| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"rob wade" |
| Date: |
12 Sep 2005 05:47:55 PM |
| Object: |
15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training
How to challenge the misinformation.
Read this before you go.
As a teacher or student, if you are forced to participate in
"diversity" or "sensitivity" training, don't just sit there and
let them spoonfeed twisted concepts through manipulative exercises and
false information. Raise your hand, bring up the following issues and
expose the real nature of what is taking place: they want to force
people to accept homosexual behavior, even if some don't like it and
the responsible facts don't support it.
It's time to object, question and expose the truth in open and frank
discussions. Here are some questions you might ask at appropriate times
in the workshops.
For supporting references, see end.
Issue 1: Safety, Bullying and Harassment. What documented evidence
exists to show that "gay" students are more subject to physical
attacks than others- not including surveys of impressionable students?
Isn't bullying done for all kinds of reasons? Aren't you including
"verbal" in your definition of harassment, and isn't this very
subjective, i.e., what's "harassing" to one person is just a free
exchange of ideas to another? Aren't kids who are fat or non-athletic
bullied, too? Would this mean that, to stop that type of bullying, we
need to teach students that obesity is good and physical fitness is
bad?
Aren't kids involved in homosexuality troubled because of the very
nature of what they are doing? Drug abusing kids are also very
troubled. Do we legalize drugs to make them feel better? Why can't we
just say in general that harassment and bullying are unacceptable,
without forcing acceptance of homosexuality, which has many aspects
(like high health risks) that continue to make it unsupportable?
Issue 2. Is Homosexuality Genetic? There seems to be an assumption here
that homosexuals are a fixed minority group. There's no conclusive
evidence that it's genetic, is there? Can a person go somewhere and
get a test for a "gay" gene? Aren't our bodies clearly built for
heterosexual sex? Aren't there lots of people who've gone back and
forth, like movie star Anne Heche, former "partner" of Ellen
DeGeneres, who recently married a man? What about bisexuality? Isn't
that clearly flexible and an obvious choice?
Issue 3: "Students Can Never Be Influenced to 'Become' Gay!"
Are you saying there's no chance that raising this issue constantly
won't influence some students who would never have thought of it
otherwise to start experimenting with homosexual behavior and like it?
What about those who've changed from heterosexual to homosexual-- as
all the mid-life changes we are hearing about--Gov. Jim McGreevey of
New Jersey, for instance? Are you saying all these people simply
performed heterosexually, without enjoying it at all, all those years?
Isn't human sexuality --for good and bad--more malleable than that?
What about the pro-homosexual advocates telling our kids it's okay to
be "fluid"?
Issue 4: Health Risks of Homosexual Sex. What about the health risks of
homosexual sex? Isn't anal sex always high risk, no matter who does
it, even if it's with only one partner? Isn't the human body really
best adapted to heterosexual sex, which with one partner, can be done
safely all during a person's life?
Issue 5. Parental Choice. What about people who don't want their kids
to believe homosexuality is acceptable? Don't they have the right to
teach their children what they want to? What about parents who don't
want their kids to hear anything at all about homosexuality, pro- or
con? Aren't these people taxpayers, too?
Issue 6. Atheists Can Object, Too. Aren't there some people who
don't have strong religious beliefs who don't want their children to
learn about homosexuality? So--it's not just a religious issue, is
it?
Issue 7. Is Homosexuality Just Another 'Viewpoint'? As far as "equal
access" goes, this assumes homosexuality is a viewpoint. Isn't it a
behavior, not a viewpoint? Would other known high risk activities like
anorexia or smoking also, then, be viewpoints?
Issue 8. Ex-Homosexuals Do Exist. How can you say no one can change
from homosexuality to heterosexuality? Are you saying it's never been
done? Can't people change from heterosexuality to homosexuality? Why
do gay advocacy groups like GLSEN maintain that students have the
"right" to "explore" to "discover" what orientation they
are? Haven't you ever met people who experimented and liked it? Or
experimented and rejected it? Aren't humans a lot more flexible than
you are saying? So--aren't we influencing students when we ask them
to accept homosexuality? How can you say there's no chance of
changing or influencing any student and that some students will just
"be" homosexual?
Issue 9. Why are homosexuals so troubled in other ways? What about all
the other lifestyle factors researchers have discovered about
homosexuals, like much higher rates of alcohol and drug use and higher
rates of mental illness? Doesn't this just scream that there's
something dysfunctional about the person? Aren't some (not all) major
psychological groups just ignoring this evidence because they want to
look trendy, and because so many homosexuals are in leadership
positions on committees?
Issue 10. What about respect for those who disagree?. Isn't it just
another type of bias and bigotry to say that homosexuality must be
accepted by students and teachers? What about people who know all this
information, but come to a different conclusion than you do? Are you
saying they are stupid? Isn't that bigoted and prejudiced?
