It's the Majority, Stupid
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
> I happened to notice that most folks answered in the poll
> that Baptists oppose Queers the most. In my opinion,
> this is indicative of the sneaky practices the roman
> catholic church undertakes to oppose us all over the
> world. WE DON'T EVEN KNOW THEY ARE DOING IT!
I think you are very astute in pointing out the major role the
Catholic church plays, in gay-bashing worldwide and locally.
> www.rc.net/rcchurch/vatstmts/bishops.gay
(And thanks for the reference to that revealing piece of perverted
doctrine.)
But I also am typing this message, to point out that we may be missing
the real enemies by pointing our fingers only at KKKristian
fundamentalists and other Christian/Catholic types. Example: practice
of atheism is no guarantee of gay friendliness. In fact, I have run
into numerous atheists on Usenet, who profess that homosexuality is
not normal, hence should be suppressed. Take also, the case of the
former USSR and communist China: both atheist nations, yet intensely
persecutory towards gays. Their form of socialism is a religion that
perceives homosexuality as a perverted symptom of "decadent
capitalism". Thus, recently the Chinese government has declared that
there is no such thing as homosexuality in their country.
Homosexuals are universally hated among all religions and
societies...it may indeed be the most common form of prejudice around
the world (with degradation of women running a very close second). So
when you point to fundamentalist groups such as the Southern Baptists,
you are pointing at merely the tip of the iceberg. Granted, they give
fuel to the fire...but why are so many *others-- including
non-Christians and even non-religious types--also anti-gay?
There is no guarantee that even the few small pockets on this planet
that are gay friendly, will always remain so; including the
Netherlands. After all, they remain heterocentered in viewpoint and in
power. In fact, even in these friendly places, gay events and films
and shows, are still regarded as peculiar, not part of the "normal"
mainstream. Gay characters are not incorporated into regular shows on
television, including commercials. In fact, most of this so-called
sexual liberalism goes no further than to exploit the female body.
Sure, you'll see women's breasts exposed on daytime TV...but gay
erotica?
In conclusion (to stop my rambling on, actually), the struggle against
homophobia here in the U.S., is a fight against a much broader base of
people than Christian fundamentalists. In fact, it is a fight against
Amerika...a fight that must be won, if democracy ever wants a chance
to take root in our pathetic country.
Robert Serrano
What excuse does the Christian Coalition have for not being happy? Do
they suck dick, too?
> At
> the very least you wouldn't be hard-wired into the paranoid position
> of perceiving the world as being, "out to get you."
Really? I think the world is out to get me? I must've missed that
meeting.
> The predominate
> mind set and a mental state quite common among homosexuals
> according to the recent thinking in the mental health branch of
> medicine.
Oh really? And I suppose you can back up this little claim with some
actual evidence. Please feel free to post said evidence.
> Life is tough enough for a man when all he does is fuck women...
There's a term for a man who does nothing but fuck women. I believe
it's called Satyriensis (probably misspelled), and it is the male
equivalent of nymphomania. But please, do feel free to elaborate on how
hard it is to have sex with women. It must be a real bitch for you if
you feel the need to complain about it.
> It's
> got to be a real "BITCH" when you're a man and you fuck or get fucked
> by other men!
Nope, it's not in the least bit a bitch. Having sex with other men is
really no more difficult than having sex with women.
> You can't complain though, because you have to dance
> with the one you choose to bring the party...Warts and all!
So do those who date you. Did you have a point?
Rob
Moira de Swardt
Ezekiel J. Krahlin wrote in message <380f7ef5...@news.ifreedom.com>...
>Homosexuals are universally hated among all religions and
>societies...it may indeed be the most common form of prejudice around
>the world (with degradation of women running a very close second).
I disagree. I think the degradation of women is far more widespread and
insidious than discrimination against gays. After all, there are more women
than gays. Christianity proclaims itself to be the most liberal of all
religions in regard to women and we can all see that the Bible is entirely
male dominated, and the Church history and tradition are entirely male
dominated and that current interpretation is only just starting to awaken
from the "Dark Age" of male imposition of superiority over females.
This in no way negates the horror of discrimination against gays. But it
must be clearly understood that it is necessary to fight prejudice against
both women and gays (and people of different racial/ethnic/religious
groups).
Moira de Swardt
Straight, but not narrow.
eric lee williams
Moira de Swardt <moira.d...@global.co.za> wrote in message
news:7uppa9$5jc$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
who accept gays and believe in 'live and let live', like Moira,
and don't constantly insist on spewing their perverted views all
over the world. Those who do generally claim some 'christian'
reason for doing so.
GLBT Poll *** Birthday Card for Matt *** Mike Batey needs you!
http://www.goodnet.com/~ewillia
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
>If you didn't suck dicks I suspect that you would be a lot happier.
I *don't suck dicks. Where did you get that idea? Perhaps if you
weren't so desperate to stuff your filthy nose up my clean ass-crack,
you'd realize that your perception of gay people is rather short
sighted, to say the least.
Do you define hetero men as "pussy lappers"? I was under the
impression that being hetero had much more to do with other things,
than just flesh gratification. Companionship, love, affection,
devotion, partnering, etc. In fact, all those dimensions put sex in a
minor role. And believe me, this is no different than what gays want
out of life.
It is only your slimy dirtball of a brain that causes you to degrade
other human beings who are same-sex attracted. Why not give your brain
a rest, so you can have a healthy crap?
>At the very least you wouldn't be hard-wired into the
>paranoid position of perceiving the world as being,
>"out to get you."
What a sick joke you are! Your own vehemence towards me, as an
outspoken gay, proves the very fact of my claims: that gay-hatred
remains a sickness of the majority populace. You are one of the
sickos. *You are the one who's hard-wired for hatred, you dumb-ass.
But you are also hard wired to remain ignorant, incapable of
understanding and learning, and unable to listen to reason. That is
why it is pointless to try to speak sense to you. I do this, however,
to benefit others who may read this thread, and who are not hard wired
so permanently as you.
>The predominate
>mind set and a mental state quite common among homosexuals
>according to the recent thinking in the mental health branch of
>medicine.
Which of course has turned to the extreme right, like so many groups.
Thus making a sorry joke of medical care.
>Life is tough enough for a man when all he does is fuck women...
And I'm sure that's *all you can do. After all: it takes no brains to
insert rod A into slot B, you breeder pervert. Why don't you quit
fucking for once in your life, and read a good book for a change?
>It's got to be a real "BITCH" when you're a man and
>you fuck or get fucked by other men!
All you are, is a jealous queen having a hissy-fit. Believe me, if I
had my way, you'd be locked up for life, where you wouldn't be a
dangerous and sick influence on children and women.
>You can't complain though, because you have to dance
>with the one you choose to bring the party...Warts and all!
Believe me, I have known some truly handsome men in my life. None of
them had warts or any other blemish. I have even danced with, and
loved, a Vietnam Veteran and Marine--Randolph Louis Taylor-- for eight
wonderful years. He was a war hero, and a gay activist...incredibly
handsome and incredibly brave. And I feel like the luckiest man in the
world, for having known him. Check it out, at:
The Somalian Affair
http://www2.fortunecity.com/village/weaver/76/
>Call 'em like they are.
No you don't. You haven't a clue...and you will die without ever
understanding. Which is the fate you deserve. Die as you live:
ignorant. What a bright day for this world, when you are finally 6
feet under, at home with your soulmates: maggots and worms.
---
Pennsylvania Dutch Gay Jesus says:
"Throw the hetero over the fence some hay."
