How are we supposed to know what you're referring to???

Yeah, was it good? Can we have a look?

The poster is aware. This thread is about same sex marriage and partnership and we will drop the personal attacks and the bigoted comments. Does that explain it clearly enough now? Any further discussion of moderation will also result in formal action as my patience is very thin today

Why is Saraburioz and others on this thread labeled "homophobic?" Are you afraid of homosexuals, saraburioz? Or do you just exercise your right to disagree with their demand that you approve of them? Do you run, screaming, away when a pleasant, intelligent gay engages you in a friendly conversation?

Of course I'm not afraid of them - I am not homophobic. I have good friends who are gay.

I have absolutely no problem with my own sexuality either.

All I'm saying is that homosexuality is an illness and can be cured. I am against gay marriages.

You forgot to include in my quoted text, "No? I didn't think so."

In other words, I was defending you from the attacks referring to you as "homophobic," a word I find offensive and nonsensical used by either those with an agenda who don't mind falsely accusing others of a mental illness, or the intellectually challenged who don't understand the word they are using.

As for your comments, and those of others, I take no stance in this thread. This and topics like it have raged for years and I know of not a single soul (and I'll say now I don't care if some poster claims to know someone) who has changed views because of debate. So why bother.

I posted simply because I don't like hot button words, regardless of what group it is that issues them.

Edited June 4, 201115 yr by sbk
flame removed- keep it civil or i will suspend

I dont see this as an empiric study, more as an indicator of the general opinion (which can of course be wrong). But it is clear that a vast majority believes chances of being bullied increases if you have gay parents.

http://www.forandagainst.com/Children_Adopted_By_Gay_Couples_Are_Likely_To_Get_Bullied#

And just to make it over clear; quality of parenting doesn't have anything to do with this - the core issue lies within the quality of minds of others, namely those who refuse to accept diversity and opposing opinion (which brings an interesting twitch to this discussion, but I dont think I need to highlight this to much...)

Why is it that if someone does not approve of something that another approves of, that the one disapproving is labeled fearful?

Why is Saraburioz and others on this thread labeled "homophobic?" Are you afraid of homosexuals, saraburioz? Or do you just exercise your right to disagree with their demand that you approve of them? Do you run, screaming, away when a pleasant, intelligent gay engages you in a friendly conversation?

Do you feel they may attack you at any moment (outside this forum, anyway)? Do you have a persistent, intense and irrational, abnormal fear of them? When meeting a gay, do you suffer from dizziness, rapid pulse, dread or panic?

No? I didn't think so.

Nor do I. All things equal, I engage with them like anyone else. I just don't agree with the demands that some make, nor those of their hetero self-righteous-we're-better-than-you-because-we're-more-caring defenders.

I don't care one way or the other about this matter--legalize it for all I care, I still won't agree with you, though--and I see immaturity and false or unproven claims on all sides, but it is sad and offensive when people with an agenda utilize a hot button word to beat someone down.

It backfires and turns the otherwise neutral people against the namecallers. Just as statements, "we're going to win--get used to it."

Get a life.

I'm fully on board with the idea that throwing around labels gratuitously and without foundation -- whether it's (depending on the issue at hand) "homophobe", "racist" or anti-semite" or whatever - is intellectually dishonest and counterproductive if one has genuine debate or discussion in mind.

But there are times when clearly people have eraned such a label and the fact si relevant as it is a primary motivator i their argument. This predictable and overly used dodge -- 'I'm not a homophobe becasue I'm not afraid of homosexuals' -- is faulty on 2 counts: prejudice is largely about fear, conscious or not. (of course no racist, homophobe et al will admit to such a fear even if they are conscious of it). Secondly, the denial is based on a too literal approach -- but everyone knows what "homophobe" means...

Homophobia

noun: prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality

And I'm genuinely mystified by this idea -- in your post andthat of thers -- that one can be OK with homosexuals but not 'agree with it/ approve of it'. What's that about? What is there to disapprove of or not agree with? The fact that they are sexually attracted to their own gender? If so, then how can you say you aren't against homosexuality per se?

This issue has nothing to do with peoples sexual preferences or activities and everything to do with equal rights. If you want to deny people equal rights because you don't like what they do to each other in the privacy of their homes than we are going to have to start smashing down doors to the homes of S&M affectionaros and don't even get me started on some of the other bizarre sexual behavior practiced by MARRIED citizens.