Issue 11.Adults Corrupting Children in Same Sex Interactions. Isn't
the risk of adults having sex with minors greater when homosexual
teachers teach children, simply because of same sex activities like
coaching, mentoring, etc.? Isn't this the reason homosexuals were
until recently forbidden from teaching kids?
Issue 12.Why does the Red Cross refuse blood from homosexuals? Isn't
AIDS in the U.S. still spread predominantly through male to male
homosexual sex? Isn't this why the Red Cross still refuses blood from
any male who has had sex with another male even once since 1977? The
FDA has the same cautions about giving/receiving blood. How can we in
good conscience in any way say or imply this is acceptable behavior for
students or teachers?
Issue 13. GSA's produce more bigotry, not less. If we allow a gay
straight alliance, won't their discussions of "homophobia" lead
them to form hostile and bigoted beliefs and feelings about other
students, teachers and parents who don't approve of homosexuality?
Don't you just trade what you say is one type of discrimination for
another--at the risk of endangering students exposed to homosexual
activity? And if this club wants to hold diversity days or days of
silence, aren't they acting in a way that discriminates against
others' beliefs?
Issue 14. Objections to homosexuality lead to violence??Are you trying
to imply that all people who believe homosexuality is wrong are
potentially violent, or potential harrassers? Isn't that bigoted and
prejudiced thinking that flies in the face of the facts that many
people "tolerate" people who are homosexual without being violent
or even impolite toward them? Isn't it incredibly offensive, even
shallow and childish, to use the term "hatred" to describe ALL
disapproval of homosexuality?
Issue 15. Future legal problems for the school and teachers. Won't
the school face potential lawsuits in the future if students are taught
that homosexuality is harmless and acceptable, and then later contract
AIDS? What if an underage student meets an adult homosexual through a
school function like a health class or a gay club meeting, and they
begin a sexual relationship? Will the school be held liable for
millions of dollars as in the some of the clergy abuse situations?
Aren't we obligated to give them either both sides of the issue, or
not cover homosexuality at all?
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
17 Sep 2005 09:46:49 AM |
|
|
The Secretary of HomIntern a =E9crit :
Heche, is pretty typical in that respect, and is probably only one among
thousands.
Well, _she_, IMO, has simply fled back into the closet, instead of
exhibiting bisexuality.
What political use can be made out of theoretical bisexuals,or while we
are at
it and to be fair,out of theoretical gays ? Do heterosexual societies
rest content with theoretical heterosexuals ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomIntern" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
17 Sep 2005 01:21:43 PM |
|
|
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to kingsix@abacom.com:
The Secretary of HomIntern a écrit :
Heche, is pretty typical in that respect, and is probably only one
among thousands.
Well, _she_, IMO, has simply fled back into the closet, instead of
exhibiting bisexuality.
What political use can be made out of theoretical bisexuals, or while we
are at it and to be fair, out of theoretical gays? Do heterosexual
societies rest content with theoretical heterosexuals?
What do you mean, "theoretical"? Bisexual people are real. We love and/or
are attracted to men /and/ women, and as often as not, we identify as
*queer*, or as bi, or lesbian/gay. Don't let our opposite-sex attractions
fool you; we are far more subversive of the straight community than the gay
community. Our most potent political function is the fact that straights,
far more often than even yourself, tend to assume that we're straight too,
_because_ of those opposite-sex attractions. Then they see some guy they've
assumed to be straight (because they know he's married, or has demonstrated
straight attractions) kiss another guy -- like he means it -- and their
minds are, if not *blown*, at least very confused, especially if they're
middle-class suburban c(C)onservatives who don't know a thing about LGBTs,
up to that point. Or, for the more
l(L)iberal-but-still-pretty-damn-squares, they see the neighbour they
thought was gay (because of his boyfriend, say) mention his girlfriend in
passing, right out-of-the-blue. These are just a couple examples...And this
is just in /Canada/, mind. In the US, the battle we just won a few months
ago is still under way. They need all the confusion we can give them...
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Bent Depraved N. Deviant *****-Smoker, Esq., Superfaggot
"Stupidity excuses nothing. It's only a reason...." -- Phxbrd
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
"The whining has just begun." -- John Wentzky
Killfiled by: directory; Anim8rfsk
"It's not nice to misrepresent Mother Nature."
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
17 Sep 2005 03:06:38 PM |
|
|
The Secretary of HomIntern a =E9crit :
What political use can be made out of theoretical bisexuals, or while we
are at it and to be fair, out of theoretical gays? Do heterosexual
societies rest content with theoretical heterosexuals?
What do you mean, "theoretical"? Bisexual people are real. We love and/or
are attracted to men /and/ women, and as often as not, we identify as
*queer*, or as bi, or lesbian/gay.
