Parents Protest Gay Fairytale for 2nd Graders...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Apr 21 2006, 02:59 PM) [snapback]243269[/snapback]</div>

My impression is that you're right. Of course, it's still not nearly as socially acceptable as being straight, but it seems like society has something against gay men more than gay women. This is something that I don't really understand, but I wonder if it has to do with the fact that we're living in a male-dominated society. Maybe the idea of being romantically attracted to a woman is more acceptable since it's something that straight men can understand?

 

I haven't posted much since yesterday afternoon... I wanted to say more on a few different topics I saw up in the replies...

1. The Litany of Sins

Any Internet or smoky bar room discussion of homosexuality doesn't get very far before someone brings up child molestation, rape, murder, or any number of sins to try and make a point that just because something is "wanted" doesn't mean society should tolerate it. Well, duh. Can you spot the common thread among all of those behaviors? None of them involve mutual consent among adults.

If two adults wish to form a stable long-term relationship, what is the harm? (Two points for the first person to use the word "Sanctity".)

And no, I do not believe that being gay is some kind of "justifiable sin". Being gay just is... to me, the notion of "sin" is about how we treat others.

2. Choice / Recruiting

The overwhelming majority of gay people that I know were not "recruited" into a "lifestyle". They were not heterosexual or indifferent and then suddenly approached by an elder homo and converted to being gay. And, yes, I have discussed this with many people in a serious setting, as part of a campus support group at the college I attended.

There are exceptions in all human experiences, to be sure, but most gay people I know came to identify as gay through a process of self-realization, most before every having and sex with a member of the same gender.

Most straight people do not need to go through this process of self-realization because the default expectation of society is that a person is straight. That's fine... we are not trying to change this default assumption, we are just trying to establish equal rights and a bit of understanding for those that do not fit into this default.

For me personally, I was not raised with exposure to a lot of gay people, I was active in my church and for the longest time held to that default assumption that I was straight (why wouldn't I be?) in spite of the desires of my mind and body that awakened as I grew older. Around the time I was 16, I came to the realization that maybe, possibly, being "gay" was a possible explanation as to how I was feeling (and had been feeling for years.)

However, given the largely anti-gay sentiments of the time (it was the mid-80's) and the hysteria about AIDS, I did not make any contact with other gay people until some time later, and I did not explore actual sex with another person until I was over 18 and absolutely sure about my feelings. I was not recruited, I just was. In fact, I had heard the right-wing stories about "recruitment" and was actually on the lookout to see if people were sending me these signals or invitations or whatever. Didn't happen, never was approached.

Ironically, now that I'm out, several of the adults that I knew when I was a teen and still know today turned out also to be gay. They claim they always could tell about me (gaydar and all). I asked why they didn't say anything to me, especially when I was echoing homophobic slurs in my high school days, and they said that they just expected that if I was, I would figure it out someday like most gay people do. (Incidentally, in case your dirty minds are wondering, no... I've never had sexual contact with any of these people. Ewww. Could _you_ have sexual contact with someone today who was an adult when you knew them as a kid? Ewww.)

3. "Ex-Gays"

There are a number of conservative Christian ministries set up to ostensibly help those who wish to not "be" a homosexual. Most of these ministries admit they are about changing patterns of behavior and helping people to deal with desire, but that the underlying desire for members of the same gender does not actually go away. They base their view on the idea that "gay" is a behavior rather than an orientation.

There are no studies that show that any of these groups have significant long-term "success". In fact, there have been some very notable and spectacular failures. The two original men who founded Exodus International, one of the largest groups, have since become husbands and have renounced the group. The guy who was in charge of Love in Action a few years ago was recognized (and eventually admitted to being) in a gay bar in DC.

There are many ex, ex-gays who have left these programs and have gone on to live normal, healthy "gay lifestyles".