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
<moira.d...@global.co.za> wrote:
>This in no way negates the horror of discrimination against gays. But it
>must be clearly understood that it is necessary to fight prejudice against
>both women and gays (and people of different racial/ethnic/religious
>groups).
Hi, Moira. I still believe that the hatred against gays is
intrinsically more evil than that against women...only because our
homophobic western societies have been capable of absorbing women's
rights before they are of gay rights. I was not claiming *quantity of
gays vs. *quantity of women. I believe that the depth of hatred
against gays is somewhat deeper than even that against women.
I also believe that, since gays remain several steps behind the rights
of all other minorities, and of women...that gays must do some
catching up, and not feel guilty at all for seeming to show less
fervor for the rights of everyone else. It is a frequent accusation by
heterocentric foes, that gays are selfish, thinking only of their
rights and no one else's. Yet, we never hear these types make the same
claims against any other minority...yet they do not frown on blacks
tending to their own struggles for black rights...likewise for Native
Americans, Asians, and any other minority. It is just another ploy to
psychologically weaken gay people, with undeserved guilt.
While of course, it is correct to claim that all minorities' (and
women's) rights must be won, together. But so often, this has been at
the cost of leaving gay rights behind in the dust...regardless of how
much selfless contributions gay people have given to all others who
suffer.And believe me: gays and lesbians have a proud history of
strongly supporting other oppressed people. Somehow, "together"
usually manages to include everyone *except gay people.
I say: it is time now, for gays to not be intimidated by accusations
that we are selfish...and take care of our own people, and fight for
our own rights, more than we ever have in our entire history. Other
minorities will have to get by without us for a while...seeing as
their support in return has been niggardly, to say the least. (After
all, one would not accuse Jews of being "selfish" when struggling to
resist, or escape, the evil of Nazi degradation. And we gays are in a
very similar situation. In fact, gays are the *most endangered
minority of all, in these right-wing times...seeing as all other
minorities *also despise gays, too. And the Republican platform is
based largely on anti-homosexual diatribe.)
Therefore, I believe that gays should not even blink at the thought of
rolling up our sleeves, and devoting 100% of our energies to fighting
for our *own rights, for a change. We cannot afford to expend our
valuable minds, hearts, and bodies for the cause of other
minorities...most groups which *still spit upon gays, and give us no
support for our own gay rights. In fact, I believe that truly
concerned activists of *any minority, should focus on the gay dilemma,
as the most important one in these times.
For each minority has its own gay population, which is despised by the
majority of each minority. This must end. I do not think it is right
for *anyone at this time in history, to suggest that *any gay person
ought to fight for some *other minority. Indeed, just the reverse
should be the case...that is, *if any minority is sincere about
including the rights of gays, when they make claims to fight for *all
people's rights.
Often--way too often-- when a person says: "We must fight for the
rights of everyone"...it is used as an excuse to exclude gays, in this
definition of "everyone". How many liberal, progressive groups fight
so hard for all sorts of minorities...except gays! (Lip service at
best.)
Be that as it may, I do think the next social revolution will be
worldwide, and will be led mainly by women's rights and gay rights
activists and their supporters.
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
<rj...@csufresno.edu> wrote:
>So do those who date you. Did you have a point?
Oh, he has a point alright: it's at the top of his head.
Moira de Swardt
Ezekiel J. Krahlin wrote in message <38119618...@news.ifreedom.com>...
>
>Hi, Moira. I still believe that the hatred against gays is
>intrinsically more evil than that against women...only because our
>homophobic western societies have been capable of absorbing women's
>rights before they are of gay rights. I was not claiming *quantity of
>gays vs. *quantity of women. I believe that the depth of hatred
>against gays is somewhat deeper than even that against women.
>
I don't lack sympathy for the gay rights cause, and I don't spend much time
or effort campaigning for the rights of women - and if I did I would choose
another forum for my efforts. However, I do think that you are blinkered
when you say that the "hatred of gays is somewhat deeper than even that
against women". There are a few nuts on this forum who hate gays and would
claim to love and respect women. But generally society is much tougher on
women than on homosexuality - lesbians are doubly disadvantaged.
The reason I say that society as a world wide phenomenon is tougher on women
is because there are large parts of the world where being a woman denies
basic rights (forget America and Europe for a moment). In China girl
babies are aborted, abandoned, unvalued, abused. In Muslim countries women
are subjected to terrible abuses in status. In poor communities in China,
India, the Middle East and Africa, girl children are given less food, less
clothing, poorer shelter, less medical care lower education, and more work
than boy children.
Put aside the third world for a moment and step into your own world. Women
are generally paid less for the same work, do more house-hold chores than
their male partners, and are regarded as being less efficient at many tasks
such as driving, regardless of the truth of their capabilities. Thousands
of women are raped and/or beaten every day simply because their partners can
and do feel physically superior to the woman.
Gay people generally simply do not live with the problems which many women
face daily in putting and holding their lives together in the face of
tremendous oppression. I understand that there are millions of women who do
not feel oppressed, and there are thousands of gays who face death because
they are gay, but more women are beaten to death every day by their partners
than gays by homophobes in a year or even a decade. More women are battered
every day than gays in the history of society. More women in America are
negatively impacted by lower salaries and status than open gays in the
entire world!
This doesn't invalidate work on *our own (gay) rights*. Simply be aware
that the levels of the problem don't even begin to match up.
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
<moira.d...@global.co.za> wrote:
>I do think that you are blinkered
>when you say that the "hatred of gays is somewhat deeper than even that
>against women". There are a few nuts on this forum who hate gays and would
>claim to love and respect women. But generally society is much tougher on
>women than on homosexuality -
Proportionately speaking: not as many gays (percentage-wise) as women,
suffer the abuse of prejudice, chiefly because far fewer gays than
women are visible to the heterocentric populace. Not to mention, of
course, that gays are a real minority, while women are a
majority...thus, in straighforward numbers, more women than gays are
bashed. Therefore, simply comparing *quantity of victims of violence
between the two groups, is no way to measure *which group is treated
the worst.
So when comparing violence against gays to that against women, you
need to recognize that only those gays who are visibly "gay", or known
to be gay (or suspected to be), are targets of violence. You must
leave out, therefore, the majority of the gay populace, for they are
closeted from the real world. You cannot take the assumed total number
of gays in society--say, 10%--then base your statistics on that number
(about 27,000,000). You must, instead, only include visible,
out-of-the-closet gays, as your total number of gays in this
statistical analysis (about 1%, or 2,700,000). I believe, with this
fairer evaluation, you'll find that on average, a greater percentage
of visible gays (among the visible-gay populace, which is more like 1%
of the U.S.) are routinely bashed, than are the percentage of women
(relative to the entire number of visible women, which is close to
100%).
Surely, if women could easily pass as men, and blacks could pass as
whites...many would do so, to avoid ugly confrontations and a
condemned life. As a result, there would be less bashing of people
belonging to either group, only because considerable numbers of them
could no longer be visibly recognized as a target for misogyny and/or
racism.
Gays are the only minority that can easily pass for heteros...in fact,
are assumed to be hetero, unless otherwise clearly informed, either
visibly or verbally.
Another aspect to this anti-women vs. anti-gay issue, is the depth of
hatred, bigotry, and dogma that is aimed at both groups...as well as
the depth of legal protection provided them. And this is the more
reasonable way, IMO, of forming an accurate evaluation of how poorly
treated are women and gays, in a relative comparison. Obviously, gays
are far more villified and abused than are women, in this arena. For
these obvious reasons:
1) No churches are virulently condemning women for being female,
threatening God's wrath on them if they don't stop being female. Yet
plenty of churches are doing so against gays. In fact, they infest the
media with constant bombardment of gay hatred and promotion of our
torture and death. Are they also speaking so harshly against women?