If it doesn`t shows,if it is in the closet,it`s theoretical and thus of
no use
to any political cause or organization whatever its name.Including a
gay one.The political reality to be sustained is however more complex
in the case of an hypothetical bisexual cause than in a gay one.An
hypothetical bisexual individual has a set of two interests - sometimes
contradictory - to sustain and balance in a real world where they are
effectively in conflict.Whereas a gay like for example my humble self
has only one.A character like,say,Ann Heche,has only to suppress any
open adhesion from her part to lesbianism in order to cease to be an
effective bisexual.Unless you explain me of what use Ann Heche is at
present to the hypothetical bisexual cause you are
outlining.Heterosexual organized societies which we have to face and
deal with are composed of real people,and they would not settle for
mere theoretical members hidding in the closet.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomIntern" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
18 Sep 2005 04:24:38 AM |
|
|
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to kingsix@abacom.com:
The Secretary of HomIntern a écrit :
What political use can be made out of theoretical bisexuals, or while
we are at it and to be fair, out of theoretical gays? Do heterosexual
societies rest content with theoretical heterosexuals?
What do you mean, "theoretical"? Bisexual people are real. We love and/or
are attracted to men /and/ women, and as often as not, we identify as
*queer*, or as bi, or lesbian/gay.
If it doesn`t shows,if it is in the closet,it`s theoretical and thus of
no use
to any political cause or organization whatever its name.Including a
gay one.The political reality to be sustained is however more complex
in the case of an hypothetical bisexual cause than in a gay one.An
hypothetical bisexual individual has a set of two interests - sometimes
contradictory - to sustain and balance in a real world where they are
effectively in conflict.Whereas a gay like for example my humble self
has only one.A character like,say,Ann Heche,has only to suppress any
open adhesion from her part to lesbianism in order to cease to be an
effective bisexual.Unless you explain me of what use Ann Heche is at
present to the hypothetical bisexual cause you are
outlining.Heterosexual organized societies which we have to face and
deal with are composed of real people,and they would not settle for
mere theoretical members hidding in the closet.
OK, you're a k00k. The out bisexuals I know are involved with both men and
women, in some cases simultaneously -- they're polyamourous, as I am -- in
others, serially. Nothing "closeted" about it.
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Bent Depraved N. Deviant *****-Smoker, Esq., Superfaggot
"Stupidity excuses nothing. It's only a reason...." -- Phxbrd
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
"The whining has just begun." -- John Wentzky
Killfiled by: directory; Anim8rfsk
"It's not nice to misrepresent Mother Nature."
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
18 Sep 2005 05:13:48 AM |
|
|
The Secretary of HomIntern a =E9crit :
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to kingsix@abacom.com:
The Secretary of HomIntern a =E9crit :
What political use can be made out of theoretical bisexuals, or while
we are at it and to be fair, out of theoretical gays? Do heterosexual
societies rest content with theoretical heterosexuals?
What do you mean, "theoretical"? Bisexual people are real. We love and=
/or
are attracted to men /and/ women, and as often as not, we identify as
*queer*, or as bi, or lesbian/gay.
If it doesn`t shows,if it is in the closet,it`s theoretical and thus of
no use
to any political cause or organization whatever its name.Including a
gay one.The political reality to be sustained is however more complex
in the case of an hypothetical bisexual cause than in a gay one.An
hypothetical bisexual individual has a set of two interests - sometimes
contradictory - to sustain and balance in a real world where they are
effectively in conflict.Whereas a gay like for example my humble self
has only one.A character like,say,Ann Heche,has only to suppress any
open adhesion from her part to lesbianism in order to cease to be an
effective bisexual.Unless you explain me of what use Ann Heche is at
present to the hypothetical bisexual cause you are
outlining.Heterosexual organized societies which we have to face and
deal with are composed of real people,and they would not settle for
mere theoretical members hidding in the closet.
OK, you're a k00k. The out bisexuals I know are involved with both men and
women, in some cases simultaneously -- they're polyamourous, as I am -- in
others, serially. Nothing "closeted" about it.
I don`t think that bisexuality constitutes a thoroughly balanced act
between
heterosexuality and homosexuality,in the course of which both
tendencies are
served and treated equally.Some of the activity of the so-called
bisexuals
occurs ultimately at the expense of one side or another.Whatever that
side,the
first identity to be thus discredited is the bisexual one as is
currently happening in the context of the so-called ex-gay movement.Not
the gay one,as
the said movement - which is staffed and possibly instigated and lead
by so-called bisexuals - would want to be.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
18 Sep 2005 02:33:54 PM |
|
|
wrote:
I don`t think that bisexuality constitutes a thoroughly balanced act
between heterosexuality and homosexuality,in the course of which both
tendencies are served and treated equally.
Well, I know that I, for one, do not slavishly maintain a spreadsheet of
partners. "Okay, I've reached my allocation of females for this year:
Time to dedicate myself to males." It simply doesn't happen. One is
presented with opportunities. They may be either male or female. To
suggest that bisexuals simply *must* maintain an absolute 50/50 balance
is to ignore the reality that relationships are not generally calculated
and planned. It also fails to account for the investment involved. To
wit, it has been my experience that females are more "work intensive"
and seem to require more "investment" than males. That dilutes the
category of bisexuality not one bit. Such instances are worth pursuit.
