Gays, lesbians, bisexuals

[Rían]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Okey dokey

Okey dokey pokey!

The "cause" issue is a problem only for the Church, presumably because if it's innate, then it must have been put there by God. Hence religious groups have a political interest in "disproving" a genetic cause.

But I'm a Christian, and to me, it doesn't even matter if it's genetic or not.

I hope that clarifies things a bit.

Yes, somewhat ... I don't think you quite understood my point, tho, but I think I'll leave it.

I should also add that I even value the diversity of opposing views, particularly when, as in your case, they are presented honestly and in a friendly manner. In this way we can challenge our own ideas, understand each other better and not become complacent.

I agree.

The only time I don't value them is when they're not honest, masking hidden agendas, or when their proponents are more interested in rhetoric than in engaging in open discussion.

No kidding - I hate that!!

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Embladyne

I see this thread is still drawing a crowd.

Well, having nothing to do with sexual orientation really, but more with gender identity...I'm going to Drag Ball tonight! It should pretty fun...though I really don't care for the "dance" music people play these days. Anyways, it was funny that a friend of mine commented that she was wearing a very girly outfit 'cause she was straight, and didn't want to confuse the lesbians. And so I pointed out to her than not all lesbians are butch.

You're awesome Embladyne! (Not all lesbians are butch! hehe) So how was it? Tolerable dance music? Good times had by all?

Inked, don't mean to ignore (actually, I do, but I don't want to be mean about it), but I see the AIDS article and I run, run like the wiiiiiind!

Hey RÃ*an, isn't it okey dokey Smokey?

[The Gaffer]

If you've seen League of Gentlemen, it's "Okey dokey pig in a pokey"

Rian, I stand corrected! What I should have said was "In my view some religious groups have a political imperative to disprove a genetic cause..." Apols for generalising

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

If you've seen League of Gentlemen, it's "Okey dokey pig in a pokey"

Rian, I stand corrected! What I should have said was "In my view some religious groups have a political imperative to disprove a genetic cause..." Apols for generalising

hallo daaave!!

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Hey RÃ*an, isn't it okey dokey Smokey?

I have no idea! I've just always heard okey dokey pokey!

Originally Posted by Gaffer

Apols for generalising

accepted! (you dropped the 'r' off your name - you made a "gaffe"! )

[Rían]

*makes french - er, American fries of the tater*

[The Gaffer]

Never was one for this Freedom vs French Fries debate. They were always, and remain CHIPS!

* Pinches one of Rian's chipses *

[Embladyne]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

You're awesome Embladyne! (Not all lesbians are butch! hehe) So how was it? Tolerable dance music? Good times had by all?

It was oookkkkay... I forgot that at college, any large scale "dance" type event pretty much involves no real dancing. Yeah. I really can't stand being around people who have to drink to "enjoy" themselves at social events, although I have no problems with alchohol as part of a meal, or celebration, where it is an addition to the event, not the reason for the event. And the music suxxors. Where I live, gay/trans people know how to choose dance music...and to dance.
Back home, when the youth organization I am part of would hold dance events for queer and queer-friendly youth, they always did a drug/alchohol check at the door. But, this Friday, there's a free contradance event, so that will be really fun! (I really enjoy contradance, nothing to do with GLBT.)There have been good dancing events here, but they are always much smaller...and I really prefer dancing when I know most of the people I'm dancing around.

Anyways, that was quite a bit off topic.

Inked, I don't see the point of your posting the article about AIDS in this thread, as it is not very directly linked to being gay. Rather, the article is about AIDS. If there were a thread for AIDS/HIV that would probabally be a better place to post that article, and then link it to being gay, if that was your intention. Please don't take my opinion as a provocation, I just don't see how the article ties into the topic of this thread. Maybe if you had put your interpretation/connections to the thread in your post, it would have been clearer.

[inked]

Originally Posted by The Wizard from Milan

This is a sad news (that I knew already).
What is your motive for posting it in this specific thread?

FYI

The title says it all. Remember in real life I am a physician and it just naturally occurs that I tell patients and others about reports of this stuff. Since I am an OB/GYN my audience is usually female and usually heterosexual (which is why a large proportion of them are pregnant ).

Of course, if there are objections to data like this being made known...just ignore it.


Embladyne,

Or we could add a heterosexual thread and I could post it in both, if that makes folks get the word. I'm open to that!

