have publicly here stated that the fight for Gay rights should be DROPPED. I haven't seen that whatsoever. I've seen a select few, but most definitely not what general people would consider 'a lot'. The rest I've seen have discussed the issue legitimately though you, myself and others may passionately disagree with their viewpoint.

I agree fully that the issue needs to be discussed respectfully and that if there are some here crossing the line to the point other members find their behavior disturbing, that they should be dealt with. No one here should have to put up with bigotry. But from what I've seen in a lot of cases, perfectly fine DU'ers are being attacked as being homophobes and bigots when they aren't and they're just discussing the issue legitimately. That's why I was concerned with your use of 'a lot', because that makes it sound like there is a significant number of DU'ers that are bigoted homophobes outright and I have seen NOTHING in any of the threads surrounding this that would lend credibility to that premise. I've seen a few for sure and some of their statements were absolutely disturbing, but I haven't come close to seeing 'a lot'. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree here then.

[Skittles]

152. Skinner would not address the issue if there were JUST A FEW

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Since then, a number of such posts have been deleted per the rules

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Madspirit]

70. The Denial

It's the denial that strikes me as off-putting at DU as much as the blatant homophobia. If you were raised in a straight, white, conservative, middle class home, in America, the chances are you will be homophobic, racist, etc. It's how we are raised here. Especially my generation and older. I'm 52.

When I was a young leftist, in the late 60s and early 70s, we recognized these things and used a process called criticism/self-criticism. We admitted our bigotry and our goals were to struggle with this every single day, in every way. It's called "consciousness raising". We thought it was important because IT IS. We couldn't change the life we were born to; we couldn't change that we had been taught these things but we could change how we felt now. We thought it was The Important Struggle...what being a leftist MEANT... The Righteous Struggle.

Now, here, I see flagrant homophobia and some racism and people just dig in their heels and don't want to confront their inner demons. They want to justify it and defend it. That's what I sure as hell don't get. They complain about Political Correctness, like there is something wrong with being politically correct. It's what I strive for.

I see people defending the right to be obnoxious, like it's some Free Speech matter. Free speech has nothing to do with it and Democratic Underground does not have Free Speech. It is a privately owned group with rules and end zones. Only progressives can post here and lots of speech is not allowed. Free speech is not the issue in a privately owned group.

It's the lack of wanting to be better people, that stuns me. Little bitty baby temper tantrums..."I can be a homophobe if I want. A gay man made a pass at me." Well, whoopdedoo. I am a lesbian and straight men make passes at me. I say, "No thank-you. I am not interested. You are not my flavor." I don't go have a psychological melt-down and make it the defining motivation for my politics and my bigotry. GET OVER IT. If the worse thing that ever happens to you is that a gay person makes a pass at you, you have a pretty good life. Bitty baby.

When I find myself thinking something bigoted, I go..."Bad, bad...let's think about why you think that. Let's analyze it and CHANGE it." I don't get all pouty and justify it and insist people allow me to hang on to my bigotry.

I DON'T GET IT. I thought being a leftist meant these things matter. A lot.
Lee

[sniffa]

73. you are not the onLy one to feeL that way

as Long as it goes on though, the gay poLice wiLL be on caLL to swarm... or something.

[Madspirit]

74. ...and we will keep kicking the thread!! n/t

[Skittles]

132. excellent post, Madspirit

:thumbsup:

by the way, my boyfriend went on a business trip to California recently and he bragged about how many gay men hit up on him - "SEE, BOTH SEXES FIND ME ATRRACTIVE" he gloated - he was nauseatingly smug about it but I could not help but adore his attitude :D

[Withywindle]

137. Wow, I wish I could rec this post.

You hit it exactly, what bothers me so much about the defensiveness. Whatever happened to WANTING to learn how to avoid hurting people? 9 times out of 10, what I see people whining about as "PC" is really more about learning to be courteous! For example, if someone points out that a word has a long history of homophobic/racist/sexist etc. usage and hearing it raises hackles, what's the big fucking deal about going, "I didn't know, I'm sorry" and not doing it again? English is a big language! There's lots of words out there! Find a better one!

It's the lack of wanting to be better people, that stuns me. Little bitty baby temper tantrums..."I can be a homophobe if I want. A gay man made a pass at me." Well, whoopdedoo. I am a lesbian and straight men make passes at me. I say, "No thank-you. I am not interested. You are not my flavor." I don't go have a psychological melt-down and make it the defining motivation for my politics and my bigotry. GET OVER IT. If the worse thing that ever happens to you is that a gay person makes a pass at you, you have a pretty good life. Bitty baby.

Oh, Lawd yes. Well said.

[Zhade]

151. Fucking OUTSTANDING post!

NT!

[northofdenali]

77. Here in Alaska, we're in our first really major fight for gay rights.

Our State Supreme Court has upheld that partners of gay couples employed by the State will receive the equal benefits of married couples.

Why did the court have to point that out? Because our idiot red asshole state government and mostly paid-republican voters did a "marriage between man and woman only" thing a few years ago.

Boy, this state is fucked, one way or another........ and I'm laughing my ass off. :rofl:

BTW, so far, the gay rights have won. We'll see. Our stupid state, who refuses to take the Exxon/Valdez matter back to court, has threatened to go to the Supremes. We all know where that will end, unless Alito, Roberts, et al, pass from this life before the case gets there.

[Skittles]

131. I don't care for the term "gay rights"

I think because there's an implication there that gay folk are asking for special favors - I prefer "human rights for gays" :hi:

[Colobo]

114. Good thread

This should not be ignored. As difficult as the "conversation" has been so far between those who have some "issues with gays hitting on them" (whatever that TRULY means) and GLBT and GLBT-friendly members, it is imperative to hold it. I'm sure something good will come out of this; some understanding will happen...

Let's remember homophobia goes beyond the homophobic individual: it is a social cancer, rooted in the Western conception of masculinity/heterosexuality itself. It takes a lifetime for many people to liberate themselves from the bondage of bigotry and hatred, because in order to do so they need to re-think about how the conceive themselves as sexual and social beings. I know because I'm still struggling with all the things I learned and made part of myself...

It's hard, but it's a fight worth fighting.

[NMMNG]

118. Thanks for the re-post

Well worth reviewing.

[Strawman]

125. There ought to be no safe harbor for heteronormative language here

That's my view.

[Madspirit]

126. I don't know what that means.

...but this is a good way to kick it up.
Lee

[stonebone]

133. kick

[Madspirit]

136. Punt n/t

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[leftofthedial]

153. I endorse Skinner's definitions, rules and his message.

I just wish all parties involved would read it closely.

There are an awful lot of accusations of homophobia that do not meet any of the criteria in Skinner's post, grotesque stretches of the definition spelled out above and invention of other alleged related shortcomings thrown around on this site, especially lately.

[The Straight Story]

154. Not to mention the stuff on religion

Which no one seems to follow....

[Maven]

155. Speaking of poor "oppressed" Christians

http://www.towleroad.com/2007/03/christian_teen_.html

You should get on that.

:eyes:

[Madspirit]

156. In "honor" of Pace's Homophobia

...and what might result, conversationally, let's kick this again.
Lee

[Der Blaue Engel]

157. Wow, I missed that first time around, too

Thanks for the re-post!

It makes me feel a little less like a second-class DU citizen. :)