Will the statistics become skewed on the balance sheet? Of course. The
nature of possible romance is random. Sure, habit and circumstance can
skew things in one direction or another. Does the reality of said
conditions negate the concept? No.
We are beings who are attracted to both possibilities. An observation
that 51% of our liaisons are of one nature or another does not negate
the reality of the other; Neither does a statistic noting that 90% of
our relationships take a particular form. It is the openness to each
situation that defines bisexuality. The fact may or may not be acted
upon. It is the attraction which matters.
the first identity to be thus discredited is the bisexual one as is
currently happening in the context of the so-called ex-gay movement.
Bah. With a 3% "success rate," the ex-gay movement can't even muster the
ability to rise above the level of "placebo."
Were said "treatments" to be held to the rigors of scientific inquiry,
they'd be castigated as not only snake oil, but virtual snake oil.
(Incapable of even pretending to be as efficacious as snake oil.)
Fortunately, all said "treatments" are matters of faith, and the
collection plate. (Donate generously.)
--
People need insults. Most people behave so abominably that they cry out for abuse. Charity moves us to meet this need. Abuse is a form of attention, and a little accommodating attention makes anyone feel human again. Now f*** off, oh clueless blatherskite!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
18 Sep 2005 03:20:51 PM |
|
|
Dionisio a =E9crit :
It also fails to account for the investment involved. To
wit, it has been my experience that females are more "work intensive"
and seem to require more "investment" than males. That dilutes the
category of bisexuality not one bit. Such instances are worth pursuit.
Will the statistics become skewed on the balance sheet? Of course.
So-called bisexuals certainly know by experience,and it is not I who
will remind them,the possible consequences of the disclosure of their
heterosexual interests
to gays.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomIntern" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
18 Sep 2005 04:18:47 PM |
|
|
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to kingsix@abacom.com:
Dionisio a écrit :
It also fails to account for the investment involved. To
wit, it has been my experience that females are more "work intensive"
and seem to require more "investment" than males. That dilutes the
category of bisexuality not one bit. Such instances are worth pursuit.
Will the statistics become skewed on the balance sheet? Of course.
So-called bisexuals certainly know by experience,and it is not I who
will remind them,the possible consequences of the disclosure of their
heterosexual interests to gays.
What, you mean the odd snide put-down? Trust me, compared to the "possible
consequences of disclosure" of our _homosexual_ interests to *straights*
(because homophobes don't always announce themselves with boorish and/or
drunken behaviour), the potential negative gay reactions are nowhere on the
radar.
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Bent Depraved N. Deviant *****-Smoker, Esq., Superfaggot
"Stupidity excuses nothing. It's only a reason...." -- Phxbrd
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
"The whining has just begun." -- John Wentzky
Killfiled by: directory; Anim8rfsk
"It's not nice to misrepresent Mother Nature."
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
18 Sep 2005 07:34:25 PM |
|
|
Well,with that hypothetical and vaguely defined concept of bisexual of
yours,you risk incorporating as bisexuals individuals you will not
necessarily be proud of,or secure
with while we are at it.In certain countries,like a south American one
where I have travelled a couple of times (Colombia),a large part of the
male population at least would most probably fit into your concept of
bisexuality.At first glance,it is a most interesting place for a gay
like my humble self.It has the most handsome and horny young men I have
ever met.But I must add this that Colombia is a very dangerous
place,where gays are regularly bumped off.And the guy who tries to
assassinate you one fine day could be the one you slept the night
before.An identical pattern of bisexuality apparently exists also in
Brazil,where those who shoot gays or hack them to death with machetes
are the same who slept previously with their victims.So,when you are
facing the reactions of an homophobe,ask yourself wether you are not in
the company of someone of the same orientation as yours.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Secretary of HomIntern" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
20 Sep 2005 12:13:58 AM |
|
|
I was busily flonking away in alt.politics.homosexuality, when The Goddess
Eris Herself suddenly made me reply to kingsix@abacom.com:
Well,with that hypothetical and vaguely defined concept of bisexual of
yours,you risk incorporating as bisexuals individuals you will not
necessarily be proud of,or secure
with while we are at it.In certain countries,like a south American one
where I have travelled a couple of times (Colombia),a large part of the
male population at least would most probably fit into your concept of
bisexuality.At first glance,it is a most interesting place for a gay
like my humble self.It has the most handsome and horny young men I have
ever met.But I must add this that Colombia is a very dangerous
place,where gays are regularly bumped off.And the guy who tries to
assassinate you one fine day could be the one you slept the night
before.An identical pattern of bisexuality apparently exists also in
Brazil,where those who shoot gays or hack them to death with machetes
are the same who slept previously with their victims.So,when you are
facing the reactions of an homophobe,ask yourself wether you are not in
the company of someone of the same orientation as yours.