[Rían]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Never was one for this Freedom vs French Fries debate. They were always, and remain CHIPS!

Oh, right, it was "freedom fries" It was so stupid I couldn't even remember it right!
*passes some ketchup to Gaffer*


Inky, I read your article and noted the gay/meth aspect. I just read yet another article, this time in Newsweek, about the PnP subculture ("Party and Play", featuring meth and "barebacking" with multiple partners). The article referred to the NY guy in your article. I don't think anyone would accuse Newsweek of a conservative bias, and they feel it is enough of a news item to write about it. They note "The meth epidemic isn't new, nor is it just a gay problem. ... But it is in the gay community that the link between crystal meth and unsafe sex is most alarming. In a study of 1,600 men who have had sex with men, conducted by the L.A. County public-health agency in 2003-04, 13 percent said they'd used meth in the previous 12 months; those respondents were twice as likely to report having had unprotected sex, and four times as likely to report being HIV-positive."

Yes, ANYONE can get AIDS and use meth, but apparently in the gay community the numbers are much higher, so much so that people are targeting the gay community to try to help them (the article notes that "Authorities in San Francisco launched a media campaign against "crystal mess", even plastering the ads on coasters at gay bars"). Is that prejudice? I don't think so. I think it's being practical.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

* tries to think of witty riposte *

* cant' *

* throws tater at RÃ*an instead *

LCoU, I can't remember Daaave... who was that?

Better be careful or else we'll be doing Babs the taxi driver.

Anyone got any opinions about Dafydd, "the only gay in the village"?

papa lazarou, 2nd series of tLoG

another bacardi n coke please, myfanwy

[Nurvingiel]

I have heard of this issue (the use of meth and unsafe sex) but I hesitate to get in to that in this thread. In fact, I avoid it completely for fear there might be harmful and false extrapolations about homosexuality being a harmful lifestile. ad infinitum.

Oh nuts I just got into it didn't I...


Edit - grammar

[Rían]

"harmful and false extrapolations about homosexuality being a harmful lifestile"?

See, this kind of thinking worries me - I think you're SO careful about not wanting to insult a group in any way that you aren't looking at reality. Why were gay bars targets in ads by San Francisco authorities, who certainly are not anti-gay, unless there was a reason?

Apparently the gay lifestyle, as it currently is, for whatever reason, carries a higher risk of dangerous sexual behaviors. It's that simple. And good for the SF authorities for not being afraid to target this at-risk population with educational ads!

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

"harmful and false extrapolations about homosexuality being a harmful lifestile"?

See, this kind of thinking worries me - I think you're SO careful about not wanting to insult a group in any way that you aren't looking at reality. Why were gay bars targets in ads by San Francisco authorities, who certainly are not anti-gay, unless there was a reason?

Ah, you misread me here friend, even though I see how you might take my post that way.

The reason I "pussyfooted" (I did, but not in the part you quoted) with wording is because I don't want to encourage anyone at all to think "Even Nurvingiel admits there is a problem (there is a problem) therefore being gay is a harmful lifestyle. It's the italicized bit I want to avoid, and why I will address below.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Apparently the gay lifestyle, as it currently is, for whatever reason, carries a higher risk of dangerous sexual behaviors. It's that simple. And good for the SF authorities for not being afraid to target this at-risk population with educational ads!

The thing is, there is no such thing as a "gay lifestyle". Since when does the gender of your partner define your lifestyle? That's like saying there's a "straight lifestyle" - of course there isn't. Do all straight people act the same? Dress the same? Engage in similar hobbies and activities? Have similar values? The answer is many resounding NOs.
Thinking that there is such thing as "a gay lifestyle" (A, as in ONE) leads to other dangerous thinking. It's easy to pigeonhole gays into all kinds of horrible stereotypes if they are "all the same".
You mentioned in another thread that it sucks when people make a lot of assumptions about you as soon as they find our you're Christian (giant paraphrase there). Well, it does suck, and the same thing happens to many gay people.
This is why the notion of a gay lifestyle is not only wrong, but dangerous.

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by inked

Or we could add a heterosexual thread and I could post it in both, if that makes folks get the word. I'm open to that!

I think that that would make the posting *much* more fair and objective.

