Governor Petitioned To Ban The Second Chiang Mai Gay Pride Parade

[zulo]

True, Thailand is better than many places but it's far from being a paradise for gays, lesbians, katoeys.

In 1997, Ratchabhat Institute (now university) made a policy not to enroll the so-called 'sexual deviant' (the phrase still popularly used).

In 2004, the Ministry of Culture tried to ban (again) 'sexual deviants' from television and other media.

Thanks to Thai LGBT rights organizations, those initiatives were beaten back.

There may not be explicitly homophobic law, but make no mistake, homophobia is there at a level that most foreigners don't realize. You may hear some gay Thais say that they experience no homophobia, but more often than not, they are the closet type or playing it down to blend in.

[Jingthing]

True, Thailand is better than many places but it's far from being a paradise for gays, lesbians, katoeys.

My view exactly and probably reflects the views of most intelligent long term farangs and gay Thais here. I am not sure how Thais who have never traveled or studied the topic would have much of a perspective about comparisons to other countries though. Perhaps some are even listening the rose glassed farangs who tell them it is paradise compared to their countries. More power to them if they think that, nothing wrong with a little harmless delusion if it helps you get through the day, I suppose. I have never read any kind of academic article that asserts anything differently than that the typical foreigners rosy view of the lot of Thai gays does NOT reflect the reality.

Thank you zulo. I previously supplied a link on another thread which included the same kinds of facts, but some people's world views are just set in stone. Others with an open mind can judge for themselves.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Jingthing

[jdinasia]

True, Thailand is better than many places but it's far from being a paradise for gays, lesbians, katoeys.

In 1997, Ratchabhat Institute (now university) made a policy not to enroll the so-called 'sexual deviant' (the phrase still popularly used).

In 2004, the Ministry of Culture tried to ban (again) 'sexual deviants' from television and other media.

Thanks to Thai LGBT rights organizations, those initiatives were beaten back.

There may not be explicitly homophobic law, but make no mistake, homophobia is there at a level that most foreigners don't realize. You may hear some gay Thais say that they experience no homophobia, but more often than not, they are the closet type or playing it down to blend in.

Yes -- great examples!

in the last 12 years 2 attempts have been made to marginalize people (though I believe the Ratchabat Uni's attempt was aimed at transgendered people) and both times they failed.

I hear ALL Thais in my circle say that there is no systemic discrimination here.

[jdinasia]

Thank you zulo. Mr. JD has some kind of bizarre agenda and it should be challenged with the kind of facts that you bring up. I previously supplied a link on another thread which included the same kinds of facts, but some people's world views are just set in stone.

Correct, some people's world views are set in stone, and then there are the rest of us that have informed opinions.

[Ulysses G.]

LOL, Jing ... you are giving links (that are ripping off other people's work without giving citations)

and no ... 1993 pretty recent and accurate (and you might want to note that your 2-3% has now become 5%)

Indeed. I reckon you are just a true believer in this 10 percent hogwash and no amount of evidence would persuade you anyway. People believe all kinds of myths. I don't think we have anything extra to fear in being a smaller minority than you think. We will never win any majority votes regardless. 1993 is over 15 years ago!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_...e_United_States

Almost all the information that I can find says that Jingthing is much closer to providing the correct infornation than jdinasia who is indeed passing on myths that have been pretty much disproved over time.

When it comes to accurate info, Jingthing is the man.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

Thank you zulo. Mr. JD has some kind of bizarre agenda and it should be challenged with the kind of facts that you bring up. I previously supplied a link on another thread which included the same kinds of facts, but some people's world views are just set in stone.

Correct, some people's world views are set in stone, and then there are the rest of us that have informed opinions.

