Do you respect/support?
I have friends that are gay...and some that are bi. I definitely support them. But is it only because they're my friends? Either way I respect everyone...so at the least, respect.
Yup!
i think we all have nothing against it, though if i may ask a different question:
how do you feel of gay's public display of affictions?
i was in this discussion where someone thought it was okay to have gay rights as long as it wasnt out in the open. so what do you think of that thought?
I totally do not support the use of rainbows to mean gay. What the hell? That's more ridiculous than the blue/pink thing!
Mada (sonicsfan): I think its funny that a lot of people end up staring at something that displeases them, and also that a lot of people would think about what would make a "pretty environment" from a very personal perspective when asked a question that might affect other people. Actually, the second part is not so funny.
Veckums: I think the rainbow is supposed to represent choice :0
I totally do not support the use of rainbows to mean gay. What the hell? That's more ridiculous than the blue/pink thing!
Once again it feels strange to see how much I agree with you. Rainbows, being a result of the splitting of white light into the visible spectrum, would make more sense as a symbol of the physics of light and colour than as a symbol of homosexuality.
As for "do you respect/support" that depends on just what exactly relating to homosexuality you're asking if I respect or support. o.o
Are you k with gay? How you feel, man? @ Matthayter
Are you k with gay? How you feel, man? @ Matthayter
If "k with gay" means I accept that some people feel attracted towards the same sex, and that it's not a reason to disrespect them, then yes. Is that all? o.o
Why do people fail to see the metaphorical symbology of the rainbow by turning it strictly into it's literal meaning instead of trying to understand why the symbol might have a second relevent meaning to those who apply it?
Just because the rainbow is essentially light and colour split into a visible spectrum doesn't mean that there can't be an applied underlying metaphorically-based meaning to it as well. there's no reason that people can't apply a meaning to something if they feel that it works for them, and looking at it as only being what it physically is and not as what it represents is missing the point entirely - a symbol is a metaphorical thing, so applying the literal meaning to it makes little sense if the underlying meaning of so-called symbolic idealogy is lost.
Basically, Just because it IS light doesn't mean it has to represent it! 😛
Oh, and being somewhat Bi...I'm just fine with the whole 'spectrum' of the topic...just so there's a relevent point here. XD;
Just because the rainbow is essentially light and colour split into a visible spectrum doesn't mean that there can't be an applied underlying metaphorically-based meaning to it as well. there's no reason that people can't apply a meaning to something if they feel that it works for them, and looking at it as only being what it physically is and not as what it represents is missing the point entirely - a symbol is a metaphorical thing, so applying the literal meaning to it makes little sense if the underlying meaning of so-called symbolic idealogy is lost.
Then it's up to those using the rainbow as a symbol to come up with the metaphorical connection between the rainbow and homosexuality, otherwise the symbol is arbitrary. o.o
It's been established for years - but it's a more common theme for those in the communities involved, and not so much with the outside world...but then again, it's been used as a Gay/Lesbian rights associated logo for such a while now that it's mostly assumed people would already understand it - It's not just something that's suddenly sprung into existance!
Rainbows = Difference is pretty!
Rainbows = Behold! Choice!
Rainbows = You're burning my eyes!
It's been established for years - but it's a more common theme for those in the communities involved, and not so much with the outside world...but then again, it's been used as a Gay/Lesbian rights associated logo for such a while now that it's mostly assumed people would already understand it - It's not just something that's suddenly sprung into existance!
Just because it's been "established" doesn't mean you should go along with it. Of course it didn't just spring into existance, but the question is, where did it come from, and why rainbows in particular?
... I guess that's technically two questions. XD
I honestly can't say I know - I'm not really 'scene' wise on why or how these things came about...I guess it just was decided as an apt representation, but then that's just speculative on my part since I don't represent them overall, I'm just a Bi guy who doesn't care.