It would be still be biased though because it would still single out sexual activity; I think that the only way in which it would be fair (and useful to the readers) is if there was a warning about the risks of forced abstinence and the risks of the activities that you could entertain if you do not have sexual activity.

e.g. I believe (but somebody more informed than me should check the figures) that if instead of having the average protected intercourse you have a car trip, the risk of death is actually higher in the car trip

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Yes, ANYONE can get AIDS and use meth, but apparently in the gay community the numbers are much higher, so much so that people are targeting the gay community to try to help them (the article notes that "Authorities in San Francisco launched a media campaign against "crystal mess", even plastering the ads on coasters at gay bars"). Is that prejudice? I don't think so. I think it's being practical.

I don't think it is prejudice if the campaign truly has informative purpose; I think it is prejudice if a group is always singled out; that's why I asked the question of what was the purpose of the posting.

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Apparently the gay lifestyle, as it currently is, for whatever reason, carries a higher risk of dangerous sexual behaviors.

As I see it, there are 3 issues:
1. due to anatomical reasons HIV trasmission is more likely among gay men than in the average population
2. (some) heterosexuals cause an increase in the promiscuity of gays by defining the gays only in terms of their sexual acts. If homosexuality were accepted as just something that some people do, sexuality would loose a lot of its role in the gay community
3. social stigma is one of the causes of the higher incidence of certain drugs in the gay community

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by Nurvi

The thing is, there is no such thing as a "gay lifestyle". Since when does the gender of your partner define your lifestyle? That's like saying there's a "straight lifestyle"

i know for a fact that i most certainly have no different "lifestyle" (hate that word) than anyone else i know, apart from the fact that i wear a lot of black, wear black eye shadow and nail varnish, which is a totally seperate issue to my gender or sexuality

[Insidious Rex]

Why Last, clearly since you are homosexual it means you are prone to doing stupid and dangerous things to yourself. Get with the program. Why are you refusing to act in such a manner? Quick its urgent that you cave in so we can blanket you with the "gay life style" myth, smugly point to you and titter about how self destructive such a "life style" is. Your avoidence of sex and crystal meth is a slap in the face to those who see things through these kinds of glasses.

Oh and whats with these muslims who dont hate westerners! clearly they missed a memo.

when crack ravaged inner city black populations in the 80's were people saying see that "black life style" is just harmful for anyone who lives that way?

when cocaine did the same to mostly WHITE youth living the fast life in the 70s were people saying see that "young white life style" is just a harmful way to live and not what god designed?

I dont think so. So why the false if/then conclusion when dealing with gays who happen to use drugs? It doesnt have anything to do with the natural state of being GAY it has to do with certain gays who use drugs. Just like certain blacks who used drugs or certain whites who used drugs had problems as well. It has to do with fads and undergound movements and human psychology and addiction. NOT simply being gay.

It is solved through education and awarness programs (and time). If you want to use it simply as an opportunity to say "see... *smirk*" then you do no one any good. Clearly all that really needs to be said is dont use crystal meth and dont have unprotected sex if it all possible. Not "see..." The main reason we need to bring this TO those individuals within certain gay communities where there is more of a prevelance of this activity is because they DONT see 99% of what we send out to our culture at large as directed toward them. They are told you are freaks and not like us. So therefore they figure well anything you tell me doesnt apply to me just to people who are "normal" and that makes them more likely to engage in risky activities. We need to bring a message to them in a way that specifically addresses THEM. Cant really blame people for doing stupid things when we dont speak to them when we speak about certain dangers.

[Embladyne]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

i know for a fact that i most certainly have no different "lifestyle" (hate that word) than anyone else i know, apart from the fact that i wear a lot of black, wear black eye shadow and nail varnish, which is a totally seperate issue to my gender or sexuality

I wear guy pants (instead of girl pants) because they're more comfy, but I wear skirts much more often...

I don't try to "appear" straight or queer, I just dress in what I like, and speak how I like, and do what I find fitting. And I make mistakes, but I try to avoid making them in the same way again. My sexuality does not define me as a person, it is just another color of my personality. And not even a dominant one. If there is one thing about me that really defines me, it is the music I create, for in it I can see a mirror of myself, good and bad and unfathomable.

The part about being queer that concerns me most is how people treat me when there are aware that I am not straight. I don't need for people to change their minds on how they veiw my fate. I just want to be treated respectfully, and as a human being.