4. Risk

Some critics of gay people state that gay behavior is inherently risky and therefore should be discouraged. It is more accurate to say that _some_ behavior (such as unprotected anal intercourse) is risky, but not all behavior is high risk (mutual masturbation is virtually risk-free, oral sex is low risk for HIV, etc.) To stereotype all gay people as performing the same set of behaviors is disingenuous.

Nevertheless, it is true that in Western industrialized nations, HIV infection is disproportionately higher among gay people than straight people. But, world wide, HIV infection is overwhelmingly heterosexual. The key to reducing HIV infection has been proven in study after study to be education and incorporating risk reduction into behavior (wearing a condom, getting tested regularly, limiting number of partners, etc.)

If you are a gay person who has anal intercourse with multiple partners in the long term, you are at a greater risk of HIV infection (and other STDs) than a heterosexual person engaged in the same behaviors, but not a hugely greater risk. The risk factors have nothing to do with orientation but with behavior and protection and early infection rates.

It is funny to me, however, that gay people receive the brunt of criticism (and a very broad-brushed, heavily stereotyped criticism at that) about risky behavior, when other high-risk activities are viewed with less disdain: Race car driving, skiing, recreational mountain climbing, recreational deep sea diving, etc. All of these activities are risky and done primarily for pleasure. We are about to add recreational space voyages to the list of human activities. Very risky (but cool).

This will soon raise the very important question: Is gay sex in zero gravity more sinful than straight sex in zero gravity? (Answer: Only if you're doing it right.)

5. How much is a significant percentage?

Some seem to wonder if 3% or 5% or 10% is a significant enough percentage of the population that the issue should even come up at all in school. In sociology, anything over 1% in a population is extremely significant. Far fewer than 1% of kids will ever grow up to be policemen or firemen, so why should these options be included in "career day" activities? If just 5% of vehicle drivers drove a hybrid with the fuel savings of a Prius, there would be an actual measurable effect on oil consumption.

My threshold: If something is common enough in the population that the kids will be talking about it at school on their own, it should be addressed somewhere, at least briefly, in the curriculum. I have already demonstrated using real US Census data that same-sex couples WITH KIDS are in at least 96% of all US counties. Kids at those schools will be talking about the kid with two mommies or two daddies, with or without input from teachers.

6. Gay Cars

"The Prius is not a gay car".

Is too.

Longer version: The Prius is a statistically insignificant minority, frequently misunderstood, even hated, by other drivers, and constantly misrepresented in the press with pseudo-science and bad reporting. Just like gay people are. I know, it's a stretch and seems silly, but my point is this: If you've ever become aghast and frustrated with misunderstanding from people who don't like your car, and dumb laws being passed which would only harm the acceptance of your car, now try and imagine being gay and having to deal with similar attitudes every day about your very life and relationships.

7. Gay hookers in the white house.

Just had to bring it up. Only fair.

- Bob R.

 

bobr1:

I'll ask you this, since you're so candid and objective in describing your insights.

Is it an accurate generalization to say that gay males reach a heightened awareness that they're gay when they reach puberty? In other words, before puberty is it more a "vague awareness" that you're "different" and/or a vague attraction to other males; then puberty kicks in and the same-sex attraction is "kick-started"?

Or (the only plausible alternative I can think of) is it perhaps more the case that the same-sex attraction occurs more independently of puberty, most likely in response to a PARTICULAR other male?

I'm a gay-supporting hetero and do not mean to dwell on the purely sexual aspects of gayness. Objectively, it is a fascinating sociological phenomenon to me. Like many curious people, I at times tried to imagine myself as gay (as I also have tried to imagine myself as a female, giving birth, being considered as an "object of attractiveness", etc.)

I'm also curious about attitudes and perceptions gay males have about girls/women. Are those attitudes/perceptions scattered all over the map, in your experience?