When I'm dealing with a homophobe, I initially let said homophobe *****-ume
that I'm gay -- the "*****" button gives that impression very nicely --
since homophobes tend to classify homo- and bisexuals together anyway. It's
not much good for more than being able to smugly highlight their fear and
hatred, but I can be petty sometimes. BTW, speaking of pettiness and
minor-but-annoying details, you could learn how to space properly between
punctuation and following words. I'm only sayin'.
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! "The personal _is_ political."
Bent Depraved N. Deviant *****-Smoker, Esq., Superfaggot
"Stupidity excuses nothing. It's only a reason...." -- Phxbrd
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.38
"The whining has just begun." -- John Wentzky
Killfiled by: directory; Anim8rfsk
"It's not nice to misrepresent Mother Nature."
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
20 Sep 2005 02:22:30 AM |
|
|
The Secretary of HomIntern a =E9crit :
When I'm dealing with a homophobe, I initially let said homophobe *****-ume
that I'm gay -- the "*****" button gives that impression very nicely --
since homophobes tend to classify homo- and bisexuals together anyway.
In the elaboration of an hypothetical - highly hypothetical - bisexual
identity,separate from both the gay and heterosexual ones,there will be
an important part of self-destruction,of the so-called bisexuals own
making and for which they will have no one to blame but themselves.In
politics,the best instruments,tools or pawns if you prefer,are those
who do not understand or even perceive the earthly interests they are
serving.I do not think that I am mistaken in stating that the main
interest which drives so-called bisexuals towards their own demise is
the heterosexual privilege,reinforced by the quite understandable fear
- in their case - of loosing it.Or of finding themselves in a situation
where no one would be left to defend it,for example when and where
heterosexuals and gays are at each other`s throaths.Unscrupulous and
machiavelian heterosexuals craving for power would have in such a case
very little effort to add to tip the scales towards their ends,insofar
as they would be dealing with so-called bisexuals and exploiting their
fears.The weight of the heterosexual privilege would already be on
their side.Whereas in my case or in the case of any other gay worthy of
that name,there is nothing but indifference and above all complete
independence from the above mentionned privilege.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
20 Sep 2005 08:15:58 PM |
|
|
wrote:
In the elaboration of an hypothetical - highly hypothetical - bisexual
identity,separate from both the gay and heterosexual ones
Um, "hello?" Separate? The bisexual identity is a blending/meshing of
both gay and straight identities. (I mean, really, the first syllable is
"bi" for pity's sake.)
I do not think that I am mistaken in stating that the main
interest which drives so-called bisexuals towards their own demise is...
Well -- prepare to be shocked -- you were mistaken. The main thing which
causes demise is, <drum roll>, time. 100% fatal.
--
People need insults. Most people behave so abominably that they cry out for abuse. Charity moves us to meet this need. Abuse is a form of attention, and a little accommodating attention makes anyone feel human again. Now f*** off, oh clueless blatherskite!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
21 Sep 2005 01:39:38 AM |
|
|
Dionisio a =E9crit :
kingsix@abacom.com wrote:
In the elaboration of an hypothetical - highly hypothetical - bisexual
identity,separate from both the gay and heterosexual ones
Um, "hello?" Separate? The bisexual identity is a blending/meshing of
both gay and straight identities.
In bisexuality,there exists a blending in various and different
proportions of heterosexuality and homosexuality.One of the two
predominates,which determines
who the so-called bisexuals actually are.My impression is that it is
most of the times the heterosexual orientation.It is difficult to see
what homosexuality causes the alledged bisexuals to loose of what is
acquired by way of heterosexuality,given the ends for what
heterosexuality is originally designed.You leave a colony of 50
apparently bisexual people of both sexes on some island,you won`t have
a bisexual colony 200 years later.The original bisexual society will
have become an heterosexual majority within one or two generations,the
descendants of hypothetical bisexual individuals being in majority
heterosexuals,and their parents not even minding.Bisexuality has no
future in terms of demographics and political organization or power.It
leads to the same ends more conventional (and less opportunistic) forms
of heterosexuality lead.Now,you leave a colony of,say,50 Kinsey 6 males
on some island.You are certain that they are the bearers of no
heterosexual future whasoever,and of no future at all unless they
replace their population by way of immigration as some countries do.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
21 Sep 2005 09:31:31 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Dionisio a écrit :
Um, "hello?" Separate? The bisexual identity is a blending/meshing of
both gay and straight identities.
In bisexuality,there exists a blending in various and different
proportions of heterosexuality and homosexuality.One of the two
predominates
Even in the 50/50 scenario? Or, let me guess, that doesn't exist...
My impression is that it is most of the times the heterosexual orientation.
Well, your impression and a dollar will get you some take-out McNuggets
at McDonalds.
