P.K. Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Sorry if my genuinely-held opinion conflicts with your personal beliefs I actually agree with most of what you say, the only sticking point that I strongly disagree that being gay is a 'choice'. People are what they are, they don't suddenly wake up and decide to be gay. It's a stunningly ignorant point of view to claim otherwise. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, then. IMO the evidence that it is genetically programmed/inherited is extremely shaky. Whilst 'choice' may possibly be too decisive a word, the suggestion that it is most often 'socialised,' particularly during the confusing time of puberty, appears to have a great deal more credence. I've never claimed there's a hypothetical gay gene. That's clearly a ridiculous assertion. I'm simply stating that gay people are just born that way. We don't understand a 10th of a human brain or how it works, and we're no closer to discovering why we have personalities that differ despite being made up of the same genetic material than we were before the discovery of DNA. There's no gene for musical ability, no gene for manic depression and no gene for being a bigot. It's those differences between each of us that makes us who were are. This is just one of them. Interesting. No gene for Manic Depression? Yet apparently it's hereditory. No gene for musical ability? Sure about that as surely you need to be able to distinguish between tones, not forgetting Mozart. I believe both points of view are correct. Ans is correct in that humans are born with a certain sexual orientation, you would have to be, reason as yet unknown. Equally Lonan3 is right in that homosexuality can be 'socialised' with Sparta being the obvious (and very extreme) example. The thing about a tolerant society is that it is only tolerant to a point. The more the minorities push the tolerance boundaries the more extreme the reaction will be by the majority when they finally get pushed too far and start to push back. The current antipathy against Muslims after the bombs and demonstrations being an excellent example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Smelly Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Food for thought there P K I personally think that aslong as they don't come around my house and change my wardrobe and decor then live and let live. With the dress sense these people have they need all the sympathy we can give Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxchatterbox Posted March 4, 2006 Author Share Posted March 4, 2006 If there is one gay in the village does that mean the man on the telly has outed him... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Apologies for resurrecting this thread of Manx enlightenment but reading it today I am amused by some contributions, especially in regard to Political Correctness. I really do think that in a particular respect Political Correctness has gone too far. The manner in which it has is the way that people aim to mask and to a greater degree excuse their inexcusable prejudice and bigotry by using a critique of Political Correctness. I just don't understand, is it cowardice? If you are homophobic and racist why not simply say so without having to justify the comments in such a pedantic way. I can certainly appreciate how with the Isle of Man government's policies being conformist and conservative there may be, and I believe, close resemblances in the political mentality of the Manx/Isle of Man layman. Either that or ignorance and fear is what prevails based on a lack of contact between these minorities and the ''normal''/white, heterosexual populace. Yes, there are occassions when political correctness goes mad and something amusing though hardly earth-shattering is reported in the tabloids or more likely the Daily Mail. I think I can understand why people don't like it. People think their position in society is threatened by the demands of the minorites, yet when you think about it the status and values are not being challenged, besides this could only be effectively carried out from within not without. Minorities will continue to push while there is discrimination in society. It isn't all about equality and legislations. Certainly on a place like the Isle of Man there is greater need for legislation and service provision not less of it. This I say with acknowledgment and experience of the prevailing attitudes surrounding ethnic minorities and especially homosexuality. The island certainly has its own unique cultural mentality. I don't think there is any need for a Gay Radio, I think it quite amusing that that has been mentioned when the island has absolutely no service provision for gay people. In contrast to the UK this is pretty shocking. Gay Airtime seems like something trivial for the future. I am not having a 'go' at all rather just want to ask that people do away with the crutch of Political Correctness and just say what they think without justifying themselves PC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstain Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 so straight away we have teh sterotypical homophobic response... Homophobia is the irrational hatred, intolerance, and fear of lesbian, gay and bisexual people. These prejudicial feelings fuel the myths, stereotypes, discrimination and violence against people who are lesbian, gay or bisexual. The UK government reckon that somewhere between 5 - 7 % of the population is gay / lesbian / bisexual - shouldn't that mean that at least that amount of airtime is devoted to gay / lesbian / bisexual program content. I still object to the use of the word 'gay' in this context, simply to make homosexual relationships sound more acceptable to the vast majority. I also find the thought of sexual relationships between people of the same sex repulsive. I can't help that, and wouldn't wish to. As far as I'm concerned, the anus is an 'exit' only! However, I do not have any 'hatred' of such people. As for providing specialised programmes for the homosexual/bisexual population - that is possibly the most ridiculous idea that even manxchatterbox has ever come up with - and that really is saying something. According to the last census there were more than 40,000 vehicles on the island - does that mean that more than half of MR's programmes should be about vehicles and drivers? The fact that homosexuals have chosen (and, yes, I believe it is a 'choice' in most cases!) such sexual orientation, is their concern - no one else's. Tolerance is as much as they ought to expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstain Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Lonan3, tell me did you choose to be heterosexual? Do you think buggery is exclusive to homosexuals? Do hetrosexual couples engage in buggery? If the anus is a one way street why have you stuck your head up yours? What's that you say? I