Homosexuals: Some things I'm noticing about you

I've seen exactly one of you, on this forum, who has been capable of anything resembling legitimate rational argument.

The rest of you have consistently relied exclusively on cultural Marxist political correctness, various forms of the "hate speech," card, and if all else fails, derisive mockery against anybody who expresses opinions which you don't like.

If there's one thing I really have no respect for, it is anyone (gay or otherwise) who attempts to use their own sense of victimhood, in and of itself, as a weapon against others. I've realised that if there is a single thing which I truly dislike about most homosexual people that I've seen, it's that; your extreme willingness to apply inverse discrimination.

I honestly do not care about members of the same gender having sex with each other. Being brutally honest, yes, on a purely visceral level, I think it's disgusting in the case of males, and I don't know of too many other heterosexual people who feel otherwise, but I don't believe that there should be a law against it; I just don't want it done where I have to watch. That also doesn't mean I'm asking for anything to be banned in public, either; I don't go out a lot. Apart from that I can live with it, without any problem at all.

What I really don't like about gays, on the other hand, is their apparent authoritarian Marxism, and their insistence on controlling the way other people think. Being a Stalinist shouldn't necessarily have anything to do with sexuality, and I'm not sure why, in the case of homosexuality, those two seem to so consistently go hand in hand.

A lot of you apparently need to become a lot more realistic, about the fact that not everyone is going to like you; and that trying to force them to do so, is no better morally, than some of the things which genuinely have been done to homosexual people themselves in the past.

That's the problem, when people have been persecuted to the degree that you have been. I see the same attitude among (thankfully a small minority of) the Jewish population. They think that because the Holocaust happened, that gives them eternal, irrevocable moral immunity to treat anyone else on the planet as abominably as they like, without any consequences whatsoever. They don't realise that them becoming monsters, as a result of monstrous things having been done to them, is not ultimately going to solve their problems. It will only make said problems infinitely worse.

Another thing that bothers me about gays, now that I think about it, is that politically speaking, you don't realise what pawns you are. You want things like hate crime legislation in order to protect yourselves, but you're so busy being locked into your hysterically emotive victim complex, that you don't notice literally every fascist politician on the planet, also licking their chops in response to the public being acclimatised to the idea, of different groups being given preferential treatment under the law. None of you have apparently considered what the social implications of that might be; either that, or you're so completely self-centered that you don't care how much it might harm other people, as long as you're ok.

Before you accuse me of it, no, I'm not Christian. Truthfully I find them equally as annoying as most of you; the only real difference is in the details.

If I have one request for the gay community, at least here on ATS, it's to turn the emotion dial down, and the logic dial up. My consistent observation of gays as a group, pretty much anywhere, has been that you are dominated by both a lack of emotional control, and an overwhelming, continual sense of victimhood; and neither of those things really seem to be helping you. I certainly know that watching you express them isn't enjoyable, anyway.

reply to post by petrus4


Don't blame gay people. Blame the politically correct crap society that doesn't say a word.

Gays have a legitimate grip, I don't agree with them, but its legitimate. If we want them to stop throwing it in EVERYBODY's face though we just need to collectively need to grow a pair and tell them to "chill".

I agree with some of your points.
But let's please separate "homosexuals" from "the homosexual agenda" which is mostly pushed by self righteous heteros who think they are forwarding "justice".
I know several homosexuals who are conservative because they pay taxes and work hard and enjoy individual liberty.
They appreciate that people care about "their group". But like all liberal group politics that celebrate victimhood, the homosexual agenda is anti-freedom and anti-individual.
As a hetero male, I prefer not to imagine male homosexual behavior in the bedroom, but I acknowledge it is none of my business and that whatever 2 consenting adults choose to do is their right as long as no one is getting hurt (unless they want to).
What irks me is this "in your face" agenda that tries to force its way onto every aspect of society and tell other institutions what they can and can't do (the boy scout thread from today for example).
Unfortunately, what this will create is backlash and as the economy fails (sorry - a little off topic), government protections will either erode or they will become more tyrannical and unstable.
If you set the precedent that government can control what institutions can and can't do and who they can and can't exclude or protect, what happens if the Christian Right comes into power? It will be their own fault. What works for the one will work for the other.
My philosophy is "Leave me alone, I'll leave you alone" which should be applied to the government as well.

reply to post by petrus4


if you don't have a problem with gay people beyond the fact that you think two dudes having sex is gross, then why all the attention paid to "the gays?" I love the doublethink at work. You don't have any problem with gays whatsoever, aside from all of the problems you have with gays.

what examples can you give of gays harassing you or attempting to force any viewpoints on you? I'd be surprised if you had anything more specific than "there's gays on tv and in the news!"

like any other group, gays have extremists among their ranks. it is a logical folly to assume that gay people are a cohesive organized group. I have two gay friends. One is a drama queen who would call the cops if McDonald's didn't have the flavor soda pop he wanted. The other is a down to earth, normal dude. How do you think the two of them approach the "gay rights" movement?