It is difficult to see
what homosexuality causes the alledged bisexuals to loose of what is
acquired by way of heterosexuality,given the ends for what
heterosexuality is originally designed.You leave a colony of 50
apparently bisexual people of both sexes on some island,you won`t have
a bisexual colony 200 years later.
Leave a colony of 107 heterosexuals in Roanoke and in under three years
you won't have a colony.
Can we have a "Danger! Danger, Will Robinson!"?
--
People need insults. Most people behave so abominably that they cry out for abuse. Charity moves us to meet this need. Abuse is a form of attention, and a little accommodating attention makes anyone feel human again. Now f*** off, oh clueless blatherskite!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
22 Sep 2005 12:37:11 AM |
|
|
Dionisio a =E9crit :
kingsix@abacom.com wrote:
Dionisio a =E9crit :
Um, "hello?" Separate? The bisexual identity is a blending/meshing of
both gay and straight identities.
In bisexuality,there exists a blending in various and different
proportions of heterosexuality and homosexuality.One of the two
predominates
Even in the 50/50 scenario? Or, let me guess, that doesn't exist...
Well,we could in theory have a formal definition of who is a bisexual
precisely defining as such anyone displaying heterosexual and
homosexual tendencies in an equal manner.Except that no one would fit
such a definition in the environment of the real world where
heterosexuality and homosexuality ar far from being treated
equaly.Besides,how to have a 50/50 scenario when comparing apples with
oranges,which is the case with heterosexuality and
homosexuality.Homosexuality is exclusively recreational.Whereas
recreation is one aspect and use only of heterosexuality,and at times a
deceiving one.Heterosexuality has also to do with reproduction and with
owning human beings.And it has been used by one of the two sexes and
for millenia as a way of living off the other sex.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
23 Sep 2005 11:35:20 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Well,we could in theory have a formal definition of who is a bisexual
precisely defining as such anyone displaying heterosexual and
homosexual tendencies in an equal manner.Except that no one would fit
such a definition in the environment of the real world where
heterosexuality and homosexuality ar far from being treated
equaly.
Oh, screw the "being treated equally." The question is not whether the
people in question are being treated equally, but whether they 50/50
split their attraction.
Besides,how to have a 50/50 scenario when comparing apples with
oranges
50% apples, 50% oranges. Math not your forte?
--
People need insults. Most people behave so abominably that they cry out for abuse. Charity moves us to meet this need. Abuse is a form of attention, and a little accommodating attention makes anyone feel human again. Now f*** off, oh clueless blatherskite!
.
|
|
|
| User: "K6" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 02:08:01 AM |
|
|
Dionisio a =E9crit :
kingsix@abacom.com wrote:
Well,we could in theory have a formal definition of who is a bisexual
precisely defining as such anyone displaying heterosexual and
homosexual tendencies in an equal manner.Except that no one would fit
such a definition in the environment of the real world where
heterosexuality and homosexuality ar far from being treated
equaly.
Oh, screw the "being treated equally." The question is not whether the
people in question are being treated equally, but whether they 50/50
split their attraction.
Individuals aren`t islands.They are not in position to split their
attractions
evenly in an environment where the said attractions aren`t represented
or promoted equaly.Even less when the said attractions are in
conflict,or do not lead to the same ends or reap the same rewards.One
has to be politically consequent,and ask which and whose purpose the
individual is serving.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 10:20:21 AM |
|
|
K6 wrote:
Dionisio a écrit :
Oh, screw the "being treated equally." The question is not whether the
people in question are being treated equally, but whether they 50/50
split their attraction.
Individuals aren`t islands.They are not in position to split their
attractions evenly in an environment where the said attractions aren`t represented
or promoted equaly.
<chuckle> What's this? "A person can't be 50% gay because gays don't
represent 50% of the population"? Puh-lease. That -- ahem -- "logic"
would mean that no one can be 100% gay. (Nor 100% straight.) It would
also drive a stake quite firmly through your stated stance on the topic.
Oh, by the by, congrats on learning capitalization.
Even less when the said attractions are in
conflict,or do not lead to the same ends or reap the same rewards.One
has to be politically consequent,and ask which and whose purpose the
individual is serving.
So, in short, everyone has a master; Even those who claim not to?
Fascinating.
--
People need insults. Most people behave so abominably that they cry out for abuse. Charity moves us to meet this need. Abuse is a form of attention, and a little accommodating attention makes anyone feel human again. Now f*** off, oh clueless blatherskite!