As for 'just going along' with something...why does it matter? I doubt it matters at all why people use the rainbow, but it doesn't bother me at all - a symbol can really mean many things to many people, so getting hung up because somebody uses one for something else is a waste of energy, IMO.
As for 'just going along' with something...why does it matter? I doubt it matters at all why people use the rainbow, but it doesn't bother me at all - a symbol can really mean many things to many people, so getting hung up because somebody uses one for something else is a waste of energy, IMO.
Different people using the same symbol to represent different things? Seems like something that could generate a lot of misunderstandings if you ask me. o.o
I swear I heard of a story where one kid got told off for using a rainbow flag without knowing what it meant...
It's true, however - afterall, the 'Nazi' swastika was/is also used to represent something else too - so it's more common than you'd think.
It's true, however - afterall, the 'Nazi' swastika was/is also used to represent something else too - so it's more common than you'd think.
Right, but at this point in time it refers to the Nazis. There's a difference, then, between questioning the association of it with Nazis and using it to "represent" something other than the Nazis.
Depends where/who you are, though - association is a part of individual perception, which is where this all lies!
Mada (sonicsfan): I think its funny that a lot of people end up staring at something that displeases them, and also that a lot of people would think about what would make a "pretty environment" from a very personal perspective when asked a question that might affect other people. Actually, the second part is not so funny.
the funny thing is even if you are straight in some communities and countries its illegal to PDA. so that idea isnt 100% insulting to gays and should be debated more i think.
as for why the rainbow was chosen...every support group has a symbol like the aids support and other in need of support groups .. i forgot most of them but most have that ribbon symbol in different colors. anyway its just to show what group you're supporting and hoping to be recognized world wide. the support starters thought of a symbol and chose the rainbow it has become the official support symbol for gays. makes sense or not thats what it is now.
I assumed that it was used as a symbol because of the stereotype that you have to be androsexual (hetero female or homosexual male) to be artistic, based upon how people such as interior decorators, fashion designers, and such are portrayed by many media, not to mention how they portray lesbians and hetero men.
Why yes, I do have a negative opinion of humanity's cultures, why do you ask?
It's true, however - afterall, the 'Nazi' swastika was/is also used to represent something else too - so it's more common than you'd think.
Right, but at this point in time it refers to the Nazis. There's a difference, then, between questioning the association of it with Nazis and using it to "represent" something other than the Nazis.
No, most people choose to only associate it with Nazis. The symbol is actually special to the Hindu, Buddist, and Jains religions and in the parts of the world where those dominate as the religion of choice, it will be found and not associated with Nazis at all. However, in this part of the world, where those religions are not very well-known or acknowledged (nor are some Native American usages of the symbol or the fact that it was a popular symbol to use until the 1940s in the "West"), the Nazis usage of the symbol reigns supreme with the ideal of "white supremacy" and overall intolerance. It was in part due to the fact that ancient groups of people used the symbol (and it was popular) that the Nazis chose the symbol in the first place. To be fair, I used to be ignorant of most of these things, save for the Hindu and Buddist religions using the swastika from my social studies classes in high school, until I decided to start doing some research after learning about censorship with regard to the Naruto series over the swastika being used. I was curious why seemingly beyond the usual claims of "the US is too sensitive" that there wasn't a big deal over the swastika in Japan. Looking back on it, it was a silly reason to become "educated," but it was informative to me.
Symbols mean whatever you choose to have them mean. Also, due to the fact that we're not always very creative (or perhaps there is a limit to how many different symbols can be made), many symbols have more than one meaning depending on the context. Because search engines are fun, here's http://www.lambda.org/symbols.htm reasoning behind why certain symbols have been used to represent homosexuals/bisexuals/transgenders over the years or the Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_symbols version. Why guess/wonder why certain symbols are used when you can look it up and then decide for yourself whether or not it makes sense (as obviously not all websites are credible and Wikipedia can be editted depending on when you are reading it).