In any marginalized, stereotyped and oppressed group of people you have the loud and proud and the meek and humble and everything in between. if you're not gay, not christian, not a civil rights activist and not overly concerned with controlling the way people live and think, then why not just turn the other cheek? do hate crime laws and laws against discrimination really harm society?

Originally posted by RicoMarston
reply to post by petrus4

 

if you don't have a problem with gay people beyond the fact that you think two dudes having sex is gross, then why all the attention paid to "the gays?" I love the doublethink at work. You don't have any problem with gays whatsoever, aside from all of the problems you have with gays.

What I meant was, I don't so much have a problem with the biological aspects of homosexuality, as I do with the political and social aspects. I should have expressed myself more clearly.

do hate crime laws and laws against discrimination really harm society?

They do if hate speech is defined as anything which is in disagreement with the opinion of a particular group. While I'm not going to name names, there is a particular woman on this forum, who I more or less consider the reincarnation of Eva Braun, in terms of the depth of outright fascism which exists in virtually every opinion she expresses. Yet despite how vile I personally find her opinions to be, I will vehemently defend her right to express them.

Note: whenever there's anybody who doesn't think like the OP does, he calls them Stalin/Marxist.

reply to post by pierregustavetoutant


how is it defensible for any group to say "no straights" "no gays" "no blacks" "no whites" "no men" "no women"? why would you ever defend a group which prefers to be exclusionary? if you want to start the Pierre Gustav Club and have only asian shemales named Pierre over for tea, that's your right. If you want to open a public organization and invite "everyone except..." to join, you are missing the point of america. we didn't all come here so we can splinter off into groups based on gender, sexual orientation, race or religion. we came here to join forces against tyranny and oppression and show the world elite what the power of the People United is all about. why promote and protect an organization like the boy scouts saying "no gays allowed" and how is that any different from a golf course saying "no women" or a diner saying "no blacks?"

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Note: whenever there's anybody who doesn't think like the OP does, he calls them Stalin/Marxist.

You're more intelligent than that, ESC. Try again.

I happen to have many, MANY, gay friends and they've all been wonderful and have never pushed any agenda towards me. HOWEVER, I have encountered many cross dressers who absolutely HATE women and everytime I happen to run into one, I get stared down and get insulted. I dont have anything against them but they seem to have some kind of animosity towards women that is just not right.

Im not sure how they expect to be treated fairly when they are walking down the street thinking that just because they have a pair of bolt ons they are better than me. Its gotten to the point where my gay friends and them end up getting into arguments because they seem to have a thing against men too. The minute they start showing respect towards me or anyone for that matter, they will have society looking at them in a certain way.

Originally posted by RicoMarston
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant

 

how is it defensible for any group to say "no straights" "no gays" "no blacks" "no whites" "no men" "no women"? why would you ever defend a group which prefers to be exclusionary? if you want to start the Pierre Gustav Club and have only asian shemales named Pierre over for tea, that's your right. If you want to open a public organization and invite "everyone except..." to join, you are missing the point of america. we didn't all come here so we can splinter off into groups based on gender, sexual orientation, race or religion. we came here to join forces against tyranny and oppression and show the world elite what the power of the People United is all about. why promote and protect an organization like the boy scouts saying "no gays allowed" and how is that any different from a golf course saying "no women" or a diner saying "no blacks?"

Completely false.
We all came here to embrace individual liberty. Using group politics to affect public or private policy is relatively new. And incredibly destructive to the principles the US was founded on.
I support tolerance. Think it is a good thing. But tolerance cannot be forced. And that is the point. Forced "tolerance" will bring about very bad things.
The religious devotion that progressives seem to have is exactly as tyrannical as the Christians they deride.

The gay rights movement isnt about "equal "rights, its about special treatment, they want the same treatment that minorities get and when they dont get it they cry discrimination and start calling people homophobic.
No, I dont have gay friends, dont want gay friends and dont agree with gay marriage and dont bother trying to insult me by calling me homophobic, I really dont care.

Exchange the word "Gay" for Black, Jew or any other minority for that mater, and same argument applies. This isn't exclusively gay issue. It's a general response of any oppressed minority group.

It's hardly surprising when the victimised start acting like victims.

The answer to the problem is simple. Stop treating them like sh*t, and they'll stop shovelling the sh*t back in return.