.
|
|
|
| User: "K6" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 10:35:31 AM |
|
|
It was never my desire,personal or political,that gays should encompass
50% of the world population,heaven forbids.5% of males being gay and
exclusively homosexual throughout their entire adult lives entirely
satisfies me.You divide the current 7 billion world population by two
to make for the male ratio,and you then multiply by 5%.That gives 175
million individuals.We could achieve our purposes of gay
self-determination with far less.As for the respective masters we are
serving - as everyone has a master and is an instrument - I am an
instrument of the gay people,one among millions,testifying humbly to
its existence and independence.If I didn`t do the job,someone better
than myself would do it in my place.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 02:32:58 PM |
|
|
"K6" <kingsix@abacom.com> wrote in message
news:1127576131.088936.281160@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
It was never my desire,personal or political,that gays should encompass
50% of the world population,heaven forbids.5% of males being gay and
exclusively homosexual throughout their entire adult lives entirely
satisfies me.You divide the current 7 billion world population by two
to make for the male ratio,and you then multiply by 5%.That gives 175
million individuals.We could achieve our purposes of gay
self-determination with far less.As for the respective masters we are
serving - as everyone has a master and is an instrument - I am an
instrument of the gay people,one among millions,testifying humbly to
its existence and independence.If I didn`t do the job,someone better
than myself would do it in my place.
[woosh]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 05:00:40 PM |
|
|
K6 wrote:
As for the respective masters we are
serving - as everyone has a master and is an instrument - I am an
instrument of the gay people
Remind me to schedule an appointment at the shop. There's an
"instrument" in need of repairs.
--
People need insults. Most people behave so abominably that they cry out for abuse. Charity moves us to meet this need. Abuse is a form of attention, and a little accommodating attention makes anyone feel human again. Now f*** off, oh clueless blatherskite!
.
|
|
|
| User: "K6" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 05:33:13 PM |
|
|
So-called bisexuals hardly need any repair to serve properly the
heterosexual interest and privilege.They even add in that respect a
touch of zeal which is lacking in the more general heterosexual
population.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 06:12:04 PM |
|
|
"K6" <kingsix@abacom.com> wrote in message
news:1127601193.670477.61520@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So-called bisexuals hardly need any repair to serve properly the
heterosexual interest and privilege.They even add in that respect a
touch of zeal which is lacking in the more general heterosexual
population.
[wooosh] again
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
24 Sep 2005 09:13:44 PM |
|
|
Dennis Kemmerer wrote:
"K6" <kingsix@abacom.com> wrote in message
news:1127601193.670477.61520@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So-called bisexuals hardly need any repair to serve properly the
heterosexual interest and privilege.They even add in that respect a
touch of zeal which is lacking in the more general heterosexual
population.
[wooosh] again
Indeed.
--
People need insults. Most people behave so abominably that they cry out for abuse. Charity moves us to meet this need. Abuse is a form of attention, and a little accommodating attention makes anyone feel human again. Now f*** off, oh clueless blatherskite!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Zeligg" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
28 Sep 2005 09:32:48 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 04:35:20 GMT, Dionisio
<moc-rr-thgisniTA@5ellimd.com> wrote:
kingsix@abacom.com wrote:
Well,we could in theory have a formal definition of who is a bisexual
precisely defining as such anyone displaying heterosexual and
homosexual tendencies in an equal manner.Except that no one would fit
such a definition in the environment of the real world where
heterosexuality and homosexuality ar far from being treated
equaly.
Oh, screw the "being treated equally." The question is not whether the
people in question are being treated equally, but whether they 50/50
split their attraction.
In my case, and I would imagine this is true of many, if not all
bisexuals, we 50/50 split our attraction, but our relationships may
not be 50/50. For instance, I might meet a guy or woman, that I
really fall in love with and spend 30 years with them. That may make
it seem like I have a preference, but really, I just found a person
that I wanted to commit with, and spent a long time with them. Not
necessarily bcause they are a man, or a woman, but because of the
person that they.
Zeligg
"Prayer has no place in the public schools,
just like facts have no place in organized religion."
- Superintendent Chalmers, The Simpsons
.
|
|
|
| User: "K6" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
28 Sep 2005 10:17:51 PM |
|
|
Zeligg a =E9crit :
In my case, and I would imagine this is true of many, if not all
bisexuals, we 50/50 split our attraction, but our relationships may
not be 50/50. For instance, I might meet a guy or woman, that I
really fall in love with and spend 30 years with them. That may make
it seem like I have a preference, but really, I just found a person
that I wanted to commit with, and spent a long time with them. Not
necessarily bcause they are a man, or a woman, but because of the
person that they.
Heterosexuality bestows upon the individual a direct control over
reproduction,
demographics and consequently politics.Which is reason enough to regard
it as predominating over homosexuality,which confers no such advantages
or privileges.
The 50/50 trick would perhaps have made sense if heterosexuality and
homosexuality were both strictly recreative patterns of behavior,which
they aren`t.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Zeligg" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
21 Sep 2005 01:46:51 PM |
|
|
On 20 Sep 2005 23:39:38 -0700, wrote:
Dionisio a écrit :
wrote:
In the elaboration of an hypothetical - highly hypothetical - bisexual
identity,separate from both the gay and heterosexual ones
Um, "hello?" Separate? The bisexual identity is a blending/meshing of
both gay and straight identities.
