E
estesbob
Guest
And again all discrimination is bad All laws discriminate based on behavior
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
L
LovePatience
Guest
Thank you for apologizing. If you want to discuss this further on another thread, then start another thread. However, my comparisons with transgender are more relevant to the discussion than your decisions to bring race into the comparisons.I don’t want to debate this: at least not on this thread, and I’ve stated so. I apologize since you did not say gender identity DISORDER. However, I got the impression you were conflating transgender and gay (not that you were saying they are exactly alike) by using the term “gender identity.”
As for the term “gender identity”, one’s sexual orientation and sexuality is recognized by the vast majority of people in this world as a part of one’s gender identity. According to wikipedia, the term LGBT is intended to emphasize a diversity of “sexuality and gender identity-based cultures” and is sometimes used to refer to anyone who is non-heterosexual or cisgender instead of exclusively to people who are homosexual, bisexual, or transgender. Are you really taking offense to considering someone’s sexual orientation part of their gender identity?
And what is your justification for thinking that race is an appropriate comparison to sexual orientation but being transgender is not?
L
LovePatience
Guest
Well, then why don’t you compare any other group other than blacks and gays? You didn’t compare Jews, Catholics, women, or the disabled and you thought the comparison with transgender was so inappropriate it deserved another thread…From my perspective, discrimination is discrimination, whether it be against Blacks, gays, Jews, Catholics, women, the disabled, or any other group.
meltzerboy
New member
I think we’re going around in circles now! But to answer your questions, yes, transgender can be compared to sexual orientation on the basis of sexuality and also discrimination, but the gender identity issue of transgendered people is NOT the same issue as that of most gay people. Although in a larger sense, sexual orientation can be regarded as part of one’s gender identity, gays, for the most part, do not have gender identity issues comparable in kind to those of transgenders. Some may question their gender in the sense of their masculinity, but this is not considered the same as having a gender identity disorder. Most gay males know that they are men and most gay females know that they are women, both inside and outside. This is not the case with transgendered males and females since they believe they appear outwardly male or female, but are internally the opposite.Thank you for apologizing for quoting me as saying something specific, refuting it, and then explaining to me how they are different. If you want to discuss this further, then start another thread. However, it is more relevant to the discussion than you bringing race into the comparisons.
As for the term “gender identity”, one’s sexual orientation and sexuality is recognized by the vast majority of people in this world as a part of one’s gender identity. According to wikipedia, the term LGBT is intended to emphasize a diversity of “sexuality and gender identity-based cultures” and is sometimes used to refer to anyone who is non-heterosexual or cisgender instead of exclusively to people who are homosexual, bisexual, or transgender. Are you really taking offense to considering someone’s sexual orientation part of their gender identity?
And what is your justification for thinking that race is an appropriate comparison to sexual orientation but being transgender is not?
meltzerboy
New member
Read my first post on the thread. I was responding to Gov. Christie’s comparison in which he thought Blacks would have appreciated a referendum for voting rights, which he linked to a referendum for gay marriage. Another poster brought up the topic of interracial marriage, and I responded to that post as well.Well, then why don’t you compare any other group other than blacks and gays? You didn’t compare Jews, Catholics, women, or the disabled and you thought the comparison with transgender was so inappropriate it deserved another thread…
L
LovePatience
Guest
Because interracial marriage is only of concern to blacks and not every single other race?Read my first post on the thread. I was responding to Gov. Christie’s comparison in which he thought Blacks would have appreciated a referendum for voting rights, which he linked to a referendum for gay marriage. Another poster brought up the topic of interracial marriage, and I responded to that post as well.
Perhaps we are considering different studies. I would be interested in seeing the one that you have read. For anyone who is interested, here is a summary of the study: narth.com/docs/nodefense.htmlThat study, which I have read, is methodologically flawed because the operational definition of gay that is used includes people who have had only one gay interaction within a twelve-month period, regardless of whether they have any kind of gay relationship.