The concept has been around for quite some time.... "Do onto others..." A concept that many like to spout, but few actually subscribe to.

reply to post by petrus4

Wow, for someone who really doesn't like homosexuals you sure seem to know an awful lot about us. I am just curious how many gay men and women that you actually know (not on ATS)? And in what context? Have you ever taken the time to truly get to know any of us? Or is all of your experience based purely on your arms-length observation? I agree that many of my brethren can be a tad emotional when it comes to some sensitive issues like, oh I don't know, hate-crimes legislation, marrying the person you love, or having a legal right to visit the person you love and spent your life, when they are in the hospital. These issues strike at the core of our personhood. I am curious what you would suggest as an appropriate course of action? Perhaps we should just sit quietly in the back of the bus, unseen, and quiet ask for the things that we know in our hearts should be ours by right, and by not by special dispensation by those in authority. I can tell you firsthand, that doesn't work real well.

And I agree with you that I you should not have to watch to males having sex. No one is asking you to (as far as I know). And on a purely visceral level I find two straight people having sex just as disgusting, to me, personally. I certainly wouldn't want to watch that. I would NOT however, expect you to sit quietly and "play nice" if someone were to tell you that you couldn't marry that person because someone else felt it might "harm" their marriage or they just plain didn't like it. Being gay isn't just about sex, its also about who we love. Would you not get a little defensive if, at almost every turn, someone was belittling and attacking that relationship and/or the person you love? We are not really any different than you, as much as you seem to want to make this an US vs THEM argument. We wake up in the morning, get ready for work, take out the trash, argue about money, worry when one of us is sick, pay taxes, etc..etc..etc. But none of that really matters to certain people who feel that we are less than human (not saying thats how YOU feel but there ARE a lot of people who think that way) Wouldn't that make you angry? A little defensive maybe? I am not trying to play on any sense of victimhood here, I only want you to be able to see where many of us are coming from when we seem a tad "emotional" about some of these topics.

I am not saying here that all gay people are good and wonderful. There are a lot of loud-mouth, ignorant gay people just like there are a lot of loud-mouth, ignorant straight people. I hope that you will just think about your post and my response a little bit before you set your beliefs about us (as whole) in stone. As I said, we are really not that different from you.

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by RicoMarston
reply to post by petrus4

 

if you don't have a problem with gay people beyond the fact that you think two dudes having sex is gross, then why all the attention paid to "the gays?" I love the doublethink at work. You don't have any problem with gays whatsoever, aside from all of the problems you have with gays.

What I meant was, I don't so much have a problem with the biological aspects of homosexuality, as I do with the political and social aspects. I should have expressed myself more clearly.

do hate crime laws and laws against discrimination really harm society?

They do if hate speech is defined as anything which is in disagreement with the opinion of a particular group. While I'm not going to name names, there is a particular woman on this forum, who I more or less consider the reincarnation of Eva Braun, in terms of the depth of outright fascism which exists in virtually every opinion she expresses. Yet despite how vile I personally find her opinions to be, I will vehemently defend her right to express them.

if a law says "you must agree with homosexuality" it is wrong. if a law says "you cannot use a person's actual or perceived homosexuality to justify harming them physically or monetarily" it seems fine to me. I've never heard of actual legislation aimed at convincing homophobes to love gays. and the social? it sounds like you've had experience with pushy, authoritative gays (jerks) and used that to define the entire group. I used to do that with christians until i met a lot of them and found out that there's nosy a-holes and friendly folks in EVERY group.

hate speech is not defined as "anything which is in disagreement with the opinion of a group." it's "In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group." that sounds like a great idea. if the majority is anti-gay, the mob mentality takes hold. people might say "yeah! the gays are wrong! get rid of them!" without any actual deep thought on the subject.

kind of like when a few muslims supposedly attacked the WTC and suddenly a nice little chunk of american society thought we were at war with muslims or that all terrorists are muslims or that terrorism is unique to muslims. laws in place to help protect the muslims out there who are just normal people like the rest of us in a time of persecution and intense suspicion seems wise to me.

anti-gay sentiments seem to be at a frothy high and I think it's wise for the level-headed and tolerant among us to snatch control and legislation away from the fervent fanatics on BOTH sides.

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Note: whenever there's anybody who doesn't think like the OP does, he calls them Stalin/Marxist.

You're more intelligent than that, ESC. Try again.

No, to be honest I've noticed the same thing in your threads.

Can you please cite some examples of gay people "shoving it down your throat?" Is a parade or a public speech 'shoving it down your throat?" What about other groups, like MADD, or PETA, or the NRA, or any group that claims to fight for the rights of a specific demographic? They are all just as emotionally involved in their causes, do you hate them too? Or is it just when two males bump uglies?

You admit that the thought of two males together makes you sick, but females is ok? What's with the double standard? I think it's disgusting when people sit and play WoW all day, (or any video game or tv watching for the majority of their waking hours) but I don't care enough to rant about it on a website..