Yes, and the readers can decide for themselves which of us has a rigid agenda and which of us is open to objective facts (as opposed to cocktail party chatter of a select group of self selected friends of one foreigner in Thailand). People tend to select friends that AGREE with them. Nothing wrong with that, but saying all my friends think this or that is meaningless. Another point, many Thais do not think it polite to say anything negative about Thailand to any foreigner.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Jingthing

[jdinasia]

LOL, Jing ... you are giving links (that are ripping off other people's work without giving citations)

and no ... 1993 pretty recent and accurate (and you might want to note that your 2-3% has now become 5%)

Indeed. I reckon you are just a true believer in this 10 percent hogwash and no amount of evidence would persuade you anyway. People believe all kinds of myths. I don't think we have anything extra to fear in being a smaller minority than you think. We will never win any majority votes regardless. 1993 is over 15 years ago!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_...e_United_States

Almost all the information that I can find says that Jingthing is much closer to providing the correct infornation than jdinasia who is indeed passing on myths that have been pretty much disproved over time.

When it comes to accurate info, Jingthing is the man.

LOL UG

Yes .. the 2-3% that then becomes 5+% that doesn't count behaviour and only counts how people label themselves is obviously the way to go.!

[jdinasia]

Thank you zulo. Mr. JD has some kind of bizarre agenda and it should be challenged with the kind of facts that you bring up. I previously supplied a link on another thread which included the same kinds of facts, but some people's world views are just set in stone.

Correct, some people's world views are set in stone, and then there are the rest of us that have informed opinions.

Yes, and the readers can decide for themselves which of us has a rigid agenda and which of us is open to objective facts (as opposed to cocktail party chatter of a select group of self selected friends of one foreigner in Thailand). People tend to select friends that AGREE with them. Nothing wrong with that, but saying all my friends think this or that is meaningless. Another point, many Thais do not think it polite to say anything negative about Thailand to any foreigner.

LOL ..

YOU may pick friends that think like you or agree with you. Personally, I have friends from all walks of life and we don't see the same way on almost anything! (Other than having insatiable appetites for learning that is). My ego isn't so weak that I need people to agree with me. (In fact my partner often votes differently than I would, has strong opinions about things that I don't agree with etc ...) I would feel really bad about myself if I thought my ego was so weak that my friends needed to agree with me!

[jackr]

stroll on

[Ulysses G.]

"Around 3-5%" is a lot more accurate than 10% jd is insisting on.

Kinsey "10%" Figure for Gays Doubtful

Several recent studies call into serious question the 1948 Kinsey research figures often quoted by homosexuals to suggest a 10% homosexual presence in the general population.

In their book, Kinsey, Sex and Fraud, (Lochinvar-Huntington House pub., 1990) Reisman and Eichel point out that Kinsey's data base was clearly skewed by his choice to include a high percentage of prison inmates and known sex offenders. (Convicted criminals comprised a full 25% of Kinsey's male sample, though they made up less than 1% of the total U.S. population.) Both practice homosexual behavior much more frequently than individuals in the general population.

Tom W. Smith's much more recent study, Adult Sexual Behavior in 1989: Numbers of Partners, Frequency and Risk, conducted among a full probability sample of the adult U.S. household population, reported that "Overall... less than 1% [of the study population] has been exclusively homosexual."

Jeffrey Vitale, President of Overlooked Opinions (op. cit.), which "is compiling the results of an ongoing national survey of a panel of about 20,000 homosexuals" estimates that "even in California and New York, two well-known [gay] havens, the gay population is less than 8 percent" (American Marketplace, "Gay Community Looks for Strength in `Numbers,'" Vol. 12, No. 14, July 4, 1991, p. 131).

Recent national surveys of about 10,000 subjects conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control report less than 3% of men as saying they have had sex with another man "at some time since 1977, even one time ("AIDS Knowledge and Attitudes for January-March, 1990, Provisional Data From the National Health Interview Survey," Deborah Dawson; Joseph E. Fitti and Marcie Cynamon, op. cit. for April-June, 1990; Pamela F. Adams and Ann M. Hardy, op. cit. for July-September, 1990, in Advance Data, #s 193,195,198, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, p. 11 in all three documents).