This issue has nothing to do with peoples sexual preferences or activities and everything to do with equal rights. If you want to deny people equal rights because you don't like what they do to each other in the privacy of their homes than we are going to have to start smashing down doors to the homes of S&M affectionaros and don't even get me started on some of the other bizarre sexual behavior practiced by MARRIED citizens.

Spot. On.

I just realized what post was deleted -- shame everyone didn't see what the poster in question was capable of (and how bizzare it was) but can't blame anyone for wanting it off the board.

I was kind of proud of myself for not responding with any vitriol (but in truth it was just too ridiculous). But at least I had the unique experience, as a heterosexual, of a having homophobic remarks directed at me.

Edited June 4, 201115 yr by SteeleJoe

Homophobia

noun: prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality

And I'm genuinely mystified by this idea -- in your post andthat of thers -- that one can be OK with homosexuals but not 'agree with it/ approve of it'. What's that about? What is there to disapprove of or not agree with? The fact that they are sexually attracted to their own gender? If so, then how can you say you aren't against homosexuality per se?

I'm not overly sure of your question. To my mind, I'm not interested in men sexually so to say so is no big deal. Same as if I see a young man with a 90 year old woman and I say that 'each to their own but I'd never do it'. I don't agree with it nor do would I want to do it, but it's not me so I don't care what anyone else does, up to them. There is nothing wrong with it. Shagging a guy isn't for me and I'm happy to say so. However some on here think it is wong for me to say that.

Do you think a straight person would have a hissy fit if a gay man said he didn't agree or approve of a man shagging a woman. I personally couldn't care less. Everyone can have their own view. If a gay man says he doesn't like or want to shag a woman is that wrong? I don't think so.

I don't think it has anything to do with fear or dislike, not in my mind anyway, it's just that I'm not interested, each to their own.

I will say though that if someone was to actually go up to a gay person and, say, chastise them on their choice of relationship then that is out of order and then it is ok to take whatever steps you feel necessary to deal with the git.

Just do what you want and get on with it without worrying or being so sensitive.

I just realized what post was deleted -- shame everyone didn't see what the poster in question was capable of (and how bizzare it was) but can't blame anyone for wanting it off the board.

I was kind of proud of myself for not responding with any vitriol (but in truth it was just too ridiculous). But at least I had the unique experience, as a heterosexual, of a having homophobic remarks directed at me.

Ahh, I missed it.

homophobe

homophobe

homophobe

Just joking.

I'm all for equal rights for gays, but, I think it should be called something other than "marriage".

Marriage should be used only for a union between between a man and a woman.

Maybe call it Civil Union with all the same rights as marriage.

Homophobia

noun: prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality

And I'm genuinely mystified by this idea -- in your post andthat of thers -- that one can be OK with homosexuals but not 'agree with it/ approve of it'. What's that about? What is there to disapprove of or not agree with? The fact that they are sexually attracted to their own gender? If so, then how can you say you aren't against homosexuality per se?

I'm not overly sure of your question. To my mind, I'm not interested in men sexually so to say so is no big deal. Same as if I see a young man with a 90 year old woman and I say that 'each to their own but I'd never do it'. I don't agree with it nor do would I want to do it, but it's not me so I don't care what anyone else does, up to them. There is nothing wrong with it. Shagging a guy isn't for me and I'm happy to say so. However some on here think it is wong for me to say that.

Do you think a straight person would have a hissy fit if a gay man said he didn't agree or approve of a man shagging a woman. I personally couldn't care less. Everyone can have their own view. If a gay man says he doesn't like or want to shag a woman is that wrong? I don't think so.

I don't think it has anything to do with fear or dislike, not in my mind anyway, it's just that I'm not interested, each to their own.

I will say though that if someone was to actually go up to a gay person and, say, chastise them on their choice of relationship then that is out of order and then it is ok to take whatever steps you feel necessary to deal with the git.

Just do what you want and get on with it without worrying or being so sensitive.

Most of that sounds eminently sensible to me.

But I don't understand this:

I don't agree with it nor do would I want to do it...

What is there to "agree" with?

And this:

Shagging a guy isn't for me and I'm happy to say so. However some on here think it is wong for me to say that.

Really? Is there anyone here who thinks it's wrong for you to say that you aren't sexually attracted to men? I've been straight all my life and had Gay friends virtually all of it as well (given that some of my parents very closest frieinds -- people that were like family to me -- were Gay), and I've never heard of any of them thinking it was wrong for me to say I wasn't Gay and didn't want to have sex with men.