To answer the question of the topic, I respect/support. To answer the other question, I'm not a fan of involved PDAs (that would be full-blown make-out sessions; hugs/kisses are fine and I don't mind those) by anyone. It doesn't matter the gender of the people involved.
Symbols mean whatever you choose to have them mean. Also, due to the fact that we're not always very creative (or perhaps there is a limit to how many different symbols can be made), many symbols have more than one meaning depending on the context. Because search engines are fun, here's http://www.lambda.org/symbols.htm reasoning behind why certain symbols have been used to represent homosexuals/bisexuals/transgenders over the years or the Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_symbols version. Why guess/wonder why certain symbols are used when you can look it up and then decide for yourself whether or not it makes sense (as obviously not all websites are credible and Wikipedia can be editted depending on when you are reading it).
Yeah, the Internet isn't exactly a reliable source of information. And for what it's worth, the "representing diversity" component of Wikipedia's reasoning is rather ironic when you consider that a rainbow is actually the separation of what is otherwise a mixture of colours into its separate colours... in a way the rainbow might be a better metaphor for segregation than for diversity. The per-colour explanation is a bit better though...
As the super skinny, fashion foward male teen I am, I've been hit on by a lot of gay guys my age. I have nothing against men or women who are sexually attracted to their own gender, after all, different strokes for different folks! I fully support whatever preference people have. It only starts to bother me when I'm getting hit on. I'm not attracted to guys at all, and it makes me feel reallly uncomfortable when a dude is flirting with me. :/ And what makes things worse, is that I have terrible lady luck, and I'm always single, D: so I'm often like a walking target.
Have any of you guys ever been hit on by another man/woman?
shibuya you're young dear, i'm sure you will find true love. you'll learn how to charm the ladies some day soon so dont you worry.
"To answer the other question, I'm not a fan of involved PDAs (that would be full-blown make-out sessions; hugs/kisses are fine and I don't mind those) by anyone. It doesn't matter the gender of the people involved"
i'm actually not aiding the full blown make out as you refered to it dear, light kisses and warm hugs is wonderful and hope to see lots of people share those wonderful feelings. but too strong i think should be praivate since kids might see adults doing that. its better not to teach kids adult stuff till they're ready (and i mean that for all types of couples)
As the super skinny, fashion foward male teen I am, I've been hit on by a lot of gay guys my age. I have nothing against men or women who are sexually attracted to their own gender, after all, different strokes for different folks! I fully support whatever preference people have. It only starts to bother me when I'm getting hit on. I'm not attracted to guys at all, and it makes me feel reallly uncomfortable when a dude is flirting with me. :/ And what makes things worse, is that I have terrible lady luck, and I'm always single, D: so I'm often like a walking target.
Have any of you guys ever been hit on by another man/woman?
As a straight guy I don't think I've ever been hit on by guys OR girls, (I could be wrong though) but I could imagine that being hit on by another guy would be extremely awkward. In a less pleasant sense than getting hit on by a girl would be. XD
EDIT: Speaking of the "skinny" part, as a guy who is mildly skinny myself, I'm sort of wondering if that would tend to be more appealing to gay guys than to straight girls or something like that. Would anyone here happen to know about studies comparing what gay guys tend to find attractive in guys to what straight girls tend to find attractive in guys?
Shibuya! D00d! I think i've kinda been hit on by a guy before. He was working at a restaurant and just went off with 21 questions. "What's yo name? Where you from? You got a girlfriend" O.O Why the hell don't girls do that schick?! I am definitely the "always single guy" so I know what you mean about the walking target thing. v_v
As for the what gay guys find attractive in guys and what girls find attractive in guys...I obviously have no clue what girls like in guys[xD], and gay guys...can't say I know that either. *shrugs*
Would anyone here happen to know about studies comparing what gay guys tend to find attractive in guys to what straight girls tend to find attractive in guys?
matt there's no manual on life, there's no science in love. you gotta respect people more. dont try to study them like animals or something. i'm sorry to say but i think your question is mean, how can you group gays into one idea, you even insult girls in your question.
waaaaaaaaaaaaa >_<
matt there's no manual on life, there's no science in love. you gotta respect people more. dont try to study them like animals or something. i'm sorry to say but i think your question is mean, how can you group gays into one idea, you even insult girls in your question.