The September 2, 1992, Dallas Morning Times (pg. 4C) reported on a "University of Chicago study aimed to be the most significant study [on American sexuality] since Mr. Kinsey's" and a related study by the National Opinion Research Center. The findings:

"...An estimated 3 percent of the population claimed at least one act of homosexual sex during 1991. Over the respondents' lifetime, 4.5 percent claim some such sex... The final conclusions from the University of Chicago's study may confirm a figure far lower than Mr. Kinsey's. They may also show that American sexual behavior is quite conservative. The mean number of sexual partners over an individual's lifetime is probably around six or seven" ("Study of U.S. sex habits may contain surprises").

Science magazine, July 3, 1992, reports a very recent French study that found only 4.1% of men and 2.6% of women said they'd had homosexual intercourse at least once in their lives. Only 1.1% of men and 0.3% of women said they'd had homosexual intercourse in the past 12 months (as reported in "Homosexual figures grossly exaggerated," AFA Journal, September, 1992, pg. 9).

"The London Daily Mail released last week what it calls `the most exhaustive survey ever conducted into British sexual habits.' The most stunning finding was that only 1.1 percent of British men said they were active homosexuals, a figure similar to the most recent American polls" (World magazine, Jan. 29, 1994, p. 9).

Gay activists repeat the 10% figure with broken-record frequency because they know it is key to their efforts to advancing their political agenda. Activist Bruce Voeller said in a recent book:

"I campaigned with Gay groups and in the media across the country for the Kinsey-based [10%] finding that `We are everywhere.' This slogan became a National Gay Task Force

leitmotif

. And the issues derived from the implications of the Kinsey data became key parts of the national political, educational and legislative programs during my years at New York's Gay Activist Alliance and the National Gay Task Force. And after years of our educating those who inform the public and make its laws, the concept that 10 percent of the population is gay has become generally accepted `fact.' While some reminding always seems necessary, the 10 percent figure is regularly utilized by scholars, by the press, and in government statistics.

As with so many pieces of knowledge and myth, repeated telling made it so

-- incredible as the notion was to the world when the Kinsey group first put forth its data or decades later when the Gay Movement pressed that data into public consciousness" ("Some Uses and Abuses of the Kinsey Scale," Bruce Voeller,

Homosexuality, Heterosexuality: Concepts of Sexual Orientation

, The Kinsey Institute Series, June Machover Reinisch, ed., Oxford University Press, 1990, p. 35, emphasis added).

In a recent article, The New American reported: "Ever since the Alfred Kinsey study, homosexual activists have been insisting that they represent about ten percent of the the total population. This notion, based on faulty science, has been generally accepted as fact by the popular culture. Even Newsweek discovered this discrepancy in a recent issue, reporting that `ideology, not sound science, has perpetuated a 1-in-10 myth. In the nearly half century since Kinsey, no survey has come close to duplicating his findings,' Patrick Rogers wrote in the February 15th issue. `Most recent studies place gays and lesbians at somewhere between 1 and 6 percent of the population.' The story also reported that some homosexual activists now admit that they exploited the inflated Kinsey figures for political reasons. `We used that figure when most gay people were entirely hidden to try to create an impression of our numerousness,' says Tom Stoddard, former member of the Lambda Legal Defense Fund [a sort of gay ACLU]'" ("The Homosexual Numbers," March 22, 1993, p. 37).

An even more recent major national survey of male sexual behavior concluded that "Nearly one-fourth of American men under 40 have had 20 or more sexual partners during their lifetimes, and only 2 percent ever engaged in homosexual behavior..." A team of researchers from the Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers in Seattle published a series of reports on their study in the March-April [1993] issue of Family Planning Perspectives, the magazine of the Alan Guttmacher Institute.