If anyone did say that, I'd tell them to f*^K off -- that would be no less offensive to me than a homophobic or racist comment. But I can't imagine it and I don't recall seeing it on this thread (though you aren't the first on this thread to suggest that such thing is being said here).

Edited June 4, 201115 yr by SteeleJoe

I'm fully on board with the idea that throwing around labels gratuitously and without foundation -- whether it's (depending on the issue at hand) "homophobe", "racist" or anti-semite" or whatever - is intellectually dishonest and counterproductive if one has genuine debate or discussion in mind.

But there are times when clearly people have eraned such a label and the fact si relevant as it is a primary motivator i their argument. This predictable and overly used dodge -- 'I'm not a homophobe becasue I'm not afraid of homosexuals' -- is faulty on 2 counts: prejudice is largely about fear, conscious or not. (of course no racist, homophobe et al will admit to such a fear even if they are conscious of it). Secondly, the denial is based on a too literal approach -- but everyone knows what "homophobe" means...

Homophobia

noun: prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality

And I'm genuinely mystified by this idea -- in your post andthat of thers -- that one can be OK with homosexuals but not 'agree with it/ approve of it'. What's that about? What is there to disapprove of or not agree with? The fact that they are sexually attracted to their own gender? If so, then how can you say you aren't against homosexuality per se?

Clean and str8(pun intended)forward argument.

Being gay, contrary to a few bigots' opinions, is not a mental illness. Gay parenting, while not the topic here, has been discussed at some length and the results of genuine studies are pretty conclusive about that too.

A few interesting articles on the subject -----

The "Gayby Boom" http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-28/living/gayby_1_same-sex-couples-lesbian-parents?_s=PM:LIVING

Actually talks to some of the adult children of gay/Lesbian parents. One of the interesting things in the article is the suggestion that if one happens to be a gay kid of same-gender parents, it is harder to "come out" (The percentages are the same as in the general population .. but the kids find it harder to come out just because they don't want to add fuel to the debate about gay parenting!)

Science has already weighed in on the question of whether same-sex couples tend to raise gay children -- and if there's something wrong if they do.

According to the American Psychological Association, numerous research shows that most kids of same-sex households describe themselves as heterosexual in roughly the same proportion as conventional families. The association also says that homosexuality is not deviant behavior but a normal expression of human sexuality.

The APA also concludes that gay parents are just as capable as straight parents, and that laws barring same-sex couples from adopting have no scientific basis.

What the APA really has to say about gay parenting (That's the American Psychological Association )

http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/parenting.aspx

Science Daily --- http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100831091240.htmMescape

"Sample size is power," Rosenfeld said. "And the census is the biggest sample we have. This study is based on a sample of thousands and thousands of kids."Most personal decisions about gay marriage are based on gut feelings, religious beliefs and individual experiences. Rosenfeld knows his research isn't going to change the minds of most people opposed to same-sex unions. But he has added new data to the debate that helps debunk assertions -- whether based on a lack of knowledge or some unfounded fear -- that children raised by gay couples cannot thrive.

"Social scientists have an obligation to shed light where they can on issues that are roiling the public," he said. "Sometimes we have to throw up our hands and admit that something is unknowable. But in this case, we could bring some real hard data to bear on an area that was otherwise really in the dark."

Medscape --- http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/514477

Oct. 13, 2005 (Washington) — An analysis of multiple studies of 500 households shows that rearing children in a same-sex household does not affect the their self-esteem, gender identity, or emotional health, a Boston researcher reported."Pediatricians need to recognize that there are variations in families and learn what kind of advice to give them to optimize the child's development," said Ellen Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts-New England Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts.

The researcher and colleagues looked at data from 15 studies evaluating possible stigma, teasing, social isolation, adjustment, sexual orientation, and strengths. The findings were presented here at the American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference and Exhibition.

Source --- AAP 2005 National Conference and Exhibition: Concurrent Seminar F340. Presented Oct. 10, 2005.Reviewed by Gary D. Vogin, MD

CBSNews -- sourced from WebMd --- Sourced from the same AAP National conference above ..... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/12/health/webmd/main938234.shtml

(WebMD) Children growing up in same-sex parental households do not necessarily have differences in self-esteem, gender identity, or emotional problems from children growing up in heterosexual parent homes.

"There are a lot of children with at least one gay or lesbian parent," says Ellen C. Perrin, MD, professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston. She revealed the findings at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference and Exhibition.

