Homophobia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

There is no need to close this thread at all. It's generally been extremely civilised and very interesting.

---

...and as long as it stays that way none will close it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

"Very serious" is not fact, it's a subjective qualification - your own interpretation. "Mishap" is also arguable, don't you think?
Clearly you feel no bigotry towards gay people. Your intentions are good and you don't need to keep repeating how much you love and respect your gay family member. Nobody is asking you to. To be honest I couldn't care less how he may or may not feel when you label him as having a very serious anomaly or pity him for having to endure his mishap, or whether or not you are capable of self-reflection when these terms are questioned.


p.s. Avidly aggressive? Look in the mirror?



p.s. Avidly aggressive? Look in the mirror? http://www.motorsportforums.com/imag...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Spafranco http://www.motorsportforums.com/imag...post-right.png
... sad indication of what society can breed.
The irony is that you are a sad uneducated neanderthal knuckle dragger that is more dangerous to society than the people you so cruelly dislike.




Please give me the post number and the context with which this was written.

I have supplied you with numerous medical opinions, papers and conclusions yet you still want to drag this out and directly at me.

Yesterday morning we(other forum members) had decided that it was best to close off the thread. You do not seem to think so.

Once again, I would appreciate it if you would supply me the post number for the above comment. Context is important.

---

I can't help you with the posts and to be honest have not followed all the thread, but I did see your links to medical reports. Who cares what was thought back in 1973? One link to a paper from 1944? Ever heard of the Tuskegee Airmen? You know around the same time the US Government commissioned a report that concluded 'Negros lack the ability to fight in war', right sure we should swallow that sort of nonsense too because it was in a report.

I treat all reports medical or otherwise with the utmost skepticism, two reason, who commissioned it (and therefore paid for the research and the authors mortgage)? And why?

I find your presentation and standing by of these so called reports rather distasteful to be honest. As I mentioned some of these so called 'experts' fail to even break the link between gender and sexuality in there 'masterpieces' (i.e. think gay men have feminine or male brains doh!) - you need to step back a little and look again with new eyes at what you are presenting in my very humble personal opinion, before calling for the thread to be closed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

What other explanation could there be for the armed forces of our nation only recently allow homosexuals to openly serve?

---

that part of your nation or the armed forces had some sort of collective hang-up when it comes to homosexuality ? :p

openly serve? as opposed to "covert" operations? :laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

Homosexual or Hetrosexual doesn't need to be explained away. Neither is some disease. It's just the way people are and has no bearing on who people are or how they behave.

---

this is what I believe :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

What's such a decision got to do with you — or, indeed, any other forum members other than the moderators?

There is no need to close this thread at all. It's generally been extremely civilised and very interesting.

---

Where is all this aggression coming from? A simple statement. Did you post the same to the person that asked for this to occur? Why was that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donKey jote

this is what I believe :)

---

Please supply me with the post # contained in my previous question to you. Much obliged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

I have supplied you with numerous medical opinions, papers and conclusions ...

---

Except you haven't ! :p

Again, you have not supplied anything to support your (I assume personal, subjective) view of homosexuality as a very serious anomaly or a mishap.

very serious / mishap

very serious / mishap

and one last time:very serious / mishap

Got it ? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Please supply me with the post # contained in my previous question to you. Much obliged.

---

lost the search button? It's hard to tell which of your posts you mean, as you appear to have mangled the quotes :)

... 221 was an example of you being avidly aggressive, no matter what the context was :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprocket

I can't help you with the posts and to be honest have not followed all the thread, but I did see your links to medical reports. Who cares what was thought back in 1973? One link to a paper from 1944? Ever heard of the Tuskegee Airmen? You know around the same time the US Government commissioned a report that concluded 'Negros lack the ability to fight in war', right sure we should swallow that sort of nonsense too because it was in a report.

I treat all reports medical or otherwise with the utmost skepticism, two reason, who commissioned it (and therefore paid for the research and the authors mortgage)? And why?

I find your presentation and standing by of these so called reports rather distasteful to be honest. As I mentioned some of these so called 'experts' fail to even break the link between gender and sexuality in there 'masterpieces' (i.e. think gay men have feminine or male brains doh!) - you need to step back a little and look again with new eyes at what you are presenting in my very humble personal opinion, before calling for the thread to be closed.

---

Another one picking on one individual to make themselves see in unadulterated unison with some of the other forum members.
Tuskegee Airmen? What in all that is rational have these men got to do with the conversation save for the fact that they were courageous individuals?

You mention studies and medical papers as though they were written by a bunch of uneducated morons not capable of a thought. So with your reasoning you have cast the efforts of Pasteur , Fleming, Bernard, Alzheimer and a myriad of others.
So, in your case you deem it as significant that anything believed in prior to your decided time period is of no significance and everything else is within your frame of time is correct. Slippery slope.

Oh, and by the way, the last of the Tuskegee airmen died.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sprocket

I think personally words like condition and abnormality in medical reports are all part of the problem. It is a perfectly natural variation within the whole of society not some form of explainable mishap. This leads to the derogatory 'well it isn't their fault' but still seems to convey some sense of inferiority, as if gay people are somehow not entirely healthy and have some form of medical condition.

There may be some underlying biological factor or 'explanation' or common traits, but it is like writing medical reports on whether or not someone decides to buy a white car instead of red one.

I tend to agree though who actually cares why? It is easier to just accept people have different sexuality as a natural variation within the population and the issues tend to go away. It doesn't matter in the least that gay people happened to be a minority rather than majority, it is still perfectly 'normal' that the variation occurs. Explanations in medical journals by someone trying to make a name for themselves won't change a thing.

I've seen reports that gay men are overly feminine in brain structure and others that say the are overly male - it is just this sort of nonsense that doesn't help at all, the individual is just 'who they are' end of story and they should be allowed to be just that without bigotry. It takes far more balls in life to be who you actually are than conform to some predetermined 'ideal' set by society at the end of the day.

---

My my, now we have someone who comes in and lays semantics. "A perfectly natural variation within society" variation/anomaly?

I reiterate that I am and do not have any issues with people who state they are homosexual. I do object to those who dismiss what was asked for because an article, one of thousands available using the word anomaly. That some of these written in 1944 does not negate what I stated when I said that homosexuality was considered an anomaly.
What you are doing is trying to insert language that you feel comfortable with. Dementia, a symptom of Alzheimer's was never used until it became known as a more serious illness.
Homosexual people suffer enough without you trying to push the reason it occurs under the carpet. People are born male and female for a reason. Reproduction.Why are people attracted to the same sex? That is a serious question.