"...Only 2.3 percent of the men reported

any homosexual activity in the past 10 years, and just 1.1 percent said they had engaged in exclusively homosexual sex

. That is far less than the 10 percent figure attributed to the landmark Kinsey report from 1948" ("Homosexual activity lower than believed, study shows,"

Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph

, April 15, 1993, p. A-13, emphasis added).

Time and Newsweek magazines, both in April 26, 1993 issues, reported on these sexual survey results released by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, scarcely a conservative bastion regarding sexual issues: "Of the [3,321 American] men surveyed, only 2.3 percent reported any homosexual contacts in the last 10 years, and only half of those -- or just over 1 percent of the total -- said they were exclusively gay in that period" (Newsweek, "Sex in the Snoring '90s," p. 55, emphasis added).

Time calls "The study, one of the most thorough reports on male sexual behavior ever," and comments: "...its scientific verdict (men are having too much unprotected sex) was overwhelmed by a political one. `It shows politicians they don't need to be worried about 1% of the population,' says conservative leader Phylls Schlafly... Some gay activists are concerned that she may actually be right. `Bill Clinton and Jesse Helms worry about 10% of the population,' says ACT UP co- founder Larry Kramer. `They don't worry about 1%. This will give Bill Clinton a chance to welch (sic) on promises'" (Time, "The Shrinking Ten Percent," p. 27).

http://www.leaderu.com/marco/special/spc11b.html

Edited February 27, 2009 by Ulysses G.

[zulo]

True, Thailand is better than many places but it's far from being a paradise for gays, lesbians, katoeys.

In 1997, Ratchabhat Institute (now university) made a policy not to enroll the so-called 'sexual deviant' (the phrase still popularly used).

In 2004, the Ministry of Culture tried to ban (again) 'sexual deviants' from television and other media.

Thanks to Thai LGBT rights organizations, those initiatives were beaten back.

There may not be explicitly homophobic law, but make no mistake, homophobia is there at a level that most foreigners don't realize. You may hear some gay Thais say that they experience no homophobia, but more often than not, they are the closet type or playing it down to blend in.

Yes -- great examples!

in the last 12 years 2 attempts have been made to marginalize people (though I believe the Ratchabat Uni's attempt was aimed at transgendered people) and both times they failed.

I hear ALL Thais in my circle say that there is no systemic discrimination here.

I only raised two most blatant examples and you concluded that's the end of the story. There's still the military paper that brands katoeys as 'mentally ill', the Red Cross's barring all gays from blood donation but saying nothing about heterosexual unsafe sex, lack of any kinds of benefits for same-sex couples, refusal to sell insurance policies to openly gays, firing someone from work because of their sexual orientation, refusal to give job interviews when the applicants turn out to be katoeys.

These are real-life examples and I can give you more if you want. But I suppose nothing will satisfy your definition of 'systemic discrimination' short of death by stoning.

Most Thais, gay or straight, like to pretend that Thailand has no problems whatsoever, especially to foreigners. It would hurt their pride of the country (some say 'face') to hint otherwise. By the way, I'm a gay Thai person.

[jdinasia]

Yes ...

We have mentioned transgenders as a separate issue. The Red Cross does in fact address unsafe sexual behavior of heterosexuals.

A case may be made for legal recognition of gay unions. The labor laws do not specifically protect gays but they protect everyone fairly well.

Insurance? I have it .. the partner has it. Our friends have it.

That leaves marraige and an employer's right to have the employee he chooses.

(Do you really see the Red Cross as being discriminatory? They hire gays, they work with gay issues, they are quite a progressive organization overall !)

I do find it funny that you say 'most Thais' then contradict the statement you made!

(Bring this over to the discrimination thread! -- please feel free to rephrase anything--- and remember that you aren't the only Thai gay guy posting there )

My friends literally do fit into all types of Thai people in almost every social class. We talk about all kinds of things that are 'taboo' in Thailand. ((what happens next etc))

[zulo]

This is not an Epimenides paradox. I didn't say ALL Thais. I said MOST Thais. And nowhere did I claim to speak for all gay Thais.