Between one million and six million children in the U.S. are being reared by committed lesbian or gay couples, she says. Children being raised by same-sex parents were either born to a heterosexual couple, adopted, or conceived through artificial insemination.

JD: Not asking you to be the spokesman for Gay men everywhere but what about you personally -- do you think it's wrong of me to say (not that I see any need to) that I am not sexually attracted to men and have no desire to have sex with one*?

*So far, at least! And given all the sexual exploration -- at one time somewhat obssesive and occasionally even a bit extreme compared to the more Vanilla type folks -- I've done in my 48 years, I'd be surprised if that were to change now.

Most of that sounds eminently sensible to me.

But I don't understand this:

I don't agree with it nor do would I want to do it...

What is there to "agree" with?

And this:

Shagging a guy isn't for me and I'm happy to say so. However some on here think it is wong for me to say that.

Really? Is there anyone here who thinks it's wrong for you to say that you aren't sexually attracted to men? I've been straight all my life and had Gay friends virtually all of it as well (given that some of my parents very closest frieinds -- people that were like family to me -- were Gay), and I've never heard of any of them thinking it was wrong for me to say I wasn't Gay and didn't want to have sex with men.

If anyone did say that, I'd tell them to f*^K off -- that would be no less offensive to me than a homophobic or racist comment. But I can't imagine it and I don't recall seeing it on this thread (though you aren't the first on this thread to suggest that such thing is being said here).

First quote.......perhaps I could have put that better and simply stated.......I don't want to do it nor am I interested.

Second quote........It does seem to me that some think it is wrong to say such things but not to worry, no big deal.

JD: Not asking you to be the spokesman for Gay men everywhere but what about you personally -- do you think it's wrong of me to say (not that I see any need to) that I am not sexually attracted to men and have no desire to have sex with one*?

*So far, at least! And given all the sexual exploration -- at one time somewhat obssesive and occasionally even a bit extreme compared to the more Vanilla type folks -- I've done in my 48 years, I'd be surprised if that were to change now.

SJ --- I am no model spokesman for the gay community ...... but if I can be brutally honest ......

Given the demographics of TVF --- I would prefer if you all were str8

On a more serious note --- I do find the defensiveness of people feeling the need to state they are not attracted to men pretty interesting! Something reminiscent of that "complacent liberalism" I was talking to Nisa about ... ""Some of my best friends are black" --- It is a mind-set I find in myself on occasion that I really try and challenge!

JD: Not asking you to be the spokesman for Gay men everywhere but what about you personally -- do you think it's wrong of me to say (not that I see any need to) that I am not sexually attracted to men and have no desire to have sex with one*?

*So far, at least! And given all the sexual exploration -- at one time somewhat obssesive and occasionally even a bit extreme compared to the more Vanilla type folks -- I've done in my 48 years, I'd be surprised if that were to change now.

SJ --- I am no model spokesman for the gay community ...... but if I can be brutally honest ......

Given the demographics of TVF --- I would prefer if you all were str8

On a more serious note --- I do find the defensiveness of people feeling the need to state they are not attracted to men pretty interesting! Something reminiscent of that "complacent liberalism" I was talking to Nisa about ... ""Some of my best friends are black" --- It is a mind-set I find in myself on occasion that I really try and challenge!

I'll pay that as the quote of the thread.

Well I'm afraid I'm lost, I just don't understand the issue with saying that. I also don't see any defensiveness. I know gay men that often state they aren't interested in women, particularly to women. Maybe it's just defining your sexuality so there can be no 'uncomfortable' moments. I don't know, just seems like a natural thing to say and I don't see any reason to take offence at it.

Maybe I'm just too laid back about such things.

JD: Not asking you to be the spokesman for Gay men everywhere but what about you personally -- do you think it's wrong of me to say (not that I see any need to) that I am not sexually attracted to men and have no desire to have sex with one*?

*So far, at least! And given all the sexual exploration -- at one time somewhat obssesive and occasionally even a bit extreme compared to the more Vanilla type folks -- I've done in my 48 years, I'd be surprised if that were to change now.

SJ --- I am no model spokesman for the gay community ...... but if I can be brutally honest ......

Given the demographics of TVF --- I would prefer if you all were str8

On a more serious note --- I do find the defensiveness of people feeling the need to state they are not attracted to men pretty interesting! Something reminiscent of that "complacent liberalism" I was talking to Nisa about ... ""Some of my best friends are black" --- It is a mind-set I find in myself on occasion that I really try and challenge!