In bisexuality,there exists a blending in various and different
proportions of heterosexuality and homosexuality.One of the two
predominates,which determines
who the so-called bisexuals actually are.My impression is that it is
most of the times the heterosexual orientation.It is difficult to see
what homosexuality causes the alledged bisexuals to loose of what is
acquired by way of heterosexuality,given the ends for what
heterosexuality is originally designed.You leave a colony of 50
apparently bisexual people of both sexes on some island,you won`t have
a bisexual colony 200 years later.The original bisexual society will
have become an heterosexual majority within one or two generations,the
descendants of hypothetical bisexual individuals being in majority
heterosexuals,and their parents not even minding.Bisexuality has no
future in terms of demographics and political organization or power.It
leads to the same ends more conventional (and less opportunistic) forms
of heterosexuality lead.Now,you leave a colony of,say,50 Kinsey 6 males
on some island.You are certain that they are the bearers of no
heterosexual future whasoever,and of no future at all unless they
replace their population by way of immigration as some countries do.
Of course this is all conjecture, since having a homosexual, bisexual,
or heterosexual parent in no way (at least as far as evidence supports
so far) will guarantee that you will be following in your parents'
footsteps.
Zeligg
"Prayer has no place in the public schools,
just like facts have no place in organized religion."
- Superintendent Chalmers, The Simpsons
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
21 Sep 2005 04:23:16 PM |
|
|
Zeligg a =E9crit :
Of course this is all conjecture, since having a homosexual, bisexual,
or heterosexual parent in no way (at least as far as evidence supports
so far) will guarantee that you will be following in your parents'
footsteps.
If,as I think,sexual orientation isn`t genetic in origin,you are quite
right.
You never know exactly what the individual will discover on his
own,beyond what he is shown and taught by society.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Zeligg" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
20 Sep 2005 03:40:15 PM |
|
|
On 20 Sep 2005 00:22:30 -0700, wrote:
The Secretary of HomIntern a écrit :
When I'm dealing with a homophobe, I initially let said homophobe *****-ume
that I'm gay -- the "*****" button gives that impression very nicely --
since homophobes tend to classify homo- and bisexuals together anyway.
In the elaboration of an hypothetical - highly hypothetical - bisexual
identity,separate from both the gay and heterosexual ones,there will be
an important part of self-destruction,of the so-called bisexuals own
making and for which they will have no one to blame but themselves.In
politics,the best instruments,tools or pawns if you prefer,are those
who do not understand or even perceive the earthly interests they are
serving.I do not think that I am mistaken in stating that the main
interest which drives so-called bisexuals towards their own demise is
the heterosexual privilege,reinforced by the quite understandable fear
- in their case - of loosing it.Or of finding themselves in a situation
where no one would be left to defend it,for example when and where
heterosexuals and gays are at each other`s throaths.Unscrupulous and
machiavelian heterosexuals craving for power would have in such a case
very little effort to add to tip the scales towards their ends,insofar
as they would be dealing with so-called bisexuals and exploiting their
fears.The weight of the heterosexual privilege would already be on
their side.Whereas in my case or in the case of any other gay worthy of
that name,there is nothing but indifference and above all complete
independence from the above mentionned privilege.
I'm not sure if you are tearing down bisexuals who don't call
themselves gay, or tearing down bisexuals themselves. Personally, I
consider myself gay, although I am bi. The main reason is that I
don't want to seperate myself from homo bros or lesbian sisters, and I
feel the entire grouping would be gay. That being said, Bisexuals get
hit a lot from both the hetero and homo sides and it doesn't seem fair
to me.Heteros will be the first to jump up and say I didn't choose to
be hetero, for it's the "normal" way to be, homos say the same, as far
as not having chosen to be gay. If this is true, how can either group
point the finger and say I choose to be attracted to, and have the
ability of holding relationships of both types? Now, I would expect
this from homophobe heteros, but how in the hell could I get the cold
shoulder from other queers???? This reminds me very much of the
racial slurs that go on between some dark-skinned blacks and some
light-skinned blacks. Why would we fight amongst ourselves, which
works against everything we're trying to do, which is equality for ALL
OF US.
Zeligg
"Prayer has no place in the public schools,
just like facts have no place in organized religion."
- Superintendent Chalmers, The Simpsons
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 15 Frank Issues to Raise in Homosexual Diversity Training |
20 Sep 2005 04:12:22 PM |
|
|
Zeligg a =E9crit :
On 20 Sep 2005 00:22:30 -0700, wrote:
I'm not sure if you are tearing down bisexuals who don't call
themselves gay, or tearing down bisexuals themselves.
I adress the issue of bisexuality as a component part of the
heterosexual lifestyle and community,and not of the gay ones.I thus
regard bisexuals as heterosexuals.There may exist disagreements between
heterosexuals about who
is or isn`t heterosexual.Or about who isn`t heterosexual enough.But
this is so to
speak an internal matter of the heterosexual community,which is not
really a concern of mine.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