I think we agree that discrimination exists, but differ about the degree. You like to explain them away, I like to see them eliminated. I have no problem with that.

By the way, you're right. The blood donation form askes you about unsafe sex. However, heterosexuals who have had unsafe sex can come back again after a fixed period of time. But if you answers that you've had homosexual activities even once in your life and no matter how long ago and even if it's safe sex, you're banned for life.

I think that's as much contribution to the discussion I have to make.

[Jingthing]

I think that's as much contribution to the discussion I have to make.

You are clearly a very wise man. I hope I can find the strength to follow your fine example, but alas the flesh is weak.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Jingthing

[jdinasia]

UG ...

I do not contest the fact that many people don't label themselves ...

and your data looks as dated as the Janus report which is the study that appears to have the least flaws

[Jingthing]

Like I said, the flesh is weak.

Yet more informed THAI voices to refute the bizarre, absurd, militant rose-colored-glasses assertion that there is no discrimination in Thai society towards Thai gays:

Danai Linjongrat from the Rainbow Sky Association of Thailand says one of the reasons the gay magazine industry in Thailand has faced a social hindrance is because the concept of homosexuality has long been overpowered by a mainstream gender approach.

In Thailand, Danai continues, mainstream gender values have played a very significant role in dictating how the ideal man should be. It applauds men and women who behave according to the norm and thus discriminates, if not disdains, those who behave otherwise.

Virach Suwanwilaikul, Max Magazine editor, hopes that gay magazines will one day be accepted as a fair option for Thai gay men to access information about their everyday lives.

''Gay men are not special people. We do not want any extra privileges. What we want is rights as equal as everyone else in society,'' Virach remarks.

The implication here is that these equal rights do not yet exist for Thai gays in Thailand; if that isn't discrimination, what is?

http://www.bangkokpost.com/leisure/leisure...ide-on-the-page

[PeaceBlondie]

This Chiang Mai Gay Pride thread is less and less about the parade, and more about general issues about gays and homophobia in Thailand and elsewhere. I suggest the larger part of the discussion adjourn to the Gay Forum, where we are also discussing this. As for the apparent level of expressed or repressed gayness in Thailand, it is several times more prevalent here than it is in Brownsville, Texas.

[Paagai]

This Chiang Mai Gay Pride thread is less and less about the parade, and more about general issues about gays and homophobia in Thailand and elsewhere. I suggest the larger part of the discussion adjourn to the Gay Forum, where we are also discussing this. As for the apparent level of expressed or repressed gayness in Thailand, it is several times more prevalent here than it is in Brownsville, Texas.

I think TV needs a new sub-forum: "the JD and Jingthing show"

Anyone for burgers or pizza?

[ozsamurai]

Nothing against gays, they make the same contributions to society as everyone else.

But why the need for a parade?

Most everyone knows their own sexuality - can't it just be left at that?

Nothing against gays, they make the same contributions to society as everyone else.

But why the need for a parade?

Most everyone knows their own sexuality - can't it just be left at that?

Agreed. Why the apparent need to feel 'pride' in being gay any more than you might feel if you're straight?

All I ask is why do gays need a parade? I don't see parades for heterosexuals. Parades just plug up the traffic in already over crowded streets.

Nothing against gays, they make the same contributions to society as everyone else.

But why the need for a parade?

Most everyone knows their own sexuality - can't it just be left at that?

110% agree with this, why do gays need to have parades? are you trying to advertise that you like a bit of bum fun or something?

we dont have heterosexual parades, is it some sort of recruiting mission?

people can be who they want to be, but this just doesnt make any sense.

I have nothing against the gay community, but I can't understand why they like to have parades so often to celebrate their sexuality. I keep waiting for someone to organize a "Heterosexual Pride Parade" but it never happens? 555

Edited: I guess I should have read all the other posts. I see other people are also confused about need for frequent gay pride parades.