No, not by any stretch of the imagination.
2) There are no laws being put forth--and passed--that would deny
women the basic rights of free speech, housing, jobs, and general
social acceptance. Yet this is going on against gays.
3) There are not 36 states in the union where it is legal to deny
housing and work to women. Nor are the remaining 14 states not
enforcing what scant laws they have to minimally grant some protection
to women, from abuse of their civil rights. Yet this is the case for
all gays.
4) There is no lack of protection and recognition of citizen equality
for women, anywhere in the U.S. Yet there is plenty lack of same in
just about every square inch of this nation...in the case of gays.
Women at least have most of their rights on paper, both on the federal
and local/state levels. Gays don't even have that...so when a person
from either group is bashed, which do you think has more legal teeth
to bite back? Answer: women...and by an enormously large extent, by
comparison.
5) There are no religious and right-wing organizations promoting the
social isolation and death of women, as there are for gays.
6) Women are far more secure from violence in much greater swaths of
geographical areas in the U.S., than there are for visible gays. A
visible woman will be bashed far less often, than a visible gay. Plus:
what areas gay people can enjoy even a minimal amount of security,
covers only a few pinpoints in the vast map of the United States.
Women are nowhere near as threatened to the extent that they only feel
"safe" in a few streets among just a handful of major urban centers.
And I make all the above observations, in full awareness of blanket
prejudice against women, and of the abortion issue that is a major
attack on the liberty of women. As I said before: women run a very
close second to gays, when it comes to violence and prejudice against
them. Women being a majority of the population, would seem to be more
frequently bashed than gays...but that is only a surface observation
w/o consideration of comparative percentages, and the invisibility of
most gays...which examples I have clarified above.
>lesbians are doubly disadvantaged.
Not as much as black gay males...but close. Lesbians are much more
tolerated in our society, than are gay men. This is because
male-chauvanism uses lesbian fantasies to get its rocks off, unlike
the concept of gay male erotica. I believe that two visible gay men
are far more endangered than two visible gay women. Far less often,
does a lesbian couple get bashed, than a gay couple. Women can dance
together at hetero parties and clubs. Gay men can't...unless they want
to get killed.
Now, if the gay male couple are also African-Amerikan...I'd say they
have it the toughest than any other type of minority couple...tougher
even than 2 black lesbians.
The fact that women do get bashed, as do lesbians, as do blacks, does
not mean they have it worse than gay men. Even in the most
gay-accepting country in the world, Holland, there are cases of
homophobic violence. This does not negate the fact, that Holland
numbers among the safest places in the world, for gays. Again, you
have to look at the laws that exist (or do not exist), in order to
help you decide which group is the worst regarded. There are plenty of
laws across the land, to protect women and blacks...yet there are
hardly any for gays. What does that tell us right there? That the
overall prejudice against gays are far more extensive and severe, than
prejudice against the other two groups (blacks and women).
>The reason I say that society as a world wide phenomenon is tougher on women
>is because there are large parts of the world where being a woman denies
>basic rights (forget America and Europe for a moment). In China girl
>babies are aborted, abandoned, unvalued, abused. In Muslim countries women
>are subjected to terrible abuses in status. In poor communities in China,
>India, the Middle East and Africa, girl children are given less food, less
>clothing, poorer shelter, less medical care lower education, and more work
>than boy children.
I am aware of the global situation, and how it varies from culture to
culture. Discrimination against the female is a universal prejudice;
but so is homophobia. In fact, I believe that homophobia and misogyny
are but two sides of the same coin: hetero male supremacy. Women's
rights and gay rights both threaten the macho male image.
But your examples of anti-female attitudes across the world, in
non-democratic hence more totalitarian nations...completely ignores
the plight of gays in those same countries. You did not give a
comparison. At least women are allowed to live...with the exception of
female infanticide in countries like China and Indians. Gays, when
caught, are often not allowed to live. And I'm certain if future gays
could be identified during their baby-hood, they would surely be
killed off in such nations.
The abuses against known or suspected homosexuals in non-democracies,
are far more extensive and violent, than even those against women. So
both on a local (U.S.) level, and on a globla level, it is gays, more
than women, who get stuck with society's shit stick. At least in Iran,
women are not murdered for who they are. But gays are. They are
crushed by a stone wall. (Puts a new twist to the phrase "Stonewall
Era".)
>Put aside the third world for a moment and step into your own world. Women
>are generally paid less for the same work, do more house-hold chores than
>their male partners, and are regarded as being less efficient at many tasks
>such as driving, regardless of the truth of their capabilities. Thousands
>of women are raped and/or beaten every day simply because their partners can
>and do feel physically superior to the woman.
I am aware of this, Moira. Still, my observation is that visible gays
are treated even worse than are women, re. home life as well as
career...including level of wages. The majority of gay men and women
are stuck in low-paying service jobs for all their lives. Physical
harm to a gay spouse is just as frequent and real as to a hetero wife.
Just replace "wife" with "physically weaker" in any gay relationship,
to figure out who is most likely to get bashed in a partnership.
The U.S. Federal 9th Circuit Court is presently reconsidering a
landlord's "right" to refuse rental to a male couple, based on his
religious belief. If this passes in favor of the landlord, this will
set a precedent nationwide...to deny not just housing, but jobs and
social acceptance, to all gays, anywhere. It would completely nullify
every single right gays have fought so long and hard to achieve.
Women are not being attacked in such an intense, hostile, and
effective level. Gays are. But a more basic precedent to
institutionalize gay hatred has already been set several years ago,
when Pres. Clinton signed DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). This law is
a federal sanction declaring, in essence, that gays are indeed a
threat to heterosexuals and their family values. Because it was passed
by a President, not by a mayor or governor, DOMA adds weight to any
anti-gay laws that are being proposed (and sometimes passed) in many
states. Especially since it was passed by a liberal *democrat, who is
not a Christian fundamentalist! This was a very ugly and hateful law
that our Pres. should not have signed...it essentially wipes out any
pro-gay statements he has made. It was a slap in our gay collective
faces...for it pretty much has set back gay rights by at least a
decade...and added a level of credibilty to all those homophobic
whackos who are proposing annihilation of gays in God's name.
There is nothing equivalent to DOMA, in the way of social hatred, that
is being done to women.
>Gay people generally simply do not live with the problems which many women
>face daily in putting and holding their lives together in the face of
>tremendous oppression.
Oh? Maybe for gay people who play the heterocentered game, and do *not
let anyone think they are gay. Granted, women struggle against
tremendous oppression. But at least there are no laws proposing their
separation from home and work, and even their death. What
out-of-closet gays face daily, is a horror far more diabolical than
what even women face. They do not wake up every day to a nation of
hate, hate, hate...unlike gays. Through every single news medium, we
gays are constantly bashed with words and relgious fanaticism. It
never stops. We are faced with the likelihood of being bashed
frequently, as well as losing our lives, or job, or home, or
family...if we are out of the closet in this world.
>more women are beaten to death every day by their partners
>than gays by homophobes in a year or even a decade.
As I said earlier in this message, this is true when simply compared
on the numerical level. A superficial comparison, at best.
>More women are negatively impacted by lower salaries and
>status than open gays in the entire world!