You do realize that if the LGBT community was treated equally, and had equal opportunities in education, career, marriage, adoption rights, they might not have to gather and march to bring their unfortunate situation to light? When you OPPRESS

You're complaining that they are 'too emotional' but your OP contains a LOT of negative emotion.

No offense, but your OP just exposed the type of justification and minimization that you feed yourself with.


I'm not gay, but many of my friends are. I'm just as disgusted by heterosexual PDA as I am by homosexual PDA. I used to think Gay Pride Parades were silly, but then I realized that when you are oppressed you HAVE to showcase your situation in order to make it better.. I like to go to Oktoberfest, where people drink beer and wear liederhosen.. It's JUST AS SILLY as any gay pride parade.

Originally posted by FanarFanar
Exchange the word "Gay" to Black, Jew or any other minority for that mater, and same argument applies. This isn't exclusively gay issue. It's general response of any oppressed minority group.

It's hardly surprising when the victimised start acting like victims.

The answer to the problem is simple. Stop treating them like sh*t, and they'll stop shovelling the sh*t back in return.

The concept has been around for quite some time.... "Do onto others..." A concept that many like to spout, but few actually subscribe to.

a million stars to the rational, level-headed and morally sound (from pretty much any set of morals) statement of the day!!

"Stop treating them like sh*t, and they'll stop shovelling the sh*t back in return."

brilliant!

What up Petrus4.

I agree with the thrust of what you are saying. I do blame liberals for how things have gone though, more than the homosexual community. I also think there are many homosexuals that do not fit the loud victim stereotype.

I liked this Gay Group I saw on Sky News a while ago. They were pushing for Gay Marriage but they were saying that they respected the right of any Church to refuse to be involved. I was surprised to hear something so reasonable from a Gay Rights group.

What I hate is Gay Mardi Gras. The thing is obscene and offensive. I do not understand why they must persist with it every year in sydney. We get the point. You are gay and proud. Yay. You can shut up now and put some clothes on. The whole thing seems to be a big "[SNIP] you" from the gay community to the rest of us more than something to do with acceptance.

reply to post by RicoMarston


Not very for anyone willing to stand back and look at the scope of history and more in depth study of biological science.
Group politics enforces more division and more alienation.

Reinforcing yourself as a distinct tribe will only create more separation. It is a basic biological principle that can be seen in all primate species, human included. And a cursory glimpse of human history reinforces this fact.
The extremist religious devotion to some sort of "social evolution" is as anti-science and anti-rational as Creationism. Both are mental diseases that harm society and the individual.

Originally posted by pierregustavetoutant

Originally posted by RicoMarston
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant

 

how is it defensible for any group to say "no straights" "no gays" "no blacks" "no whites" "no men" "no women"? why would you ever defend a group which prefers to be exclusionary? if you want to start the Pierre Gustav Club and have only asian shemales named Pierre over for tea, that's your right. If you want to open a public organization and invite "everyone except..." to join, you are missing the point of america. we didn't all come here so we can splinter off into groups based on gender, sexual orientation, race or religion. we came here to join forces against tyranny and oppression and show the world elite what the power of the People United is all about. why promote and protect an organization like the boy scouts saying "no gays allowed" and how is that any different from a golf course saying "no women" or a diner saying "no blacks?"

Completely false.
We all came here to embrace individual liberty. Using group politics to affect public or private policy is relatively new. And incredibly destructive to the principles the US was founded on.
I support tolerance. Think it is a good thing. But tolerance cannot be forced. And that is the point. Forced "tolerance" will bring about very bad things.
The religious devotion that progressives seem to have is exactly as tyrannical as the Christians they deride.

completely false?! hardly.

embracing individual liberty is essentially the flip-side of fighting tyrannical oppression.

but if YOU have individual liberty, than so does EVERYBODY. so if you want the right to petition your government to change existing laws or adopt new ones which would benefit or protect you or yours, then everybody gets that right.

picture this; building on the suspicious attitude "mainstreamers" have against "conspiracy theorists" a budding political superstar decides to launch an anti-conspiracy site campaign. they cite the higher occurrences of mental illness and anarchic philosophy among ATS users than the general public. since "mainstreamers" have nothing invested in "our group" they are more likely to give tacit approval or even actively call for anti-conspiracy theory laws. "we've got to stop those fringe nut jobs from infiltrating and infecting society!"

still with me? good. now, would you oppose or support legislation which basically said "just because somebody goes on ATS or thinks the gov't sucks, doesn't make them a terrorist or enemy of the state"?

reply to post by RicoMarston


"The religious devotion that progressives seem to have is exactly as tyrannical as the Christians they deride."

now there's something we can agree on, comrade! religiosity finds its way into far more aspects of human life and society than just the spiritual stuff. religious fervor is often misdiagnosed as patriotism, tolerance or heroism. it's all just fancy words for somebody saying "agree with me or DIE!"