Nothing against gays, they make the same contributions to society as everyone else.

But why the need for a parade?

Most everyone knows their own sexuality - can't it just be left at that?

Agreed. Why the apparent need to feel 'pride' in being gay any more than you might feel if you're straight?

Agree.

WE'RE HERE, WE'RE QUEER, GET USED TO IT!!,

we all got used to it decades ago, now get over yourselves...

200% agree, there is no need for celebration of sexuality, unless you want to set aside parades for all other persuasions. Maybe we should throw some political light on the plight of the pedophiles and poligamists instead, help them out of the closet into mainstream.

Oz

[sriracha john]

This Chiang Mai Gay Pride thread is less and less about the parade, and more about general issues about gays and homophobia in Thailand and elsewhere. I suggest the larger part of the discussion adjourn to the Gay Forum, where we are also discussing this. As for the apparent level of expressed or repressed gayness in Thailand, it is several times more prevalent here than it is in Brownsville, Texas.

I think TV needs a new sub-forum: "the JD and Jingthing show"

Anyone for burgers or pizza?

I would be remiss if, in a Chiang Mai Forum thread, I didn't specifically request khao soi instead of burgers or pizza.

Perhaps we should start a poll on the thread....

Edited February 28, 2009 by sriracha john

[jdinasia]

WE'RE HERE, WE'RE QUEER, GET USED TO IT!!,

we all got used to it decades ago, now get over yourselves...

200% agree, there is no need for celebration of sexuality, unless you want to set aside parades for all other persuasions. Maybe we should throw some political light on the plight of the pedophiles and poligamists instead, help them out of the closet into mainstream.

Oz

Celebrating diversity is a good thing. All kinds of groups have rallies and parades. The comparison to pedophiles and poligamists (sic) is specious, but hey, if you want to have a parade ... feel free!

BTW ... quoting then re-quoting then re-quoting? ....

As for the Poll .... what a novel idea! I love stupid polls! Let's have 4!

[realthaideal]

I think TV needs a new sub-forum: "the JD and Jingthing show"

Aren't we at about the point where in the movies someone makes an impassioned plea "Come on you guys! Now we're fighting ourselves ! Don't you see that's what they wanted us to do ?! We're not the enemy, they are !"

And then everybody goes back to being mad at the red shirts. Indeed JD n JT might just have some sparks flying.... but maybe in the wrong direction.

Too bad the parade was canceled. I hear it was a small but fun hoopla in yrs past. A gay friend of mine made his tbf up for the beauty contest and was pretty passable.lots of fun pictures of the event ....and I know that's not what the whole point of what the parade is, or the full expression of the community. I'm just saying they had fun, and CM n Thailand should be about fun for the Everybody Community.

[Jingthing]

"Come on you guys! Now we're fighting ourselves ! Don't you see that's what they wanted us to do ?! We're not the enemy, they are !"

Gay people are very diverse. Even more than other typical identity groups as we come from all nations, all races, all backgrounds. Also, the yellows are no friends of gays EITHER. There is only one thing all gay people have in common. That they acknowledge they are attracted emotionally and/or sexually mostly to their own sex.

Edited February 28, 2009 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Also, the yellows are no friends of gays EITHER.

Thank you for reminding us. The reds might not be very nice guys, but they have caused much less damage to the country as a whole. The truth is that Thailand is probably better off with out either one of these groups.

[lannarebirth]

WE'RE HERE, WE'RE QUEER, GET USED TO IT!!,

we all got used to it decades ago, now get over yourselves...

200% agree, there is no need for celebration of sexuality, unless you want to set aside parades for all other persuasions. Maybe we should throw some political light on the plight of the pedophiles and poligamists instead, help them out of the closet into mainstream.

Oz

Celebrating diversity is a good thing. All kinds of groups have rallies and parades. The comparison to pedophiles and poligamists (sic) is specious, but hey, if you want to have a parade ... feel free!