That is true only for gays who put a "straight" face on before the
world. Gay men and gay women who are out of the closet, suffer far
worse than women in general, in these matters. Again, you are only
comparing numbers, not percentages. I hope you don't stereotype gays
as being mostly white, male, and affluent.
>This doesn't invalidate work on *our own (gay) rights*. Simply be aware
>that the levels of the problem don't even begin to match up.
Indeed, they don't; I agree. Gay persecution far exceeds women's.
Everywhere, except in most Western Democracies except the U.S.
>Straight,
No doubt.
>but not narrow.
Doubt.
I think you need a ways to go to be truly "not narrow", when it comes
to the gay issue. I hope you are not yet one more liberal
"gay-friendly" hetero who thinks she knows everything there is to know
about gay people...even more than other gays. Were I in a women's
group I would not pounce all over women, with preconceptions about the
female that I believe are the final words on this issue. I would
listen a lot more than speak. You, Moira, are in a gay group.
---
Pennsylvania Dutch Gay Jesus says:
"Throw the hetero over the fence some hay."
---
My website kicks (but never licks) butt!
http://surf.to/gaybible
GodHates...@HetBeGone.com
Chuck Sommers
as some people here do - generally I agree with much of what you say.
I think you are overreacting here, however, and forgetting a few things.
Women have systematically been denied rights in most cultures over
most of history. The "female circumsicion" in many cultures and the
routine double standard for sexual monogamy are standard fare.
Only a few Islamic countries have been dragged (kicking and screaming)
into the twentieth century and the Afgan Taliban has shown the ultimate
in female degredation.
The biblical misogyny is legendary. The "crime" which comdemns
gays for "Sodomy" is unconcerned about the sacrifice of young women
to satisfy the mob.
St Thomas Aquinas considered women to be necessary evils in that
while they were needed as incubators, they were inherently inferior
to men and were no doubt concieved due to disadvantageous weather
conditions. This is the same biologist/"Saint" who codified homophobia
in the church by declaring it "unnatural".
The Southern Baptists (bless you lil ol souls y'all) recently issued a
statement reaffirming the call for women to submit to their husbands.
Women's sufferage was achieved only in this century, and
most professions have only recently been open to women and
still have "glass ceilings" comparable to those for gays.
The abuse of women is based on many of the feelings of mixed
feelings of superiority/fear of women by men...very similar to
the reasons for their homophobia. In fact the main motivation
of many teen gay-bashers is the need to "prove" their
masculinity - they associate being gay with loss of "manliness",
ie, "superiority".
The military (which routinely chastised troops by calling them
"girls" and "pussies" resisted/s the inclusion of women because
it destroyed the masculine image which motivates many in the
military...from recruits to generals... this is also one of the main
reasons for the opposing of gays in the military.
I agree that social progress for women has outpaced that for gays.
The reasons have much to do with relative numbers and power.
It will still be a long time for gays to catch up, but I think gays and
women face basically the same problems...my heart bleeds for
Lesbians who face a "double whammy"...to say nothing of
African American - Lesbians!
--
Chuck Sommers
csom...@chorus.net
Ezekiel J. Krahlin <ezekiel...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:381d64ba...@news.ifreedom.com...
> On Sun, 24 Oct 1999 09:46:35 +0200, "Moira de Swardt"
> <moira.d...@global.co.za> wrote:
>
> >I do think that you are blinkered
> >when you say that the "hatred of gays is somewhat deeper than even
that
> >against women". There are a few nuts on this forum who hate gays
and would
> >claim to love and respect women. But generally society is much
tougher on
> >women than on homosexuality -
>
> Proportionately speaking: not as many gays (percentage-wise) as women,
> suffer the abuse of prejudice, chiefly because far fewer gays than
> women are visible to the heterocentric populace. Not to mention, of
> course, that gays are a real minority, while women are a
> majority...thus, in straighforward numbers, more women than gays are
> bashed. Therefore, simply comparing *quantity of victims of violence
> between the two groups, is no way to measure *which group is treated
> the worst.
>
snip
Scheherazade
even though they might not be, and they cannot go into any closet, are
transgendered people. They don't get bashed because they are transgendered,
but because they are perceived as gay.Talk about double whammies.
--
Krystal
krystal_z[NOSPAM AT-SIGN]hotmail.com
"We learn from history that we don't learn from history."
============================================
Chuck Sommers <csom...@chorus.net> wrote in message
news:7vk3s9$7i2$1...@news.chorus.net...
Moira de Swardt
Ezekiel J. Krahlin wrote in message <381d64ba...@news.ifreedom.com>...
There is a lot of truth in what you say. However, as a percentage 51% of
humans are women. 10% of people are gay. Some of that 10% is female.
Nearly all women are prejudiced in some ways, while "straight-acting" gays
escape open persecution. I don't really see it as a competition, and I
don't think you do either. Your points about the physically weaker person
being a target for physical abuse is probably valid, but one I didn't
consider.
<snip>
>1) No churches are virulently condemning women for being female,
>threatening God's wrath on them if they don't stop being female. Yet
>plenty of churches are doing so against gays. In fact, they infest the
>media with constant bombardment of gay hatred and promotion of our
>torture and death. Are they also speaking so harshly against women?
>No, not by any stretch of the imagination.
What about the "submission" clause? It may not be as harsh as the fundie
rubbish, but it is still unpleasant.
>
>2) There are no laws being put forth--and passed--that would deny
>women the basic rights of free speech, housing, jobs, and general
>social acceptance. Yet this is going on against gays.
There are lots of laws against women having the above rights, but they don't
operate in America, nor fortunately in South Africa, the home of the truly
free! :-)
<Snip>
>5) There are no religious and right-wing organizations promoting the
>social isolation and death of women, as there are for gays.
Muslims in Islamic countries?
>
>6) Women are far more secure from violence in much greater swaths of
>geographical areas in the U.S., than there are for visible gays. A
>visible woman will be bashed far less often, than a visible gay. Plus:
>what areas gay people can enjoy even a minimal amount of security,
>covers only a few pinpoints in the vast map of the United States.
>Women are nowhere near as threatened to the extent that they only feel
>"safe" in a few streets among just a handful of major urban centers.
In South Africa women are so socially disadvantaged (not legally) that in
practice they are generally afraid to be in public. I realise that this is
a crime problem and not a political one, but I suspect that if the plight of
women was taken seriously by men-folk, women would be better off. Our
current rape rate is one every 17 seconds. In a population of just over 40
million people, 1.8 million women will be raped this year in South Africa.
> There are plenty of
>laws across the land, to protect women and blacks...yet there are
>hardly any for gays. What does that tell us right there? That the
>overall prejudice against gays are far more extensive and severe, than
>prejudice against the other two groups (blacks and women).
A lot of the prejudice against gay people is invisible, which is what makes
it's severity sad. A few months ago there was some idiot who wanted toilets
marked "Male", "Female" and "Homosexual". Having lived in a country where
there were toilets marked "Male - European", "Male - African" etc. I found
it completely ridiculous, but very frightening.
>
<Snip>
>I am aware of the global situation, and how it varies from culture to
>culture. Discrimination against the female is a universal prejudice;
>but so is homophobia. In fact, I believe that homophobia and misogyny
>are but two sides of the same coin: hetero male supremacy. Women's
>rights and gay rights both threaten the macho male image.
Interesting thought, and probably valid.