BTW, you're an exemplary writer.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ghostofjk @ Apr 21 2006, 05:20 PM) [snapback]243344[/snapback]</div>

I second that. You do a really nice job of mixing humor in with the serious issues. The "gay sex in zero-G" comment made me laugh out loud; something that I very rarely do when reading things online.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ghostofjk @ Apr 21 2006, 02:20 PM) [snapback]243344[/snapback]</div>

I think in most cases it is as you describe in the first case, however the realization may be triggered by the first strong attraction to a particular person. It is the same for gay people as straight people in this regard: Straight men are not attracted to _all_ women and would find some women very attractive, some moderately attractive, and some unattractive. What makes their orientation heterosexual is the fact that nearly all of the people these males actually are drawn toward sexually are female.

I knew one straight guy in college who one might say demonstrated stereotypical gay behavior... he was a tad effeminate, involved in theatre, concerned about his hairstyle and fashion, etc. He even wondered aloud if maybe he might somehow be gay or at least bi, even though he had never engaged sexually with a partner of the same gender, because he seemed to fit the stereotype. I asked him to reflect for awhile and use my patented "Are you a breeder or a fag?" test:

The Test: You are walking to class on campus on a beautiful spring day. Someone comes jogging or biking past you in tight spandex and you suddenly lose complete track of where you were going, your heart rate quickens, and you turn your head to catch a further glance at this person, and become sexually aroused or engage in a bit of a fantasy in your head... We've all had some kind of experience like this, especially as young adults. Now, reviewing those kinds of past experiences in your mind, were the people that caught your gaze and distracted you A) male, B) female, or C) some mixture of both? The answer to that question is likely a glimpse at your orientation.

In the case of my college acquaintance, after talking about it quite a bit, we came to the conclusion that he was heterosexual. His confusion came from the fact that he was not repulsed by the idea of two men together, but that did not mean that he was gay.

Sigh, another prime "recruitment" opportunity missed... I suppose they'll have to revoke my gay card now.

Scattered all over the map. But then in the Oregon towns in which I've lived (Portland and Corvallis), gay men and women are relatively integrated. In some areas that I have visited where the gay male population is more segregated, I detected more misogyny in some people.

My husband's mom is a dyke, so don't count my perceptions in this area as common.

Thank you!

- Bob R.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bobr1 @ Apr 21 2006, 12:53 PM) [snapback]243300[/snapback]</div>

Bob,

Would you agree that some gay individuals, who feel pressured to act and appear as heterosexuals and are also possibly in denial of their sexuality due to family, church and some other societal influences, are more comfortable identifying themselves as being gay only after being exposed to positive gay role models?

Perhaps that is what the anti gay activists mean when they use the term recruitment in this debate.

 

Ooh, a rhyme! This is fun!

'Twas wasting time online today,
Blogging forth on topics gay,
When SirGreen did opine
that Perverts aren't Divine...
But you can't pray the gay away.

http://www.exgaywatch.com/

(Yes, I know there's too many syllables in the last line...)

- Bob R.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Apr 21 2006, 03:06 PM) [snapback]243370[/snapback]</div>

I would agree that exposure to positive gay role models makes it easier for people to think about their sexuality and possibly come out.

I would not agree that anti-gay activists only mean this when they use the term "recruit". I've seen it used too often in the context of sexual activity, even in the context of molestation.

Plus, I don't think you'll ever see an anti-gay crusader ever refer to "positive gay role models"... kind-of defeats the point of their argument.

- Bob R.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bobr1 @ Apr 21 2006, 03:47 PM) [snapback]243391[/snapback]</div>

You may have misunderstood me. I agree with you that an anti gay crusader is unlikely to ever consider any openly gay person as a positive role model.

I meant positive role model for the person who is afraid to come to terms with his or her own sexuality due to family, church and other narrow minded community influences. Becoming aware that there are well adjusted and content gay individuals, couples and families probably makes it easier for that isolated individual to start living as his or her true self.

This whole thread started with a "discussion" of a book about a kid with two parents of the same sex. The homophobes came out loudly against having such books in public schools. I think the book helps to educate society. The homophobic activists seem to consider it a as recruitment tool.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bobr1 @ Apr 21 2006, 03:01 PM) [snapback]243366[/snapback]</div>

Can't help following up.