BTW ... quoting then re-quoting then re-quoting? ....

As for the Poll .... what a novel idea! I love stupid polls! Let's have 4!

That's a good idea for a parade, "celebrating diversity". Then people from every walk of life, culture, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. etc. could see what a healthy social community loooks like, rather than what a fragmented one looks like. I would attend, for sure.

[Ijustwannateach]

"Come on you guys! Now we're fighting ourselves ! Don't you see that's what they wanted us to do ?! We're not the enemy, they are !"

Gay people are very diverse. Even more than other typical identity groups as we come from all nations, all races, all backgrounds. Also, the yellows are no friends of gays EITHER. There is only one thing all gay people have in common. That they acknowledge they are attracted emotionally and/or sexually mostly to their own sex.

One regrettable element I have found among some persons in various countries who have fascinations with foreigners or living in foreign countries is a failure to function socially in their original contexts. If such persons are particularly unpleasant and lacking in insight, they will typically blame the persons in their own countries for their isolation/rejection rather than take responsibility for their own behaviour. Their self-loathing becomes projected outward onto their own culture or people from that culture, and they tend to idolize the foreign/adopted culture. It helps that the foreigners who come into contact with such persons are willing to extend more tolerance than usual on the basis of 'cultural differences' and so the dysfunctional person will tend to thrive more than he would in his own country, where people recognise his bad behaviour quite quickly and have no patience for him.

Unfortunately, dysfunctional personalities can be found among all walks of life, and unless they are recognised as such they may bring harm to groups they claim to represent. A gay person with an antisocial personality disorder is just as unpleasant as a straight one. Best to ignore them when spotted!

Of course, there aren't any people like that around here!!!!

[Paagai]

There is only one thing all gay people have in common. That they acknowledge they are attracted emotionally and/or sexually mostly to their own sex.

TIT you forgot financially

[Gonzo the Face]

If we are to let this thread continue on and on and on,. I make a suggestion we are allowed to bring back the O'Mally's, Red Lion Thread that was curtailed around a year ago.

I liket that one it was like a cu lt, this one is similar but has the makings of a cu t too,

I vote for the free water too

Bury it please....

[Jingthing]

There is only one thing all gay people have in common. That they acknowledge they are attracted emotionally and/or sexually mostly to their own sex.

TIT you forgot financially

??? Huh ???

They have "financially" in common? I don't think so.

[Steve2UK]

"Come on you guys! Now we're fighting ourselves ! Don't you see that's what they wanted us to do ?! We're not the enemy, they are !"

Gay people are very diverse. Even more than other typical identity groups as we come from all nations, all races, all backgrounds. Also, the yellows are no friends of gays EITHER. There is only one thing all gay people have in common. That they acknowledge they are attracted emotionally and/or sexually mostly to their own sex.

One regrettable element I have found among some persons in various countries who have fascinations with foreigners or living in foreign countries is a failure to function socially in their original contexts. If such persons are particularly unpleasant and lacking in insight, they will typically blame the persons in their own countries for their isolation/rejection rather than take responsibility for their own behaviour. Their self-loathing becomes projected outward onto their own culture or people from that culture, and they tend to idolize the foreign/adopted culture. It helps that the foreigners who come into contact with such persons are willing to extend more tolerance than usual on the basis of 'cultural differences' and so the dysfunctional person will tend to thrive more than he would in his own country, where people recognise his bad behaviour quite quickly and have no patience for him.

Unfortunately, dysfunctional personalities can be found among all walks of life, and unless they are recognised as such they may bring harm to groups they claim to represent. A gay person with an antisocial personality disorder is just as unpleasant as a straight one. Best to ignore them when spotted!

Of course, there aren't any people like that around here!!!!

Excellent analysis, IJWT - and so tactfully put. Sure, nobody (LOL ) like that around here..........