>
>But your examples of anti-female attitudes across the world, in
>non-democratic hence more totalitarian nations...completely ignores
>the plight of gays in those same countries. You did not give a
>comparison. At least women are allowed to live...with the exception of
>female infanticide in countries like China and Indians. Gays, when
>caught, are often not allowed to live. And I'm certain if future gays
>could be identified during their baby-hood, they would surely be
>killed off in such nations.
Yes, there was recently (three or four years ago) a play on this theme.
"Twilight of the Golds". I forget who wrote it.
<Snip>
>>more women are beaten to death every day by their partners
>>than gays by homophobes in a year or even a decade.
>
>As I said earlier in this message, this is true when simply compared
>on the numerical level. A superficial comparison, at best.
No, this would work percentage-wise too. I have had dozens of women friends
over the years who have been regularly physically bashed by their partners,
while I have only ever had two or three gay friends physically bashed by
either their partners (on a regular basis) or by homophobes (by it's nature,
usually a one off).
<Snip>
>
>Again, you are only
>comparing numbers, not percentages. I hope you don't stereotype gays
>as being mostly white, male, and affluent.
I am a woman living in Africa. I know about the black female impoverished
population whatever their orientation.
>
>>This doesn't invalidate work on *our own (gay) rights*. Simply be aware
>>that the levels of the problem don't even begin to match up.
>
>Indeed, they don't; I agree. Gay persecution far exceeds women's.
>Everywhere, except in most Western Democracies except the U.S.
OK. I live in South Africa, one of only four countries in the world where
gays (and women) are protected by the constitution. I also know that that
protection really works fairly effectively for gays, and doesn't work at all
effectively for women. I have two gay South African friends currently
living in America, and they have both commented on the increased homophobia
they find in the USA.
>
>>Straight,
>
>No doubt.
>
>>but not narrow.
>
>Doubt.
>
>I think you need a ways to go to be truly "not narrow", when it comes
>to the gay issue.
I work at it.
> I hope you are not yet one more liberal
>"gay-friendly" hetero who thinks she knows everything there is to know
>about gay people...even more than other gays.
In many (but not all) ways this is an accurate summation of my attitude. I
look at gay society both as an outsider looking in, and as an insider
looking out (I consider myself to be part of the gay community).
>Were I in a women's
>group I would not pounce all over women, with preconceptions about the
>female that I believe are the final words on this issue. I would
>listen a lot more than speak. You, Moira, are in a gay group.
True. However, you made the statement that gays are more persecuted than
women. I simply pointed out that I didn't (and still don't) believe that
is true. This doesn't, as I mentioned in my previous post, begin to justify
persecution of gays, but was simply an acknowledgement that women suffer
greatly simply because they are women. It's not an attack of gay people,
it's not a defense of homophobia. It is simply a disagreement of your point
of view, with what I believe to be some substantiation for mine.
CWBarton
Moira de Swardt wrote in message <7vkg9q$gbm$3...@ctb-nnrp1.saix.net>...
>..."straight-acting" gays
>escape open persecution.
And "gay-acting" straights wouldn't suffer persecution and offset this
because...?
Moira de Swardt
CWBarton wrote in message ...>>..."straight-acting" gays
>>escape open persecution.
>
>And "gay-acting" straights wouldn't suffer persecution and offset this
>because...?
>
same-sex "close friend". :-)
Wahre Arbeit, Wahrer Lohn
wrote:
>You all seem to forget that the most visible people who get bashed as gay,
>even though they might not be, and they cannot go into any closet, are
>transgendered people. They don't get bashed because they are transgendered,
>but because they are perceived as gay.Talk about double whammies.
Well in my experience with drag queens, there are a few who really are
gender-mismatched, and these have my profound sympathy, and they are
no more deserving of scorn than epileptics or diabetics.
But the majority of drag queens seem to be gay men who do it for the
attention it gets them, and since they are doing something they don't
need to do just to get attention, pardon me for not screaming my
throat raw about the fact that some of the attention is negative.
I don't hate drag queens, but I certainly don't like them, and I have
known ver few of them (among hundreds) who could stop talking about
themselves or their impersonations for one fucking minute.
--
Chris Fox
http://home.earthlink.net/~chrisfox/
"You have the power to change your world
Small reasons - huge effects
Time is running away
One second per second
Break out of your mindcage
And control your rage
You're responsible - you're responsible
Understand that - understand that
Don't be a cogwheel anymore"
-- Project Pitchfork "Revolution Now"
zoe wilfong
>
> I haven't seen anything in your posts to cause me to react as strongly
> as some people here do - generally I agree with much of what you say.
> I think you are overreacting here, however, and forgetting a few things.
>
> Women have systematically been denied rights in most cultures over
> most of history. The "female circumsicion" in many cultures and the
> routine double standard for sexual monogamy are standard fare.
Oh no, not another 'Who has it worse' thread. Well, fwiw, you (chuck)
have hit one nail on the head here; one thing people forget about
women's opression is the absolutely universal nature of it. Most other
groups have been discriminated against for relatively short times in
certain parts of the world, whereas with women it's been in *every*
culture since day one. I think it was John Lennon? who said 'Woman is
the nigger of the world.' (i wouldn't use that same langueage, but the
point is accurate.)
> Women's sufferage was achieved only in this century, and
> most professions have only recently been open to women and
> still have "glass ceilings" comparable to those for gays.
>
> The abuse of women is based on many of the feelings of mixed
> feelings of superiority/fear of women by men...very similar to
> the reasons for their homophobia. In fact the main motivation
> of many teen gay-bashers is the need to "prove" their
> masculinity - they associate being gay with loss of "manliness",
> ie, "superiority".
>
> The military (which routinely chastised troops by calling them
> "girls" and "pussies" resisted/s the inclusion of women because
> it destroyed the masculine image which motivates many in the
> military...from recruits to generals... this is also one of the main
> reasons for the opposing of gays in the military.
True. As ezekial? said, anti-gay and anti-woman prejudice is really two
sides of the same coin.
> Ezekiel J. Krahlin <ezekiel...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:381d64ba...@news.ifreedom.com...
> > On Sun, 24 Oct 1999 09:46:35 +0200, "Moira de Swardt"
> > <moira.d...@global.co.za> wrote:
> >
> > >I do think that you are blinkered
> > >when you say that the "hatred of gays is somewhat deeper than even
> that
> > >against women". There are a few nuts on this forum who hate gays
> and would
> > >claim to love and respect women. But generally society is much
> tougher on
> > >women than on homosexuality -
Well, since i am a woman who is also gay, and sometimes mistaken for a
gay male, i can see what it's like from several sides of this issue.
One the one hand, anti-gay attitudes are more virulent, but the social
restrictions placed on females are more all-encompassing and essentially
define a woman's whole life.
Obviously, gays
> > are far more villified and abused than are women, in this arena. For
> > these obvious reasons:
> >
> > 1) No churches are virulently condemning women for being female,
> > threatening God's wrath on them if they don't stop being female. Yet
> > plenty of churches are doing so against gays. In fact, they infest the
> > media with constant bombardment of gay hatred and promotion of our
> > torture and death. Are they also speaking so harshly against women?
> > No, not by any stretch of the imagination.
Okay, the church (and society in general) has long held that women have
their 'place,' whereas gays have *no* place. What ezekial is
underestimating is the stifling and degrading nature of woman's 'place.'
> >
> > 2) There are no laws being put forth--and passed--that would deny
> > women the basic rights of free speech, housing, jobs, and general
> > social acceptance. Yet this is going on against gays.
*Recent* US legal and social history has had *all* of those things; even
though the laws have been changed, the attitudes still persist, not to
mention what goes on in third world / middle eastern nations.