What do you mean? Science itself is just a tool to figuring it out. It's the underlying biology and psychology that influences love itself, and the study of these things that can be used to improve understanding of them. What would you suggest as an alternative?
Oh, and I'm not "grouping gays into one" here, I'm just talking about comparing straight girls to gay guys in terms of their respective averages, not about treating the averages for these groups like they apply to all members of each group. o.o
No need for studies honey
Those chunky boys be for the straight girls and those skinny boys be for the muscle boys
No need for studies honey
Oh yes there is. How else are you to going to really find out?
Sociological studies are intellectual masterbation, anyway. It's damn arrogance and ignorance to think that a group of people, no matter how diverse can effectively group out the psychological trends of all people. To give an effective assessment on my thinking here, look at the television ratings for all shows. The viewer rating is actually a culmination of 117 million Nielsen viewers, rather than the full demographic of all people watching. That's about 15% of all viewers, and they just multiply the numbers by said 15% and bang, that's the FACTUAL public listing of viewers.
That's just FACT proven, what a person was watching out of a set number of channels.
Then you have the studies which take an even smaller pool of people who are gathered from a limited source, which of course covers only LOCAL culture to where the study is taking place, wether you wish to take that as the city, state or country of the study, it certainly doesn't cover the rich cultural diversity of THE ENTIRE WORLD, which all studies which say "men [blah, blah, blah]" without any note of wether it's men from poor backgrounds, rich backgrounds, what ethnicity they are, wether they are American, British, European, Asian etc etc.
Now, the FULL STUDY probably includes this, but no one outside of those directly creating and recieving the study will know or care, because at the end of the day all that exists of any study is the "cold hard fact" that it proves. All that is reported is not "statistics show that out of a pool of 5,000 San Fransisco males who were asked which trait a male has would be found attractive, 18% found the thighs to be the most enticing" it would be written "San Fransisco study finds gay men attracted to thighs".
This is not only a product of impact advertizing from newspapers, which make BOLD claims and then elaborate. The bold claim, which is stated as a fact (and it is true, if the study found some men were then the study (from San Fransisco) found men (at least, some from the limited pool they researched) are attracted to said feature) will be the first and in many cases only thing that people read, therefore immedietly accepted as a pre-bias fact when reading the details which may slowly deconstruct or rebute the original claim the reader is programmed to agree with.
To cut a long story short.
Paragraph of text posted by respected authortiy proves all opinion based studies are false.*
*False in the way that if even a single opposing view is delivered then there is no fact, as there is no set standard for humanity or psychology and all studies do is highlight a prominent or large trend, rather than an out and out fact on human behavior.
Craig if you wanted to sleep with me all you had to do was ask.
~Toby
Sleep with me a dream in love
Now, the FULL STUDY probably includes this, but no one outside of those directly creating and recieving the study will know or care, because at the end of the day all that exists of any study is the "cold hard fact" that it proves. All that is reported is not "statistics show that out of a pool of 5,000 San Fransisco males who were asked which trait a male has would be found attractive, 18% found the thighs to be the most enticing" it would be written "San Fransisco study finds gay men attracted to thighs".
That's because the media are run by idiots and the largest audience is bigger idiots. Sociological studies can be extremely informative if the audience understands what they mean rather than jumping to ridiculous conclusions.
It's the reason why some dismiss studies into health because 'they're always saying different things.' They take those reports to wild places and then find that one of their wild places contradicts another.
@Shibuya & HyperSonic: in most cases it's a lot more awkward for a gay guy to flirt with another guy and then realize he's straight, than it is for a straight guy to be flirted with. chalk it up a plus that someone finds you attractive enough to flirt with you; there's no real difference between that and a girl you're not interested in being a flirt.
