Gays, lesbians, bisexuals, PART II

[Tessar]

I was actually a little confused by that... I wasn't sure if they meant the "victim" as in the wife who was stabbed, or the "victim" as in the woman who was hung. They probably mean the woman who was hung, but my mind is a little boggled by the idea that a child would (or would be forced to) basically hang his own mother... that's what makes me wonder if it wasn't the son of the stabbed woman because otherwise I just can't conceive it. :-/

Very sad all around.

[The Gaffer]

Yeah, I understand part of the idea of this sort of penal system is to give recompense, sometimes in the form of revenge, to the victim or their family.

Not a million miles from letting them watch whilst she gets electrocuted, IMO.

[Valandil]

Yes - I'm sure it was the son of the woman who was murdered. The woman executed wouldn't be referred to as 'victim' - certainly not by the authorities. I wonder how old the son was.

It's all quite sad.

[BeardofPants]

Gah. Just, ... GAH.

http://fatlip.leoweekly.com/2011/02/...ms-date-night/

Fail on so many levels. You apparently can't be a gay christian. And you certainly can't besmirch their "museum" with teh gayz. Entirely their prerogative, I know, on who they choose to let in, but... EH.

[Earniel]

Tsssk, and just when one thought the creation museum couldn't fail any more than it already had...

[GrayMouser]

They would probably say that since God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve....

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by BeardofPants

Gah. Just, ... GAH.

http://fatlip.leoweekly.com/2011/02/...ms-date-night/

Fail on so many levels. You apparently can't be a gay christian. And you certainly can't besmirch their "museum" with teh gayz. Entirely their prerogative, I know, on who they choose to let in, but... EH.

Im pretty sure discriminating based on sexual orientation could impact the public funds they receive.

[inked]

The CDC has published the most current data on the GLB demographic and illness and risk et alia. You may view it here:
http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/20...ce=govdelivery

[Tessar]

I'm not surprised.

[GrayMouser]

I was kind of surprised about smoking.

"For youth to thrive in their schools and communities, they need to feel socially, emotionally, and physically safe and supported," said Laura Kann, Ph.D., chief, Surveillance and Evaluation Research Branch, DASH. "Schools and communities should take concrete steps to promote healthy environments for all students, such as prohibiting violence and bullying, creating safe spaces where young people can receive support from caring adults, and improving health education and health services to meet the needs of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth."

Certainly agree with that.

One question I'd have is that this is about high school students who self-report. Could it be likely that students who are GLBT- oriented but not open to admitting it are skewing the results?

Students who report being gay, lesbian or bisexual and students who report having sexual contact only with persons of the same sex or both sexes are more likely than heterosexual students and students who report having sexual contact only with the opposite sex to engage in unhealthy risk behaviors such as tobacco use, alcohol and other drug use, sexual risk behaviors, suicidal behaviors, and violence, according to a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Certainly when I was in high school gays were much more closeted, but there were absolutely connections betwen being (heterosexually) sexually active and indulging in more risky behavior.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by GrayMouser

I was kind of surprised about smoking.

Not I. I remember back in Toronto, me and my gays would be out on Statler's balcony, drinking heavily, smoking up a storm, and generally camping things up.

Seriously, though, a lot of gay people deal with internalized homophobia (God knows I had enough of it to work through!), which can often manifest in self-destructive behaviors.

[Nerdanel]

to be fair, i haven't read the article yet, but the results sound promising.

Adams et al. "Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?"

abstract: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I would be kind of dubious about that study. How does it determine who is "homophobic?" Self-report? Filling out a questionnaire? I just have real difficulty believing that repressed homosexual desires are a pre-requisite for homophobia. People have always been very good at hating the Other, and I really think the majority of homophobia is no more than that.