> >
> > 3) There are not 36 states in the union where it is legal to deny
> > housing and work to women.
Again, *recent* US history, as well as *present* reality in many parts
of the world.
> > 4) There is no lack of protection and recognition of citizen equality
> > for women, anywhere in the U.S. Yet there is plenty lack of same in
> > just about every square inch of this nation...in the case of gays.
> > Women at least have most of their rights on paper,
True.
> >
> > 5) There are no religious and right-wing organizations promoting the
> > social isolation and death of women, as there are for gays.
Actually, your religious groups want gays to 'turn straight' and then be
accepted into the fundy fold, which is not unlike their treatement of
women; if women do not play the traditional submissive homemaker role,
they will certainly be cast out of fundy society.
> >
> > 6) Women are far more secure from violence in much greater swaths of
> > geographical areas in the U.S., than there are for visible gays. A
> > visible woman will be bashed far less often, than a visible gay.
Yes and no. I'm not sure what the numbers are, but women are routinely
subject to violence, just because your average male criminal or batterer
knows he *can* physically dominate a woman. Women live with the
awareness of their vulnerability at all times. I mean when a straight
guy goes out on a first date with a woman, he's not thinking about his
physical safety; she on the other hand is thinking 'I better not go
anywhere alone with this guy, in case he tries to rape/assault/murder
me.' Women are so used to arranging their lives around avoiding violent
attacks that it becomes second nature. The flip side is the violence
and harassment that openly gay or effeminate males get, which i will
agree is in a class by itself. As i said, i have some idea what this is
like. I have this problem being mistaken as an effeminate guy sometimes
because my build is pretty athletic and my voice is deeper than the
average woman's, but basically i look like a half-way attractive woman,
so i get these men (strangers) who hit on me or make some suggestive
comment to me, and then when i say something they get all freaked out
(thinking i'm a guy) and they want to kill me because they think i
'tricked' them into making a pass at a man. I've had several incidents
of this nature where if i hadn't stayed calm and diffused the situation,
it could have resulted in major violence. At least in these situations
i can always say "i'm a woman, idiot" if i have to, but what is somebody
to do who really is an effeminate man? Well anyway, I don't know that
either group (gays or women) has it worse; i think there are differences
in the discrimination each group faces, but their root cause is the
same.
zoe
Douglas H. Wildoner
Wahre Arbeit, Wahrer Lohn wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 16:14:53 GMT, "Scheherazade" <toth...@alice.com>
> wrote:
>
> >You all seem to forget that the most visible people who get bashed as gay,
> >even though they might not be, and they cannot go into any closet, are
> >transgendered people. They don't get bashed because they are transgendered,
> >but because they are perceived as gay.Talk about double whammies.
>
> Well in my experience with drag queens, there are a few who really are
> gender-mismatched, and these have my profound sympathy, and they are
> no more deserving of scorn than epileptics or diabetics.
>
> But the majority of drag queens seem to be gay men who do it for the
> attention it gets them, and since they are doing something they don't
> need to do just to get attention, pardon me for not screaming my
> throat raw about the fact that some of the attention is negative.
>
> I don't hate drag queens, but I certainly don't like them, and I have
> known ver few of them (among hundreds) who could stop talking about
> themselves or their impersonations for one fucking minute.
> --
> Chris Fox
> http://home.earthlink.net/~chrisfox/
>
> "You have the power to change your world
> Small reasons - huge effects
> Time is running away
> One second per second
> Break out of your mindcage
> And control your rage
> You're responsible - you're responsible
> Understand that - understand that
> Don't be a cogwheel anymore"
> -- Project Pitchfork "Revolution Now"
Gee Chris.... Scheherazade said nothing about "drag queens", she spoke of
transgenders. Some drag queens undoubtedly thrive on the attention, but a number
that I have known do it for fun. A few do community theater, and the drag keeps
the acting edge sharp.
Rainbow Christian
- On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 16:14:53 GMT, "Scheherazade" <toth...@alice.com>
- wrote:
-
- >You all seem to forget that the most visible people who get bashed as gay,
- >even though they might not be, and they cannot go into any closet, are
- >transgendered people. They don't get bashed because they are transgendered,
- >but because they are perceived as gay.Talk about double whammies.
-
- Well in my experience with drag queens, there are a few who really are
- gender-mismatched, and these have my profound sympathy, and they are
- no more deserving of scorn than epileptics or diabetics.
-
- But the majority of drag queens seem to be gay men who do it for the
- attention it gets them, and since they are doing something they don't
- need to do just to get attention, pardon me for not screaming my
- throat raw about the fact that some of the attention is negative.
-
- I don't hate drag queens, but I certainly don't like them, and I have
- known ver few of them (among hundreds) who could stop talking about
- themselves or their impersonations for one fucking minute.
- --
- Chris Fox
Mr. Fox...You obviously have never know a transgendered person.
Drag Queens are NOT transgendeed persons, and transgendered person are NOT
drag queens.
They are not even remotely connected.
I wish you would do just a teeny bit of research on the subject before
majing such heartless, pejudiced assumptions.
By the way, would you it surptise you to know that the overwhelming
majority of "crossdressers" are heterosexual?
- http://home.earthlink.net/~chrisfox/
-
- "You have the power to change your world
- Small reasons - huge effects
- Time is running away
- One second per second
- Break out of your mindcage
- And control your rage
- You're responsible - you're responsible
- Understand that - understand that
- Don't be a cogwheel anymore"
- -- Project Pitchfork "Revolution Now"
--
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Heights/1734
-
Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true. whatever is noble, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable - if anything is excellent or praiseworthy - think about such things. Philippiams 4:8
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.ufmcc.com
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
Wahre Arbeit, Wahrer Lohn
Christian) wrote:
>Mr. Fox...You obviously have never know a transgendered person.
>Drag Queens are NOT transgendeed persons, and transgendered person are NOT
>drag queens.
My understanding of "trandgendered" is that it's a blanket term for
transvestites ("drag queens" if M->F) and transsexuals. Want a Venn
diagram?
I was talking about drag queens. That's why I used the term. In an
earlier paragraph you took care to excise, I made a further
distinction. Including it might have adulaterated your outrage.
>They are not even remotely connected.
They are connected in the sense of "apple" and "fruit."
>I wish you would do just a teeny bit of research on the subject before
>majing such heartless, pejudiced assumptions.
I don't need to do any research. I have know HUNDREDS of drag queens.
I have never known one I could stand to talk to more than a minute.
Of the many I knew in Norfolk in the mid-70;s, all but a few were
prostitutes and thieves.
I have no sympathy for people who use sexuality or gender -- or
anything else -- to get attention.
>By the way, would you it surptise you to know that the overwhelming
>majority of "crossdressers" are heterosexual?
I know that. Your point? It's not who they have sex with that
bothers me, it's the attention-seeking that lies at the root of most
transvestitism, and the utter tedium of their company. Read it next
time.
--
Chris Fox
http://home.earthlink.net/~chrisfox/
"You have the power to change your world
Small reasons - huge effects
Time is running away
One second per second
Break out of your mindcage
And control your rage
You're responsible - you're responsible
Understand that - understand that
Don't be a cogwheel anymore"
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
J. Krahlin) wrote:
Errata:
Where I said:
>You cannot take the assumed total number
>of gays in society--say, 10%--then base your
>statistics on that number (about 27,000,000).
The population addressed is for gays in the United States only, which
has approx. 270,000,000 people within its borders.
Where I said:
>Gays are the only minority that can easily pass for heteros...