Yea I suppose you're right, Matt. I just...argh! I'll just have to deal with what i'm given. A girl'll come along eventually.
And on the whole what do gay guys find attractive and what do straight girls find attractive in a guy...of course there's no one thing that 100% of the population is going to find attractive. That's ridiculous. But there are trends and there are specific things that drive our sense of attraction. But once again this doesn't apply to everyone. Not even that statement, "it doesn't apply to everyone", applies to everyone. Nor does that statement, stating that the previo-*explodes*
Craig if you wanted to sleep with me all you had to do was ask.
~Toby
Sleep with me a dream in love
<hugs toby while in tears> thank you for brining such wonderful thoughts in my head dear.
"That's because the media are run by idiots and the largest audience is bigger idiots"
true that's the problem most people belive anything they hear if its presented in a good way
Yea I suppose you're right, Matt. I just...argh! I'll just have to deal with what i'm given. A girl'll come along eventually.
And on the whole what do gay guys find attractive and what do straight girls find attractive in a guy...of course there's no one thing that 100% of the population is going to find attractive. That's ridiculous. But there are trends and there are specific things that drive our sense of attraction. But once again this doesn't apply to everyone. Not even that statement, "it doesn't apply to everyone", applies to everyone. Nor does that statement, stating that the previo-*explodes*
Who, me, or MattManic? o.o
As for the studies, I was actually thinking more along the lines of psychology and biology than of sociology, but otherwise, what Vec said. I'm not exactly convinced it's the fault of the people doing the studies that others misinterpret them.
Given I was talking to him and you weren't, I'd say he was addressing me.
Yea sorry, I meant Manic. Should've specified. Heh
OMG! there's two matts?!
i totally didnt notice that, i always read the "matt" bit, without carring to memorize the full username X_X which one is the one that i was talking to in chat and stuff... or was i talking to both of you.............. this is so twilight zone....and why do you both have 7 and numbers in your usernames dont you know that's confusing >_<
OMG! there's two matts?!
i totally didnt notice that, i always read the "matt" bit, without carring to memorize the full username X_X which one is the one that i was talking to in chat and stuff... or was i talking to both of you.............. this is so twilight zone....and why do you both have 7 and numbers in your usernames dont you know that's confusing >_<
Mine's 007 backwards, from when I was just getting into Goldeneye for N64. Ironically I'm not very familiar with the James Bond series otherwise, aside from a couple other Bond games I played a bit of and a couple of Bond movies I watched inattentively. Can't speak for MattManic though.
As for chatting, I'm the one who's in chat every now and then, usually every couple days or so, if that's what you mean, so I'm probably the one you're referring to. o.o
EDIT: Another thing, I think I remember being taught in introductory psychology, (I think it's in my textbook too) that about 3 to 4 percent of males and 1 to 2 percent of females are primarily homosexual. So assuming no major gender imbalance, this would imply that the ratio of straight girls to gay guys is somewhere between 24.5 and 33; so if a guy is more likely to be the target of flirting from gay guys (a much smaller group of people) than from straight girls (a much larger group of people) then would this suggest that gay guys are, on average, much more likely to find said guy attractive than straight girls are?
Hahaha, you know, its interesting how a thread that started out as a discussion of where you stand on the entire "gay/not gay" debate became a place where things like "what a rainbow means" and "the falsity/validity of all scientific studies" were discussed. In fact, at the moment, I believe I'm opening up another off-topic discussion about the off-topic-ness of this topic. (Although, these are all very interesting topics that are very debatable, so please know that I am not complaining about this debate. In fact, I am going to respond to said sub-debates as I of course wasnt around when they were first discussed.)
But anyways, where do I stand on said discussed topics?