Agree with you on all of that (well, except for the implicit crack about finding me sexually unattractive -- I mean the rest of these guys, OK...but me?): I saw that bit with Nisa and I totally get the parallel you draw.

Look, it's about context, isn't it?

Typically I can't see any reason to declare "I don't want to have sex with men!" and I think people who are compelled to inject it into the discourse when it's irrelevant, are often saying something about themselves other than just their sexual orientation.

But if someone asks you if you're Gay or are interested in sex with men (redundant, I guess), or the information is somehow relevant, then I can't imagine why it would be wrong to assert that you are not (absent any additional comment about being grossed out by it etc -- which WOULD be "homophobic")

I'll pay that as the quote of the thread.

Well I'm afraid I'm lost, I just don't understand the issue with saying that. I also don't see any defensiveness. I know gay men that often state they aren't interested in women, particularly to women. Maybe it's just defining your sexuality so there can be no 'uncomfortable' moments. I don't know, just seems like a natural thing to say and I don't see any reason to take offence at it.

Maybe I'm just too laid back about such things.

We are on an internet forum --- I see it as defensive (no need for it)

If we were sitting in a bar there would still be no need for it .. (pointing the negative) .... as we would do it in the affirmative. You'd look over your beer at a woman and smile ---- and thus endeth the conversation ... I'd look at a cute guy (if there were any) and smile .. and you'd know. If there weren't any, I'd be finishing my beer quickly and say "I am off to a place with cuter guys "

The level of defensiveness goes right with that complacent liberalism ---- "I'm not gay, but I approve of gay marriage" --- how does the first statement help? Some people see it as an affirmative statement of support --- and to all of the not gay people that support gay marriage --- Thanks! I, however, see it slightly different. Human rights are human rights. I don't typically say ... I'm not a woman but I am in favor of women's rights. In fact, I typically look at people oddly when they ask about "rights", as I am in favor of equal rights and rarely define it any more than that.

Note --- these are My opinions ....

"I'm not gay, but I approve of gay marriage" --- how does the first statement help?

Presumably, in some contexts, it can be meant as an assertion of one's impartiality and truly fair outlook.

Human rights are human rights.

Absolutely. That is my fundamental stance and I typically say such (think I may have on this thread).

I don't typically say ... I'm not a woman but I am in favor of women's rights.

You typically wouldn't need to (say the former) -- it's generally apparent, I'm sure. And I find it generally unnecessary to speak of "womens rights" as well.

"I'm not gay, but I approve of gay marriage" --- how does the first statement help?

Presumably, in some contexts, it can be meant as an assertion of one's impartiality and truly fair outlook.

Human rights are human rights.

Absolutely. That is my fundamental stance and I typically say such (think I may have on this thread).

I don't typically say ... I'm not a woman but I am in favor of women's rights.

You typically wouldn't need to (say the former) -- it's generally apparent, I'm sure. And I find it generally unnecessary to speak of "womens rights" as well.

Gender (as is the case of sexual orientation) is not apparent online ---- I thought Nisa was a woman because of the avatar.

edit ---- "I'm not gay but am for gay marriage" seems a bit patronizing on one hand and self-congratulatory on the other ...

hi PB! I see you there! Hope you are well! Your input on parenting on this thread would have been helpful! I almost went back and dug out some of your old posts! We all look forward to your speedy recovery and future contributions!

Edited June 4, 201115 yr by jdinasia

I'll pay that as the quote of the thread.

Well I'm afraid I'm lost, I just don't understand the issue with saying that. I also don't see any defensiveness. I know gay men that often state they aren't interested in women, particularly to women. Maybe it's just defining your sexuality so there can be no 'uncomfortable' moments. I don't know, just seems like a natural thing to say and I don't see any reason to take offence at it.

Maybe I'm just too laid back about such things.

We are on an internet forum --- I see it as defensive (no need for it)

If we were sitting in a bar there would still be no need for it .. (pointing the negative) .... as we would do it in the affirmative. You'd look over your beer at a woman and smile ---- and thus endeth the conversation ... I'd look at a cute guy (if there were any) and smile .. and you'd know. If there weren't any, I'd be finishing my beer quickly and say "I am off to a place with cuter guys "

The level of defensiveness goes right with that complacent liberalism ---- "I'm not gay, but I approve of gay marriage" --- how does the first statement help? Some people see it as an affirmative statement of support --- and to all of the not gay people that support gay marriage --- Thanks! I, however, see it slightly different. Human rights are human rights. I don't typically say ... I'm not a woman but I am in favor of women's rights. In fact, I typically look at people oddly when they ask about "rights", as I am in favor of equal rights and rarely define it any more than that.