I meant:
Gays are one of the few minorities that can easily pass for a
non-minority. (Other such minorities are those based on religion or
ideology, where their appearance doesn't obviously identify their
creed.)
Q: How many heteros does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: Don't know yet; they're still trying to breed enough
brains to meet the challenge.
---
Allah is gay, Allah is good!
http://surf.to/gayislam
---
My toll-free voice/fax mailbox (USA only):
1-888-830-5746 (ext. 8275)
Leere Grab
>On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 10:11:55 GMT, ezekiel...@my-deja.com (Ezekiel
>J. Krahlin) wrote:
>Q: How many heteros does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
>A: Don't know yet; they're still trying to breed enough
> brains to meet the challenge.
Fucking bigot.
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
<ewi...@goodnet.com> wrote:
>Contrary to the unfounded claims above, there are many people
>who accept gays and believe in 'live and let live', like Moira,
>and don't constantly insist on spewing their perverted views all
>over the world.
You are dangerously naive. Either that, or intentionally attempting to
blindside the truth (as homophobes are wont to do). There are way too
few people who, like Moira, are hetero yet gay friendly. Moira also
carries some naive perspectives, which I will soon address.
Anti-gay hatred is intense and widespread, here in the U.S., as well
as in almost every country in the world. With the exception of most of
western democracies (minus the U.S.), homophobia is de riguer.
When you say "many people" are gay friendly, I have to ask: "many"
relative to what? One or two? While there are indeed many hets
friendly to gays, there are many, many more who are not. In fact, your
"many" is but a drop in the bucket compared to my "many more".
>Those who do generally claim some 'christian'
>reason for doing so.
Nonsense. Without kkkristians, homophobia would still remain a
universally massive hatred. The Muslim cultures occupy 1/3 of the
world's population...and it is obvious their religion is zealously
homophobic, even more so than Christians.
Let us not forget the two powerful atheist governments of the former
USSR and communist China. Were/are they gay-accepting? Not by a long
shot. They are violently oppressive towards homosexuals.
So now we have 2/3 or the world's nations that are rabidly homophobic.
Don't forget Africa, either...which in large part is gay-hateful in
the worst ways...a mixture of Muslim and Christian fanaticism. And
Latin America? Well, it's spotty at best...and for the most part,
those countries too are still seriously homophobic. Thanks, mostly, to
Catholic dogma.
This then tallies up to more than 3/4 of the world that homophobia is
an accepted institution. Not to mention that in those gay friendly
nations, gay bashings and hatred continues in no small measure.
And when I say you are dangerously naive, I mean the danger in
soothe-saying that would delude gays from the truth that we have a
long, long way to go in most parts of this crazy old het-supremacist
world. Believe what you want, just don't insist your beliefs equal
reality. In the case of gay friendliness, you clearly are mistaken.
(Though I wish this weren't so.)
Q: How many heteros does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: Don't know yet; they're still trying to breed enough
brains to meet the challenge.
Leere Grab
>This then tallies up to more than 3/4 of the world that homophobia is
>an accepted institution. Not to mention that in those gay friendly
>nations, gay bashings and hatred continues in no small measure.
What is the virtue in accepting this view of yours? Do you get some sort of
thrill or personal validation out of believing the situation is hopeless?
There's a name for this little game you're playing ... it's called "I Lose."
What a victim.
The rest of us go about our openly-gay lives and very VERY few of us have any
problems. Ever. I'm a lot more worried about being in a plane crash than I
am about getting gay-bashed or even discriminated against ... and I don't even
fly that often, nor am I afraid of flying.
Get some professional help. Seek out a better counselor, because anyone who
has helped you to be comfortable with a view of a world in which you imagine
that everyone hates you ... isn't doing his job.
Ward Stewart
wrote:
>In article <38293b2f...@news.ifreedom.com>, ezekiel...@my-deja.com (Ezekiel J. Krahlin) wrote:
>
>>This then tallies up to more than 3/4 of the world that homophobia is
>>an accepted institution. Not to mention that in those gay friendly
>>nations, gay bashings and hatred continues in no small measure.
>
>What is the virtue in accepting this view of yours? Do you get some sort of
>thrill or personal validation out of believing the situation is hopeless?
>
>There's a name for this little game you're playing ... it's called "I Lose."
>
>What a victim.
>
>The rest of us go about our openly-gay lives and very VERY few of us have any
>problems. Ever. I'm a lot more worried about being in a plane crash than I
>am about getting gay-bashed or even discriminated against ... and I don't even
>fly that often, nor am I afraid of flying.
>
>Get some professional help. Seek out a better counselor, because anyone who
>has helped you to be comfortable with a view of a world in which you imagine
>that everyone hates you ... isn't doing his job.
The usual junk-think from Fox. "My son got into law school here in
Maine, why should I be concerned about James Meridith there in
Mississippi? I'm not being inconvenienced!"
ward
----------------------------------------------------
"No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is
a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a
clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less
as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a
manor of thy friends or of thine own were; any man's
death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind;
and therefore never send to know for whom the bell
tolls; it tolls for thee."
John Donne
----------------------------------------------------
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
Stewart) wrote:
>The usual junk-think from Fox. "My son got into law school here in
>Maine, why should I be concerned about James Meridith there in
>Mississippi? I'm not being inconvenienced!"
Thank you, Ward. Perhaps some day we can eventually find a common
ground on which to resist homophobia, and work togehter regardless of
our different ideologies.
Leere Grab
>
>Thank you, Ward. Perhaps some day we can eventually find a common
>ground on which to resist homophobia, and work togehter regardless of
>our different ideologies.
The irony of this being right above ...
>Q: How many heteros does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
>A: Don't know yet; they're still trying to breed enough
> brains to meet the challenge.
.. is too blunt and coarse to even be funny.
Your idea of "common ground" sounds like "all gays united against the
heterosexual enemy." I'll pass on that, thanks.
You're a bigot.
Ward Stewart
wrote:
>In article <38293b2f...@news.ifreedom.com>, ezekiel...@my-deja.com (Ezekiel J. Krahlin) wrote:
>
>>This then tallies up to more than 3/4 of the world that homophobia is
>>an accepted institution. Not to mention that in those gay friendly
>>nations, gay bashings and hatred continues in no small measure.
>
>What is the virtue in accepting this view of yours? Do you get some sort of
>thrill or personal validation out of believing the situation is hopeless?
>
>There's a name for this little game you're playing ... it's called "I Lose."
>
>What a victim.
>
>The rest of us go about our openly-gay lives and very VERY few of us have any
>problems. Ever. I'm a lot more worried about being in a plane crash than I
>am about getting gay-bashed or even discriminated against ... and I don't even
>fly that often, nor am I afraid of flying.
>
>Get some professional help. Seek out a better counselor, because anyone who
>has helped you to be comfortable with a view of a world in which you imagine
>that everyone hates you ... isn't doing his job.
The usual junk-think from Fox. "My son got into law school here in
Maine, why should I be concerned about James Meridith there in
Mississippi? I'm not being inconvenienced!"
ward
-------------------------------------------------------------
The 1964 Civil Rights Act is "the single most dangerous piece
of legislation ever introduced in the Congress"
He later opposed a national holiday for that
"pervert" Martin Luther King Jr.
Who but? Jesse Helms
-------------------------------------------------------------
ezek...@my-deja.com
chri...@earthlink.net (Leere Grab) wrote:
> The irony of this being right above ...
