We often hear from gay leaders of the diversity of the gay (or GLBT, or LGBTQ, etc.) community. Each June we have Pride Parade slogans like "Celebrate Diversity," or "Unity in Diversity" (or maybe it's the other way around). But no one ever explains exactly what our diversity consists in, nor why diversity is a good thing or why we should celebrate it, nor do they explain how this diversity can be forged into some sort of unity, nor what kind of unity or for what.
I suspect that our diversity, like our unity, is merely a linguistic construct, designed to mean anything people want it to. No doubt each of us is different from every other gay person. But celebrating a fact like that is like a slogan to "Celebrate Gravity." Nor are we any more diverse than the rest of America; we're just part of America's own diversity.
There is a fairly sophisticated philosophical argument for diversity connected with the (Karl) Popperian notion that "all life is problem solving." At its simplest, the argument is that the more perspectives you have on a problem, the better chance you have to discover solutions as problems come along. But I don't hear anything like that from gay spokespersons. I hear the claim that the fact of diversity is a good thing in itself.
Think for a moment of the ways in which we are different from one another, or, if you like, of the constituent groups in our community. We differ by sex, race, ethnicity, sexual tastes, age, and economic level. As more people have come out and our community has grown larger these various groups have become large enough for people to find ample stimulus and friendship within their own groups. Old-time gay bars in small towns were home to men and women, drags and leather men, and different races. So you would think that there is a centrifugal tendency in the community resulting from its growth.
But some of these differences are lessening. Once Latinos and other immigrants learn English, ethnicity has a fading significance except as an additional cultural heritage. Race, I think, is slowly fading as a differentiator. As "leather" diversifies, "leathermen" seem to be feeling less need for separate space. So there are some centripetal (if not exactly unifying) forces at work. On the other hand, as gays who came out when young live into their 60s and 70s, age may become an increasing differentiator. That is not clear yet.
One thing that helps overcome these various divisions is the fact of sexual attraction. That can exist on the basis of physical attractiveness (not the constituent group of the other person) but also on the appeal of differentness or exoticism. And in both cases, the appeal no doubt consists to some degree of the cultural meaning attached to the qualities of the other person. That is too individual to generalize about.
But gay men and lesbians do not have sexual attraction to draw them to one another. Or put playfully, all they have in common is their lack of (sexual) interest in each other. That's not quite true. They continue to work together, as they have since the beginning of the movement, for common political goals: marriage, military access, adoption and child custody rights. But as our political goals are gradually achieved there will be less reason to work together and get to know each other well enough to become friends, although there will continue to be links at our various social service agencies.
Within the GLBT acronym, the whole status of bisexuals is uncertain. Bisexuality seems far more common among women than men. No doubt there are a few lifelong bisexual men (Kinsey 2, 3, 4)-there are a few of everything-but they are rare. According to The New York Times, a recent research study found that "men who called themselves bisexuals were significantly more aroused by one gender, usually by men."
According to the same article, "heterosexual women physically don't seem to differentiate between genders in their sexual responses." As some women put it, they are attracted more to the person rather than the person's specific sex. Hence the ease of "bisexual chic"-among women, but not men. Consider too the women who remain with their partners even after the partner has gone through sexual reassignment surgery. Whereas if a man's wife became a transsexual man... ?
Market research firms count bisexual in a long term relationship with a person of the same sex as a member of the gay community, but not if they are in one with the opposite sex. We could also rate them on their degree of commitment to or identification with the gay community. Some may feel such a commitment, others may not. So bisexuals may or may not be members of our community.
42 Comments for “Diversity…or Divergence?”
posted by comment one on
I have no reason to believe that diversity is good in itself. If I have a problem to solve, I don’t need a whole bunch of /different/ perspectives, I need good ones. For the gay community, this should never have been the angle from which it argued for equal treatment because it’s irrelevant. There is no problem for which a celebration of diversity is in order. Tolerance for difference and equal treatment, even when it means, separation, is what is in order.
posted by Clyde on
In practice, “diversity” usually means racial diversity. When schools and employers seek diversity, they usually mean they are seeking racial diversity. Since every person is diverse, using diversity as a synonym for racially integrated does not create clarity. “Diversity” is simply political rhetoric or a slogan, vague, broad, and can be applied to any two people or any two groups. Therefore, it’s not useful for creating clarity on gay issues. We need less rhetoric and fewer slogans and more facts and principles to achieve equality under law.
posted by Richard on
Seems like the author has a bit of a problem, or obsession with bisexuals.
Bisexuals are certainly not uncertain that they exist, nor is much credible scientific evidence.
Yet, some people want to pretend that bisexuals could not possibly exist as anything more then a stop along some magical highway to gay or straight-ness.
posted by Ashpenaz on
I consider transexuality to be on the heterosexual spectrum–it is a woman (inside a man’s body) attracted to a man. It is feminine attracted to masculine, which is the definition of heterosexuality. I don’t think it’s particularly useful to us or to them include transexuals in the gay community.
BTW, in case you’ve forgotten, gay means men attracted to men, masculine attracted to masculine. If it doesn’t mean that, please let me know so I can use the right word about myself.
posted by guapoguy on
Genetic diversity in biological evolution, in association with natural selection, is critical to biological species improvement. The same holds true for social evolution. Social diversity, paired with social selection, leads to social improvement. Just as genetic inbreeding leads to the emergence of biologic weakness, so also will social inbreeding lead to the emergence of social weakness. Conversely, diversity will ultimately lead to greater strength, both biologically and socially.