Note --- these are My opinions ....

You put your opinion quite well, I just don't agree with some of them.

Using your scenario I think it is quite good to say 'I'm not gay but I support gay marriage'. The first part of the statement takes away any perceived bias of your view because you don't have a 'motive' for your view. Therefore I think it should be said.

One could say 'the Pope is a daft git' and without more information one could think there may be a bias, depending on who says it. But if one says 'The Pope is a daft git, and I'm a catholic'. It adds to the statement to indicate a lack of bias. Maybe.

And to reiterate you...those are my opinions and mine only.

Wallaby --- your parents might be gay, your children might be gay, your siblings might be gay ---- stating you are not gay doesn't eliminate the idea that there may be bias still --- except in some folks .. and they don't think it through too much ....

(And yes one of my co-workers says frequently "you think too much" (To which I reply .. that's why I get paid the big bucks!)

JD, by the way, if we were having beers and you preferred a gay bar so you could perve I'd probably go along as most of the gay bars I've been to have been a hoot.

<br />

<br /><b>JD:</b> Not asking you to be the spokesman for Gay men everywhere <img src="http://static.thaivisa.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif" /> but what about you personally -- do you think it's wrong of me to say (not that I see any need to) that I am not sexually attracted to men and have no desire to have sex with one*? <br /><br /><br />*So far, at least! And given all the sexual exploration -- at one time somewhat obssesive and occasionally even a bit extreme compared to the more Vanilla type folks -- I've done in my 48 years, I'd be surprised if that were to change now.<br /><br /><br /><br />

<br /><br />SJ --- I am no model spokesman for the gay community ...... but if I can be brutally honest ......<br /><br />Given the demographics of TVF --- I would prefer if you all were str8 <img src='http://static.thaivisa.com/forum/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /><br /><br />On a more serious note --- I do find the defensiveness of people feeling the need to state they are not attracted to men pretty interesting! Something reminiscent of that "complacent liberalism" I was talking to Nisa about ... ""Some of my best friends are black" --- It is a mind-set I find in myself on occasion that I really try and challenge!<br />

<br /><br /><br />

JD, in this case I have to take issue with you. I think the question of sexual orientation is valid in the context of this thread. When someone says they are for gay marriage, for example, then add that he or she is straight, I think that is relevant. Or, if someone who is gay is against gay marriage, I think that would be equally relevant.

Now if the thread was about the English Premier League or The Hangover Part II, and they volunteer that information, well, OK, I can see your point. But in this thread, I think it is relevant.

JD, by the way, if we were having beers and you preferred a gay bar so you could perve I'd probably go along as most of the gay bars I've been to have been a hoot.

Some of the best nights I've had have been at Gay clubs or at "Gay night" at the Palladium in NYC (and when I was with a woman, no one seemed to be offended)...but I hope we aren't being condescending...

Does sound dangerously close to 'some of my best friends are...' ( but then again, I happen to think that sort of comment can also be valid and relevant in some contexts).

Anyway, if I'm not supposed to ever say that I'm straight, I give up. I haven't a homophobic bone in my body but I'm not willing to try that hard to not offend -- though I certainly don't want to.

Deleted out of apathy.

Edited June 4, 201115 yr by Crushdepth

JD, in this case I have to take issue with you. I think the question of sexual orientation is valid in the context of this thread. When someone says they are for gay marriage, for example, then add that he or she is straight, I think that is relevant. Or, if someone who is gay is against gay marriage, I think that would be equally relevant.

Now if the thread was about the English Premier League or The Hangover Part II, and they volunteer that information, well, OK, I can see your point. But in this thread, I think it is relevant.

Me too. (Again, it's about context. Precisley how, why and when it's stated.

your parents might be gay, your children might be gay, your siblings might be gay ---- stating you are not gay doesn't eliminate the idea that there may be bias still --- except in some folks .. and they don't think it through too much ....

NOTHING can eliminate the possibility. If one wants to question that deeply -- absent any reasonable cause...well, then it's hard to have a discussion. All things being equal, a certain amount of good faith has to be allowed...