Well, on symbols, I believe that if it's a symbol your unfamiliar with and could represent multiple things, one of which may seem offensive in the context, (like the rainbow situation here) then it's best not to argue as Veckums did. Instead, question the meaning of the symbol instead of harshly argue against it. A "What's the rainbow for? I mean, it sort of seems to me like something representing feminine stereotypes which seems innappropriate for the topic at hand." would've worked in contrast of kind of lashing out, assuming it means something it may not have been intended to mean. Yes, I realize this discussion has come and gone, but since I wasnt here to chime in with my opinion I thought it wouldn't hurt to maybe just put it out there. Argue with my opinion, if you'd like.
And on scientific observations, I must say that I pretty much agree with everything that has been argued about it. What I'm going to say is basically that I believe all that must be done is for the reader of these scientific observations to realize that this is of course a generalization, and it wont mean that, for example, "all homosexuals are attracted to nice thighs". They simply need to know it's just a majority, and even so just the majority of (for example) said homosexuals in whatever area, however small or large, the study was conducted in. Although, I must say, those who publish such study's results and observations could very well do a better job of clarifying this, because those who are not the smartest may in fact take the results as meaning that all homosexuals are in fact attracted to nice thighs.
Finally, as for the topic at hand, the gay discussion, well, I have nothing against gay people. It is kind of odd when, for example, I'm at a bar, and these two guys are making out and just really going at it. Those situations are uncomfortable, and yes, I do find it more uncomfortable than having the same situation happen with a heterosexual couple. Those kinds of things can widely be considered a turn-on, even, whereas this is strictly not the case with a homosexual PDA.
There. Now you know where I stand, so go ahead and blow my argument out of the water or something like that.
I'll make an effort to stay on topic;
I completely support the homosexual community, given a few members of my family, and friends as well, are openly gay. To me, it's never been an issue. It might be ignorant of me to say this myself, but I've found that many people I've encountered (most, but not all) who disapprove of homosexuality are simply ignorant to the entire topic.'
I don't want to get too deep into this, but I believe your sexual preference is genetic, and not a choice. It's strange that my stance is pro-gay, considering I was raised in a Christian family/community, but beliefs are beliefs, and looking down on someone for their sexual preference is supplemental, wrong, and ignorant.
It's strange that my stance is pro-gay, considering I was raised in a Christian family/community, but beliefs are beliefs, and looking down on someone for their sexual preference is supplemental, wrong, and ignorant.
some people might miss how big of an effort you put, but to support gay rights when you're a follower of a faith is not an easy task at all. i should know i'm like that too. and that's really the problem religion is against gays even if some try to update its teachings, not all religions will agree to that. and most of the world's people are religious. and in most cases supporting gays gets you in just as much trouble as being openly gay in most societies around the world.
but to support gay rights when you're a follower of a faith is not an
easy task at all.
Now, I never said I was a follower of faith. That's an entirely different argument all it's own. I do agree with you, however, that supporting gays in an entire battle in itself, but I wouldn't compare it to the struggle of being openly gay.
Sonicsfan, you say most societies frown upon homosexuality...
Maybe someone should tell Europe that.
I haven't even bothered to look at the other continents, that's just Europe alone.
bunanigans dear i'm not talking about america or europe even but most of the world does not tolerate homosexuality some even have laws that hurt them and hurt their supporters. its wonderful to speak your mind and live in a world where you have freedom of speech but the rest of the world doesnt.
women in most of the world still struggle for their rights even the simple rights. homosexuals havent got a prayer in the 3rd world.
Again, you're overgeneralising.
Sorry if this breaks the tables...
Awful lot of blue there for a world where most cultures hate homosexuality don't you think? Many do not recognise it and some indeed prosecute it but it's by no means most. It only seems to be parts of Africa and the middle east (and a couple more in asia) where it's illegal. Use "many", it's much more appropriate for the context.
And now you're saying women in most of the world struggle for rights too OH GEEZ.
Oh man why is the USA the only one that signed then did nothing about it i seriously thought they'd sorted that out years ago it's like they're allergic to treaties.
Aside from that, I'm unaware of any country that would prosecute someone who's open about not being homophobic.
