[winwun]

Since Tamara suggested, and rightly so, that the conversation be veered back toward the topic on the "Pink Pistols" post, and further, feeling that there was more to be discussed on the issue, I read the specs under L & P and saw that the topic should be more logically and hopefully, permissively, here.

The point was suggested that homosexuality was akin to being left-handed in that it is congenital and there is little one can do about it, and to try would engender frustration and unhappiness.

In certain situations, I agree.

However, I also feel that there are certain instances of the life style being one of choice rather than predisposition. (unless you're Methodist)

I can imagine no worse horror than to be a woman locked in the body of a man and not be able to live your life as your instincts and genes tell you to.

Even following your instincts, your morphological configuration would greatly contribute, even in free will, to frustration.

I am a man, normal, I suppose (gotta get another gun!) but when I see another man exhibiting innate and inborn female characteristics, yet obviously with the "wrong plumbing", my heart and sympathies go out to this person, for there, but for the grace of God, . . . .

Having said all this, I must add that a man who exhibits all the characteristics of maleness and macho-ism opts for the gay lifestyle, then I have a severe problem with this guy.

Definitions are another area in which everyone isn't singing out of the same book.

I would say that a person who is desirous of vestibular access for the sexual act is being in the female mode, whereas he who exhibits prominence is playing the male role, and should not be classified as being of the "homosexual community".

Such a gray area. So much we don't know. Ignorance breeds confusion and often hostility.

Education ? there are those who would suggest, "I don't want to know anything about it ! It's wrong ! I hate it !"

[Thumper]

I would say that a person who is desirous of vestibular access for the sexual act is being in the female mode, whereas he who exhibits prominence is playing the male role, and should not be classified as being of the "homosexual community".

Are you saying that you don't consider the guy "driving" to be gay?

Sounds strange to me.

Guessing this one catches a lockdown pretty quickly.

[whoami]

The point was suggested that homosexuality was akin to being left-handed in that it is congenital and there is little one can do about it, and to try would engender frustration and unhappiness.

In certain situations, I agree.

However, I also feel that there are certain instances of the life style being one of choice rather than predisposition. (unless you're Methodist)

I've had debates on this subject with many people. My own opinion is that it is not an issue of genetics or heredity, but a lifestyle choice. The reason I hold this belief generally boils down to one point: Were it to be proven that there exists some genetic sequence, or combination, such that it would predispose or result in a child being 'born homosexual', it gives even greater ammunition to those who would seek to persecute them. More proof, they would say, that homosexuality is a genetic perversion, and should be wiped away. 'We're working on genetic therapies to deal with such conditions as ALS or Alzheimers, now we can work on one for homosexuality'.

Regardless of my personal opinions, I really would not want to wake up and read something like that in the paper.

Having said all this, I must add that a man who exhibits all the characteristics of maleness and macho-ism opts for the gay lifestyle, then I have a severe problem with this guy.

Now, I have to admit, I don't exactly have many male friends who are gay, but I've generally noted, and thus come to the conclusion, that for every 1 male who expresses an extreme of the spectrum, there are 4 to 5 who are the epitome of the generic male. I can understand how something like that would be disturbing....but I find it far worse when a drop-dead gorgeous female turns out to be lesbian...
:D

Such a gray area. So much we don't know. Ignorance breeds confusion and often hostility.

Education ? there are those who would suggest, "I don't want to know anything about it ! It's wrong ! I hate it !"

Sadly, the best way I've seen to 'educate' someone is very similar to the best way of educating an anti....only more dangerous. When people see that someone around them, be it a close friend, or respected colleague, happens to be a homosexual, oftentimes it starts the gears grinding....they reconcile the regard they have of the person with the dislike for their lifestyle, and begin to see the simple truth......they're just people. Like everyone else....who live their lives, pay their taxes, gripe about work, mow their lawn. It's very easy for them to say 'I hate them!', when it is just a nebulous entity summed up by a simple word.....it becomes much more real when they realize they're saying 'I hate Jenny from accounting', or 'I hate Fred from the softball league', or 'I hate my couse Bill'. Most of the time they realize what they're saying. Sadly, some still don't.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I completely disagree with the lifestyle. That will not change. I also believe that that is about where my rights end on the subject, and I know better than to judge someone on that criteria alone.

[Jim March]

All I know for certain is the following two facts:

1) I don't have the right to judge.

2) When you put a gay/lesbian/bisexual or (above all!) transexual gunnie in the same room as a flaming Liberal grabber, said Liberal grabber goes through a process of "mental meltdown" that is simply beyond hilarious. It's politically useful, yes, BIGTIME, but if for no other reason than to see Liberals visibly short-circuit:

GO PINK PISTOLS!

:neener:

(Y'all missed a REAL seriously funny such encounter before the Calif Assembly Public Safety Committee on the 8th of April. Oh dear God...all that was missing was the popcorn :).)

[buzz_knox]

I can imagine no worse horror than to be a woman locked in the body of a man and not be able to live your life as your instincts and genes tell you to.

I was going to stay out of this but this particular sentence got me. To the extent we have instincts, they are embedded in our genes, the very things which give us the bodies we have. If you are born male or female, then your instincts and genes will tell you to be male or female, unless you've got some serious genetic damage going on.

The "gender identity crisis" is cultural, where a person's preferences conflict with what culture dictates a particular gender should be, it's not genetic. Calling it genetic was one of the liberal ways of making it mainstream.