>
> >Q: How many heteros does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
> >A: Don't know yet; they're still trying to breed enough
> > brains to meet the challenge.
>
> .. is too blunt and coarse to even be funny.
I don't hear a peep out of you, regarding all the horrible faggot jokes
that many heteros spew. My jokes that mock hetero supremacy don't even
come *close to the hatred espoused in most faggot jokes. I am mirroring
anti-gay attitudes common among heteros...and in mirroring, I do so to a
far lesser degree than the extreme bluntness and coarseness of faggot
humor...just enough to give a taste of some of the venom that we gays
are forced to absorb on a daily basis.
A hetero bashes my gay lover. So I spit on the hetero. You enter left
and scream at me for being anti-hetero. (Aren't you the little goody
2-shoes!)
---
Allah is gay, Allah is good!
http://surf.to/gayislam
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
ezek...@my-deja.com
chri...@earthlink.net (Leere Grab) wrote:
> Fucking bigot.
Know-nothing assimilationist queer turncoat. I now quote your home page:
"I make no secret of my dislike for what we call
'the gay culture.' The healthiest adaptation I
think I can make with it is to have no part of it."
Then get the hell out of our newsgroups. Our culture
has only begun to thrive...and will do so much better
without the likes of you.
More quotes:
"I am not the least ashamed of being gay
myself, but I feel ashamed of the culture
which I am supposed to regard as 'my family.'
I feel no allegiance to it, and have no sense
of solidarity. It is too ugly, and its values
aren't mine."
No gay should ever trust you as a friend...you are
likely to stab him in the back. Yes, I do not approve
of some aspects of some people who identify with the
gay culture. But to denounce the whole culture is
equivalent to a black person denouncing his entire
heritage, just because he doesn't like some in his
community who are drug addicts. The answer is not for
him to bash all blacks with cultural identity...and the
answer is not for you to bash all gays, just because
you are not big enough, and gracious enough, to look
beyond your limited experiences.
You also say:
"Our inability to change behavior in the face of
AIDS reveals a spiritual sickness that we can't blame on
homophobic society or Pat Robertson."
Ah, but we have changed our behavior...at least, those
who needed to change. But you are dealing with human
nature re. sex. Don't forget all the centuries of
ugly, death dealing venereal diseases that ran rampant
due to hetero supremacy and male dominance over women.
How many millions suffered agonizing lives and death from
syphillis, before penicillin came along? Syphillis has
created far more human tragedy than AIDS ever has, or
will. But where is your outrage against this nasty history
of male/hetero arrogance? Penicillin did not turn straights
into "better" people.
Also, there is the probably, IMO and that of other gay
activists like Tom Keske, that AIDS was disseminated to
gay people by our gov't, via the hepatitis B vaccine testing...which was
done only on gays, in New York and San Francisco. The first
cases of AIDS showed up only a few months after the final]
Hep B injections, in only those two cities, in only among
gays.
You have grossly judged, and condemned, all gay people, to
satisfy your selfish and insecure ego. Self-righteous bigot that you
are!
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
<moira.d...@global.co.za> wrote:
>OK. I live in South Africa, one of only four countries in the world where
>gays (and women) are protected by the constitution. I also know that that
>protection really works fairly effectively for gays, and doesn't work at all
>effectively for women.
I don't think so:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOUTH AFRICAN GAY BAR BOMBED
http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?1999/11/08/1
NewsPlanet Staff
Monday, November 8, 1999 / 07:31 PM
At least 6 people were injured in an explosion at Cape Town's Blah
Bar,but the folks who brought down apartheid aren't very easily
intimidated.
At 12:20am on the morning of November 6, a bomb exploded in Cape
Town's gay Blah Bar during its peak hours. Original reports said six
people had been injured, but later ones cited nine and in one report,
ten.Two of these required surgery, one to remove shrapnel from the
victim's neck, the other trying to save the foot of a victim whose
heel had been blown off; most if not all of the rest have now been
released after treatment. Some victims' family members asked that they
not be publicly identified. Police said the toll could have been much
higher except that the bomb was placed behind an interior wall of the
bar. As it was, doors and windows were blown out, causing shock and
pandemonium among the patrons and doing thousands of rands' worth of
damage to the bar. Police closed off the entire Somerset Road, noted
for its gay venues, for several hours following the blast, but even
afterwards the usual Saturday night crowd was almost entirely absent.
Thus far, police have no motive and no real leads for the attack. They
are convinced that the device was homemade and believe it was probably
detonated with a timer. They are inclined not to connect it to a
number of previous urban terrorism attacks in Cape Town because no
warning was given in advance of the explosion. Cape Town reportedly
had 79 bombings in 1998 and more earlier this year, but then special
anti-terrorism efforts appeared to be having an effect, and there had
not been a bombing since June. Gangs and drug dealing were also
largely ruled out as motives, since the Blah Bar had been involved
with neither.
Blah Bar co-owner Glynn Delaney said she was determined to reopen the
bar to make a point that she wouldn't be frightened off, although she
would reopen with beefed-up security measures. Four of the injured
were bar staff: the bar's co-owner Craig Gibson, manager Marnitz
Vermeulen, waiter Ian Martin, and an unnamed cleaner. Other bar staff
were treated for shock. Although the bar carried insurance, it does
not cover the earnings staff will lose during closure. Delaney hopes
to set up a fund to assist those injured in the bombing.
Speculation on the timing of the possible anti-gay attack focused on
two recent events. A few days previously, the Blah Bar was featured
among official venues for the millennium parties Cape Town is
currently marketing to the world. The blast also followed publication
of the news that three gay men, a Ugandan physician and two
Pakistanis, had applied for asylum in South Africa to escape
homophobic violence in their homelands, and had been granted temporary
residence permits.
The Cape Town City Council, through its executive committee chair
Saleem Mowzer and Mayo Nomaindia Mfeketo, condemned the act of
violence. Cape Town Tourism manager Sheryl Ozinsky urged police to
clear the matter up as quickly as possible before the incident could
damage tourism, the city's economic lifeblood. She said, "We hope this
incident is not reactive against the gay community in Cape Town
because that is tantamount to bringing back prejudices of the past."
Several gay and lesbian groups were quick to respond, each condemning
the violence, calling for full-scale police response and extending
sympathy to victims. The Cape Town Triangle Project said that, "This
incident highlights the divide between the rights and protections
afforded to gays and lesbians by the constitution and the homophobia
that our community lives with on a daily basis," and offered its
hotline and counseling services to victims and their families. The
National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality (NCGLE) noted that it
would continue its commitment towards building democracy and
reconciliation "despite any acts by reactionary forces on the margins
of society." From neighboring Zimbabwe, Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe
(GALZ) said in a statement that, "If the explosion at the Blah Bar is
indeed an anti-gay attack, those who committed this heinous crime need
to be reminded that the lesbian and gay community in South Africa
fought hard to bring down apartheid and that since then, those same
people have struggled tirelessly to transform South Africa into a
truly democratic nation with equality for all."
In a related story in Britain, the suspect in the April 30 bombing of
Soho's Admiral Duncan gay pub has ben hospitalized for a three-month
mental status assessment following a brief court hearing November 8.
David Copeland was arrested the day after the blast that killed three
and injured 86, and has been jailed ever since. He is also suspected
of two previous London bombings which together injured more than forty
people, one in a Bangladeshi neighborhood and one in a Black
neighborhood.
Q: How many heteros does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: Don't know yet; they're still trying to breed enough
brains to meet the challenge.
---
Allah is gay, Allah is good!
http://surf.to/gayislam