[Nerdanel]

it was a questionnaire. i understand your doubts, and they're probably justified, at least to some extent. but i can believe that if you're brought up in an environment where homosexuality is seen as something wrong or even "evil" or sinful, you can have a strong counter-reaction if you notice such traits in yourself.

if there actually wasn't a difference, then the questionnaire probably measures something else - or their results were false. and, of course, their sample size was pretty small... but pretty interesting results anyhow, imo.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Young, Gay, and Homeless

[Gwaimir Windgem]

To my mind, this kind of thing is an excellent example of how gay-themed concerns have deeply messed up priorities today. Everyone's energies are all poured into a slip of paper, while queer youth are starving on the street, with nowhere to lay their heads at night.

[GrayMouser]

Why not both?
This seems reminiscent of the disagreement between Booker T. Washington and WEB DuBois in the early civil rights days, with Washington arguing that blacks should concentrate on economic and educational improvement, while Garvey and the NAACP fought to remove legal restraints, arguing that only with full legal equality could come social equality.

A similar situation happened with (American) feminism; in the early 70s mainstream feminism was concentrated on equal rights, while others argued that issues such as daycare and healthcare were more important to working-class women.

It would seem more attention needs to be paid to this- first I'd heard about it- yet I can see why people would more strongly support action on something which affects their own lives.

The argument could also be made that once gays have equal rights, people will get used to it, become more tolerant, and ease up on the bigotry, hate, and rejection, thus treating the problem at the root, rather than trying to alleviate the results of homophobia.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Exactly. No one ever hears about issues like this, because they don't fit into the paradigm of the gay rights movement; it's not a legal battle, therefore it's ignored. It's hugely disappointing for a lot of reasons. In the first place, gay people are supposed to be a community; you would think, as such, we would look out for the weakest in our community. In the second place, gay people are supposed to be able to identify more strongly with the margins, but it turns out "the margins" is only the most bourgeois of spaces.

Both would be all right, if there were any sort of proportion between the need and the effort expended. But gay rights are all about marriage these days (you don't even hear about the fact that in many states gay people don't have employment protection); certainly, the rights afforded by that are valuable, but they pale next to the basic needs for food and shelter which our queer youth are suffering from. The latter is clearly far more important, but no interest in put into it. I posted this on a gay website I frequent, with some twenty thousand members and several hundred daily visitors, and exactly two people responded. At the same time, someone posted about Daniel Avila's idiotic column, which sparked a furor of responses. When basic needs are ignored, and people saying stupid things are profoundly relevant (when in fact, the comments in question had already been condemned and the person in question sacked about a week before), priorities are not as they should be.

As regards the gay-rights-will-make-parents-stop-kicking-their-queer-youth-out shtick, look at the streets of Toronto. You cannot force solutions to social problems through legal responses; you may alleviate them a little, but all you really do is create an illusory veneer which hides them.

[The Gaffer]

Thanks for posting that GM.

there are so many parents who can't be parents to their gay kids

[GrayMouser]

A more exact parallel would be the fight against segregated zoning. This is by definition a "bourgeois" issue; it applied only to that small minority of blacks who could afford to buy a house in a white neighborhoood.

Should they have been told "never mind about this, look at all the poor young black people on drugs in Harlem"?

Or another parallel- a devout but concerned Muslim woman living in a country with Sharia law. She tells her feminist sisters that they should concentrate on providing shelters for women fleeing abusive marriages- surely a vital need- and stop worrying about changing the laws about arranged marriages or the inferior legal status of women.

They might point out in turn that it is Islam itself, or at least the current intolerant version of it, that is causing the problem, and by refusing to acknowledge that, she brings up that old 60s saying: You're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem.

Gaffer, how about the very next line:

They can't cope, they can't deal with it, their religion is in conflict with the reality of their kids' lives, and these kids are getting thrown away

So, Gwai, what would you suggest? Gay people organising shelters for young LGBTs, helping them adjust, telling them there is nothing wrong with them or their sexual practices, and that the problem is with the bigots that can't accept that? You down with that?