[winwun]

Whoami, and Buzz, are you serious that you've never seen a male that exhibited obvious (rounded figure, soft voice, breasts, etc) female characteristics ?

The opposite is also very prevalent, ie, the masculine acting and dressing "female".

I would suggest that obvious genetic predisposition toward either (opposite) gender would make the general public MORE sympathetic toward the individual because it would be obvious that he/she was "born that way" and it is not a "choice".

I believe that a person is a better human being and is more capable of manifesting those characteristics that are generally considered "ennobling" if there is a sprinkling of the opposing gender within them.

Pure male without a bit of female "sensitivity" is nothing more than a mailed fist, and conversely a woman with no indication of the common male characteristics of assertiveness and artistic ingenuity is little more than a simpering toy.

[wingman]

I don't have the right to judge.


Not to flame the person who posted the
above, however I believe this "may"
be some of the fault/cause of problems
we now have in our new society.

[Thumper]

Winwun...see my question above. Did I misunderstand your intent?

[winwun]

Why of course you have the right, Wingman, and I might suggest, the DUTY to judge when it affects you personally.

The old shower room scene that has been hashed and rehashed many times is proof of your "right" to judge.

To have someone eyeing you with sexual lust and without your knowledge is the equivalent of a "peeping tom".

That you aren't aware of it matters little.

To have someone "hit" on you to your discomfort and be forced into the position of being able to do little about it for fear of social displeasure is equally reprehensible.

Thumper, I say again that different persons have different definitions and if we aren't all singing out of the same book, the song sounds strange.

What was that you said about a lockdown? I didn't understand that.

[dustind]

I should say something because I have had many activly bisexual friends, both male and female. Many people say it is a choice, and some say they were born that way. I am guessing you probably have some people who are "a woman trapped in a man's body", or vise versa(sp), but that is not the majority.

It would be nice if everyone was equal under the law, and could leave everyone else the heck alone. Sadly I doubt that will happen as long as so many want to see them bar coded and marched off to concentration camps.

[buzz_knox]

Whoami, and Buzz, are you serious that you've never seen a male that exhibited obvious (rounded figure, soft voice, breasts, etc) female characteristics ?

You are using those superficial characteristics as the basis for your argument that it's genetic? To put it back on you, are you serious? Have you ruled out: typical and atypical fat deposits, steroid use, habituation to have a soft voice, etc? You didn't even consider them, did you? Further, even to the extent those are genetically based characteristics, are you seriously arguing that minor physical differences justify a claim that a person is "gender switched"?

[MrAcheson]

A friend of mine's father used to be a practicing homosexual. He is now a sex therapist and councelor in the Baltimore area.

He would disagree that homosexuality is genetic and unchangable. He's a follower of the psychological causation school of thought. He works with lots of gay men and lesbians and sees the same topics come up over and over again. In men, its a lack of a father figure (which is his background). In women, its abuse of either their mothers or themselves by a man. I don't have statistics on this, but many homosexuals have these in their backgrounds. I don't think thats a coincidence.

Also I think as a whole the christian right tends to put homosexuality too high on their agenda. For instance I think homosexuality is far less important than the general destruction of straight sexual morals that has been going on since the 60s. When you look at the rampant illegitimacy rates in some sectors of US society, the two issues don't really compare.

Thats said I think Pink Pistols are great. Homosexuals and racial minorities are probably the two most important groups who need to be able to defend themselves. I would shoot with them any day.

[winwun]

Barcoding ? Dustind you are a voice from the wilderness ! !

What a fantastic idea, a barcode imbedded in everyone's forehead and everyone having a small remote portable scanner to read anyone's barcode from 50 feet away.

You could contact the Dahmers of the world if you wanted some "fake I.D.".

Buzz, major gender indicators are "minor physical differences" ? ?

[buzz_knox]

He was not proposing barcoding, he was stating that some want homosexuals exterminated.

[XLMiguel]

I don't know that many gay people well enough to have explored the topic in great depth, but the few I do know well say they've been queer (i.e. not 'straight') since birth. They have never had any interest in the opposite sex. For all, it was a confusing, frustrating, painful process untill they were old enough and mature enough to figure it out and come to peace with themselves.

As far as 'choice of lifestyle' goes, the general response has been consistent- 'Why would I choose a 'lifestyle' that vitually guarantees, fear, prejudice, ostracism, discrimination, and sometimes physical violence. It is NOT a choice, it IS what I am . . . ' It's in the blood.

All the gays I know are responsible, productive members of society, better educated than average, mostly affluent, many are church-goers. A few are annoying (I don't care for their politics or personalities), but they are otherwise responsible, productive members of society (and your politics and personality are your business, I don't have to socialize with you if I don't want to). A couple are my neighbors, and they are good neighbors.

As long as they are responsible, productive members of society, what they do on their own time, in private, is none of my business.

[winwun]

Buzz, I am aware of what Dustind was proposing.

I am often of the opinion that a ridiculous assumption can best be deflected and neutralized by a copious dose of irony and , 'ala Leacock, hyperbole.

[buzz_knox]

Buzz, major gender indicators are "minor physical differences" ? ?

You think voice and body shape are "major gender indicators"? Funny, I thought genetic coding (i.e. XX or XY) and genitalia were the keys.

All right, all you High Road males with relatively soft voices, rounded body shapes, and breasts (you know who you are). You are actually females trapped in the body of men!

All you High Road females with husky voices, you're actually guys!

[Preacherman]

WAY OT for THR. Closed.