can't hear you..........sounds like your talking out of your arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Lonan3, tell me did you choose to be heterosexual?Do you think buggery is exclusive to homosexuals? Do hetrosexual couples engage in buggery? If the anus is a one way street why have you stuck your head up yours? What's that you say? I can't hear you..........sounds like your talking out of your arse. Since heterosexuality is perfectly natural, it wasn't necessary to make a choice. In my experience, heterosexual people do not need to proclaim their sexual orientation in the normal course of their lives - it is only the extremely vocal minority who have chosen otherwise who constantly proclaim that because they are 'normal' they should have more rights than anyone else! As for buggery, I'm sorry if it offends you, but I find the idea of one man offering either his anus or his mouth as a vessel of sexual gratification to another man utterly repulsive. If that makes me homophobic, then so be it. As for your final two statements - I apologise, I didn't realise that I was debating the subject with someone who clearly suffers from arrested development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I tend to disagree Lonan3 with your last few statements. I don't see how homosexuality or heterosexuality (as concepts and as sexual orientations) are either perfectly natural, I think it more your judgement than factual statement. Prior to the mid-nineteenth century there were no such things as homo- and hetero-sexual therefore no understanding of these terms. I think if you are going to make a statement about heterosexuality being, somehow, natural it needs to be explained as to what you mean by natural. If it is your experience that heterosexuals do not need to proclaim their sexuality then that is of course your experience but it is neither not the reality. We all live in a heterosexual society, heterosexual values dominate society in some many ways. All you have to do is turn on the television to watch a film or advert about heterosexual relationships or appreciate the values placed on marriage and sex in society and those are only tiny, superfiscial examples of the way heteroseuxality proclaims itself and perpetuates itself. Heterosexuals do need to proclaim their sexuality. The concept of heterosexuality only exists to counterbalance that of homosexuality, if the latter concept did not exist there would be no heterosexuality. The only reason why homosexuals seem to proclaim their orientation is because as the counterpart to heterosexuality, once it is shown or displayed it is immediately visible. The worry that heterosexuals harbour about homosexual rights is only the irrational reaction of heterosexual norms coming under threat. The conception that you have that same-sex relationships are repulsive is informative but not surprising. You equate same-sex relationships with anal sex, but why? This is curious not simply because lesbians exist but because if one were to conceptualise same-sex relationships, the vagina doesn't immediately spring to mind. Talking about relationships I personally think of boyfriend/girlfriend, marriage first. I don't know if you have a partner but I would hope and presume that your relationship is based on something more than getting a good shag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 The only reason why homosexuals seem to proclaim their orientation is because as the counterpart to heterosexuality, once it is shown or displayed it is immediately visible. The worry that heterosexuals harbour about homosexual rights is only the irrational reaction of heterosexual norms coming under threat. I don't agree. They "seem" to proclaim their orientation? What, they don't really mean to or something? I don't worry about homesexual rights irrationally and I don't view their actions as putting heterosexual norms under threat because by the very nature of homosexuals I don't see how they can. I do hate them though. The conception that you have that same-sex relationships are repulsive is informative but not surprising. You equate same-sex relationships with anal sex, but why? Errr, I think you'll find a statement where Lonan3 found buggery offensive which would explain the anal sex bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrsTrellisfromNorthWales Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 http://www.gaytalkcampaign.co.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan Kerr Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 The conception that you have that same-sex relationships are repulsive is informative but not surprising. You equate same-sex relationships with anal sex, but why? Errr, I think you'll find a statement where Lonan3 found buggery offensive which would explain the anal sex bit. I think you mean "perception" - I seriously doubt whether "conception" is relevant in the context of same-sex relationships (or it could be that I have not kept abreast of technological developments in recent years). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumble Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I'm with Lonan 3...in a warm manly backslapping kind of way, of course! I have no problems with homosexuals - either blokes or wimmin - but I DO object to them making such a bloody fuss about it. I think Matt Lucas is drawing the same point out perfectly in the 'only gay in the village' sketches. Two of my best pals are gay and live together - but they don't choose to flaunt their sexuality any more than I do. Which is the way it should be. Maybe I'm prudish, but I don't like ANY public displays of sexuality - heavy snogging even. Now - pass me another boy....this ones... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Errr, I think you'll find a statement where Lonan3 found buggery offensive which would explain the anal sex bit. I agree. I much prefer the word "pederast" - terms such as "buggery" and "anal-sex" are such blunt expressions whereas pederast sounds such a jolly term in comparison. Its a word you could include in your passport without getting a second glance. Can we please be civilised when we discuss such base issues! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 Well I was referring to Lonan3's earlier posting where it was stated implicitly that homosexual relationships are based upon anal sex. I was trying to get an explanation for why buggery offends, I could guess at that but thought it needed highlighting that homosexual relationships are obviously more than anal sex. Grumble: I would agree with you in that I can't say I like to see much any 'heavy' displays of affection in public. I hate the sight of seeing people snogging in pubs or clubs etc. but that is a bit specific when it comes to the displaying of sexuality. P.K. Why do you hate them though? That sounds irrational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.