And here is the actual citation: Mathy, R.M., Cochran, S.D., Olsen, J. and Mays, V.M. (2009). The association between relationship markers of sexual orientation and suicide: Denmark, 1990-2001. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
Excerpt:
It looks fair the way they coded a heterosexual relationship versus a homosexual relationship."Because only same-sex partners are eligible for partnership status in Denmark, we recoded marital status into one of three categories: (1) current or past married status reflecting indirect evidence of a heterosexual sexual orientation (married, divorced, widowed), (2) current or past RDP status reflecting indirect evidence of a homosexual sexual orientation (registered partner, dissolved partner, surviving partner), and (3) never married, which provided no information, direct or otherwise, as to possible sexual orientation.
meltzerboy
New member
No, rather because the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s started as a Black movement for freedom and equal rights. Other races, as well as women and gays, were not quite on the radar screen yet.Because interracial marriage is only of concern to blacks and not every single other race?
L
LovePatience
Guest
Interracial marriage did not start with the civil rights movement. The first case to overrule bans on interracial marriage was Perez v. Sharp in 1948 for the Supreme Court of California and brought by the Catholic Church on grounds of religious freedom. This case served as precedent for the Loving vs. Virginia case.No, rather because the Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s started as a Black movement for freedom and equal rights. Other races, as well as women and gays, were not quite on the radar screen yet.
It is not that other groups were not on the radar screen. They were on the screen long before. Same sex orientation has existed prior to the time of Christ. In fact, if you look in the bible at St. Paul’s condemnation of same gender sex, he was criticizing Ancient Greece where pedastery was practiced and considered noble among the upper classes. It is that they saw the success of the Civil Rights movement and modeled their organizations and tailored their strategies to copy the Civil Rights movement. NOW was formed as an imitation of the NAACP.
meltzerboy
New member
I mean the other groups were not on the radar screen as liberation movements in the US, with the exception of women’s rights suffragettes, who predated NOW by several decades.Interracial marriage did not start with the civil rights movement. The first case to overrule bans on interracial marriage was Perez v. Sharp in 1948 for the Supreme Court of California and brought by the Catholic Church on grounds of religious freedom. This case served as precedent for the Loving vs. Virginia case.
It is not that other groups were not on the radar screen. They were on the screen long before. Same sex orientation has existed prior to the time of Christ. In fact, if you look in the bible at St. Paul’s condemnation of same gender sex, he was criticizing Ancient Greece where pedastery was practiced and considered noble among the upper classes. It is that they saw the success of the Civil Rights movement and modeled their organizations and tailored their strategies to copy the Civil Rights movement. NOW was formed as an imitation of the NAACP.
L
LovePatience
Guest
They were always on the radar screen as part of the left, but they formed liberation groups in the U.S. in order to capitalize on the success of the civil rights movement. Gender/sex issues and race issues aren’t the same. Gender/sex has been with us since the first human and will require complex answers; you can see that all the Jewish prophets were male as well as all of Christ’s apostles.I mean the other groups were not on the radar screen as liberation movements in the US, with the exception of women’s rights suffragettes, who predated NOW by several decades.
According to wikipedia:
The Gay Liberation Front’s statement of purpose explained:
Code:
"We are a revolutionary group of men and women formed with the realization that complete sexual liberation for all people cannot come about unless existing social institutions are abolished. We reject society's attempt to impose sexual roles and definitions of our nature."It seems there is widespread agreement about the effects of same-sex marriage between the Catholic Church and the Gay Liberation Front. Is it good to abolish social institutions or the nuclear family?
The changing of traditional marriage as a movement has long been part of the far left. For example, the Russian Revolution of 1917 decriminalised homosexuality and recognised same-sex marriage. It was also the first country to legalize abortion. If gay marriage has any substantial relationship with the civil rights struggle, why has it advanced further in Europe where there has been no struggle? And how did it achieve its first victory in 1917
In Europe and America, a broader movement of “free love” was also emerging from the 1860s among first-wave feminists and radicals of the libertarian left. They critiqued Victorian sexual morality and the traditional institutions of family and marriage that were seen to enslave women. Some advocates of free love in the early 20th century, including Russian anarchist and feminist Emma Goldman, also spoke in defence of same-sex love and challenged repressive legislation.