In your experience, do gay men generally hold the same standards of male attractiveness---and, for that matter, female, even if not in a "sexual way"---as are held by hetero people in the general culture? Given that some hetero people have quirky or out-of-the-mainstream taste (e.g., small-breasted women by men, very thin men by women), are gay men significantly quirkier?

Finally, my last (for now) question addressing pop stereotypes (which may be "truths"): in your experience, are some/most gay men somewhat/far more interested in (perhaps even "active and capable in") the arts, including language arts, than hetero men? (And I'm not just asking about the stereotypical "effeminate" gay man, although you may consider that apt, too.) How about gay women? Are gay men "ultra-sensitive" or "high-strung" than average? Do you think gays are, on the whole, somewhat/a lot more intelligent than average? I can appreciate if you might be reluctant to answer one or more of these queries (queeries? :lol: )

(The converse of these, of course, would be: is there a noticeable absence of "insensitive", "loutish" gay males?

Thanks.

 

h34r:
edited for clarity and taste.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Apr 20 2006, 07:41 AM) [snapback]242580[/snapback]</div>

What does any of this have to do with the Toyota Prius? There are plenty of other web forums for this crap.

<_<

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Apr 21 2006, 09:30 PM) [snapback]243499[/snapback]</div>

Oh, well I might have suspected that had it been more appropriately named "Fred's House of Nutcakes"

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(flybynightprius @ Apr 21 2006, 11:27 PM) [snapback]243495[/snapback]</div>

flybynightprius & to the others out there that do not like the topics found on FHOP.

If you dont like the posts skip over or ignor them, -_-
if they were not popular topics of debate you wouldnt see 115-236 posted replies.! h34r:

I take it this topic must have hit close to home for you or you wouldnt be whining about it... :blink:

Again If you dont like it skip the topic........ (I know curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back, but only 8 times).. :lol:

P.S. flybynightprius~ your avatar appears to be comitting a lewd act (its all perception)..

 

Did you ever wonder why it is that straight white men don't hold demonstrations, wear rainbow pins, endorse their characters in children's books, in short, fight for their human rights?

No?

That's because they don't have to. Duh!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ghostofjk @ Apr 21 2006, 06:48 PM) [snapback]243464[/snapback]</div>

By and large the same standards of attractiveness apply, and every individual is attracted to different "types" of partners. Not too much different than the straight world. I'd say that gay men (probably because of already dealing with and moving on from fear of expressing their self identity) are more likely to own up to whatever particular "quirk" they look for in a person. Tastes and opinions vary, and in any group you're just as likely to find someone with unusual tastes in a partner as you are to find someone who snickers at the very idea that so-and-so is attracted to such-and-such.

This is an oft-debated question... I don't have the answer, but I think a clue is that the "creative" professions have long been known for being more accepting of people who don't fit into the mainstream, so it is not unexpected that a larger percentage of gay people would choose to enter these professions than other professions. Among my set of gay friends are several cops, military officers (I'm not telling), a boutique retail store clerk, a college teacher, a fraternity president, a materials scientist, a linguist and Christian counselor, a commercial photographer, librarian, several church organists, just one hairstylist, manager of a graphic design company, a few software developers, TV reporter... I'm sure I'm missing a few. There are a few of the "queer eye" professions in there, but just as many "mainstream" professions as well.

As for intelligence, insensitivity, loutishness, etc., well, I've met some colossally stupid gay folk in my time.

Seriously, though, I don't think it can be measured. The coming out process is deeply personal and requires (for many people) a certain level of independence, economic security, self confidence, and self reflection. Thus, if you did IQ tests on the "out" gay community, you might find a higher level of intelligence (or at least income and education) than the general population, but that doesn't mean that you're doing an accurate comparison.

- Bob R.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bobr1 @ Apr 22 2006, 01:41 PM) [snapback]243736[/snapback]</div>

:lol: B)

Thanks for being straight.

I mean...er...ah...