A Question For Homosexuals

Ok I understand what you both mean. "Homosexual" indeed sounds clinical and is not really a term you identify with. I never use that word myself, I identify as lesbian. We could say the same about "heterosexual", most people use straight.

Same goes for hearing impaired indeed, good comparison!
 
I should probably clarify that I am straight, but I have a vested interest in gay rights and equality.
 
Clairol said:
Ok I understand what you both mean. "Homosexual" indeed sounds clinical and is not really a term you identify with. I never use that word myself, I identify as lesbian. We could say the same about "heterosexual", most people use straight.

Same goes for hearing impaired indeed, good comparison!
Click to expand...

I rarely use the word, and none of my gay / lesbian friends use it for self identification purposes. However, they have been known to use it in discussions of clinical or sociological implications. I don't see it as a negative, nor do they. I would liken it more to use of the term deaf than "hearing impaired". Now if someone was using the term "sexual orientation impaired" then there would be a problem.:giggle: There are many derogatory terms out there in regard to homosexuality. Let's work on getting rid of those.

And, let's also keep context in mind, and who is using the terminology. Intent is important here. My best friend happens to be a gay guy. I call him a "mo" all the time. Coming from me, it is not an insult, and we both know my intent is not to degrade. Coming from a homophobic, it would have a completely different connotation. Nor would I ever use such a reference with someone I did not have a deep and abiding friendship with.
 
How do we know the stooges weren't gay?

They all slept in the same bed.

This thread is HILARIOUS!
 
this is how i was born. there is and was nothing i could do to change my feelings and how i think.
 
SilentRider said:
Yesterday 's Lies: Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals

I came across this and was shocked that now some are claiming they should have same rights as homosexuals with pedophiles.. the fact that they are kids who don't have any rights and being used is just so wrong!
Click to expand...

Meh! This is just another one of those slippery slope arguments that the homophobes are always using.:roll: Ironic that some rag called "Yesterday's Lies" is busy telling lies.
 
jillio said:
Meh! This is just another one of those slippery slope arguments that the homophobes are always using.:roll: Ironic that some rag called "Yesterday's Lies" is busy telling lies.
Click to expand...

Actually did you know it does exist? There's the Renee Gunyon Society and NAMBLA. But yeah I think that the slippary slope argument for that is rediclous......Being gay involves consenting adults! Kids cannot consent at ALL!
 
deafdyke said:
Actually did you know it does exist? There's the Renee Gunyon Society and NAMBLA. But yeah I think that the slippary slope argument for that is rediclous......Being gay involves consenting adults! Kids cannot consent at ALL!
Click to expand...

Sure it does, but it is still part of the slippery slope argument. There is no way that this country will grant marraige rights to pedophiles and children.:roll: The two situations cannot even be compared.
 
jillio said:
Sure it does, but it is still part of the slippery slope argument. There is no way that this country will grant marraige rights to pedophiles and children.:roll: The two situations cannot even be compared.
Click to expand...

Are people really so stupid to buy into that argument? Are people so willing to let someone else do their thinking? If so, I am in the wrong business... If people are that so hard up for a leader that they will follow idiots, maybe all we need to do is give them something honest to follow. :shock:
 
Back
Top