From the anarchistic Gay Liberation Movement of the early 1970s arose a more reformist and single-issue “Gay Rights Movement”, which portrayed gays and lesbians as a minority group and used the language of civil rights — in many respects continuing the work of the homophile period.[21] In Berlin, for example, the radical Homosexuelle Aktion Westberlin was eclipsed by the Allgemeine Homosexuelle Arbeitsgemeinschaft.[22]
“Gay and lesbian rights advocates argued that one’s sexual orientation does not reflect on one’s gender; that is, “you can be a man and desire a man… without any implications for your gender identity as a man,” and the same is true if you are a woman.[23] Gays and lesbians were presented as identical to heterosexuals in all ways but private sexual practices, and butch “bar dykes” and flamboyant “street queens” were seen as negative stereotypes of lesbians and gays. Veteran activists such as Sylvia Rivera and Beth Elliot were sidelined or expelled because they were transgender.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_social_movements
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
And there are some here who claim that the gay rights people don’t have an agenda.They were always on the radar screen as part of the left, but they formed liberation groups in the U.S. in order to capitalize on the success of the civil rights movement. Gender/sex issues and race issues aren’t the same. Gender/sex has been with us since the first human and will require complex answers; you can see that all the Jewish prophets were male as well as all of Christ’s apostles.
According to wikipedia:
The Gay Liberation Front’s statement of purpose explained:
GLF activist Martha Shelley wrote, “We are women and men who, from the time of our earliest memories, have been in revolt against the sex-role structure and nuclear family structure.”Code:"We are a revolutionary group of men and women formed with the realization that complete sexual liberation for all people cannot come about unless existing social institutions are abolished. We reject society's attempt to impose sexual roles and definitions of our nature."
It seems there is widespread agreement about the effects of same-sex marriage between the Catholic Church and the Gay Liberation Front. Is it good to abolish social institutions or the nuclear family?
The changing of traditional marriage as a movement has long been part of the far left. For example, the Russian Revolution of 1917 decriminalised homosexuality and recognised same-sex marriage. It was also the first country to legalize abortion. If gay marriage has any substantial relationship with the civil rights struggle, why has it advanced further in Europe where there has been no struggle? And how did it achieve its first victory in 1917
In Europe and America, a broader movement of “free love” was also emerging from the 1860s among first-wave feminists and radicals of the libertarian left. They critiqued Victorian sexual morality and the traditional institutions of family and marriage that were seen to enslave women. Some advocates of free love in the early 20th century, including Russian anarchist and feminist Emma Goldman, also spoke in defence of same-sex love and challenged repressive legislation.
From the anarchistic Gay Liberation Movement of the early 1970s arose a more reformist and single-issue “Gay Rights Movement”, which portrayed gays and lesbians as a minority group and used the language of civil rights — in many respects continuing the work of the homophile period.[21] In Berlin, for example, the radical Homosexuelle Aktion Westberlin was eclipsed by the Allgemeine Homosexuelle Arbeitsgemeinschaft.[22]
“Gay and lesbian rights advocates argued that one’s sexual orientation does not reflect on one’s gender; that is, “you can be a man and desire a man… without any implications for your gender identity as a man,” and the same is true if you are a woman.[23] Gays and lesbians were presented as identical to heterosexuals in all ways but private sexual practices, and butch “bar dykes” and flamboyant “street queens” were seen as negative stereotypes of lesbians and gays. Veteran activists such as Sylvia Rivera and Beth Elliot were sidelined or expelled because they were transgender.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_social_movements
Gay Liberation? Seriously? Gay people are repressed, subjugated, and enslaved?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.