On the other hand, the democratic process of social evolution is often frustratingly slow, and full of dead end tangents, as anyone who has served on a committee should be aware. The more the members of any social group concentrate on their differences, rather than their common interests, the more frustrating the process will become. So admittedly, now and then someone just has to stand up and make a decision.
posted by Craig2 on
Much would depend on the issues involved. All of us- LGBT -require anti-discrimination laws. Lesbians and gay men alike are both affected by prohibitionist legislation or proposed constitutional amendments that outlaw same-sex
marriage, as well as discriminatory bans against same-sex parenting (whether achieved through fostering, guardianship,
reproductive technology or fostering).
The transgender community has some unique issues, like changes to one’s official documentation to reflect one’s reassigned sex,
access to reassignment surgery,
standards of care within such
surgery, etc.
As for the bisexual part of the LGBT equation, though, one problem is that apart from HIV/AIDS prevention needs, the bi
community appears not to have
articulated its own distinctive
issues for legislative reform.
I wouldn’t want to exclude them,
it’s just that there’s a silence there that isn’t the case with the lesbian, gay and transgender communities.
Craig2
Wellington, NZ
posted by David Skidmore on
Like it or not, diversity will always be there in the gay community. Gay men and lesbians for starters have different issues. And it’s not only our community which experiences this. Indigenous communities the world over are divided on gender lines amongst other divisions. But whether we are gay men, lesbians or transsexuals (and I’m aware transsexuals don’t necessarily identify with the first two groups) we are condemned as “queer” and bashed or even murdered as a result. Of course, sometimes there are issues we can’t agree on or organise around. But then the enemies of gays have their divisions as well – which are always worthwhile exploiting.
posted by Matt on
You know,
I can’t totally see your statements about lesbian and gay men moving apart as true at all, at least not from the stand point of this young queer college kid. In my experience I have seen LGBTQI youth all very integrated and not just for political reasons, either. I have made many lesbian friends and while we’re not sexually attracted to each other we still talk, often times on an intimate level, about our shared experiences as non-straight people in a straight dominated society. A lot of social organizations that exist for people to meet people often serve gay and lesbian folks alike, and I think that’s how these groups will “stay together.” I also see a lot less conflict among younger LGBTQI folks than I see among older ones. “Oh the dykes control the Community Center” “Oh the gay men wont give money to this cause…” is what I hear a lot from older community members. Not so for younger ones, I feel there’s more of a “we’re all in this together” sort of mentality, even when we don’t agree or are in extremely LGBTQI-friendly climates. And sometimes I and other gay youth I know meet and befriend really butch lesbians that we end up finding attractive in a more than admiring way.
As for the guy who made a comment about biological evolution and social evolution, dude that’s social darwinism you’re talking about… you understand under Darwin’s theory we’re all “biologically unfit” right?–i.e. useless to society because we dont contribute to the gene pool. Social Darwinism also underpins a lot of Hitler’s ideologies… why on earth would you even consider involving that idea in a discussion of diversity?
As for the question this author proposed about whether or not diversity itself is worth celebrating (and remember this is coming from a young Californian): Diversity exists, especially in this country (it always has, btw), celebrate it or get over it. Yes it’s a linguistic construct, it’s a word… words are linguistic constructs, what kind of statement is that? It’s a concept that everyone has their own particular view of, ok, so what? Back in the day it was linguistic diversity between German and English speaking immigrants. Then it was Catholic vs. Protestant and Black and White and now it’s so complex and demographically final that there’s no productive reason why you would ask that question because even if you conclude that diversity is bad, well too bad for you it’s not going away… unless you want to think like that one guy who posted on here about Social Darwinism.
I think people feel the need to celebrate it because not too long ago it was not celebrated. Certain groups were “normal” and in power and “superior” in their own minds. Those ideas have been smashed. Celebrate diversity means we’re celebrating all of us, not just the straight white male protestant people who have historically controled everything and been exclusively celebrated in our societal narrative. What’s the problem with that?
And Ashpenaz, I’m not sure about the term “gay” meaning masculine guy into masculine guy… What about feminine gay guys? I’m pretty masculine I think, although a bit queer in a lot of ways, and have been attracted to men as butch as Bruce Willis and others who are more feminine than many or most women I know. I think that’s a matter of personal preference, really.
posted by Ashpenaz on
Here is a link to an article I wish I’d written:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28491
OK, no one has addressed this, so I’ll ask it again: Why is transgender part of the gay spectrum? If a transgender is a woman who loves a man, isn’t that heterosexual?
Gay means a man who loves a man, BTW. Masculine loving masculine. In case you forgot.
posted by Richard on
Someome said; gay means men attracted to men, masculine attracted to masculine.
That may be what being gay means to you, but that does not mean that is what being gay means to other people; gay or straight.
Being masculine or feminine is a product of gender — not sex — roles which are often sterotypically put onto men, women, gay and straight.
Some of the earliest fighters for gay rights have been transgender and the issue of gender identity is often connected — socially — with sexual orientation.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Ashpenaz asked ” Why is transgender part of the gay spectrum? If a transgender is a woman who loves a man, isn’t that heterosexual?”
Transgender is part of the gay spectrum because like gays we are often rejected by the mainstream as sexual outlaws, we are both opposed for being who we are. Trans people don’t necessarily prefer the opposite sex either. There are transwomen who prefer women and transmen who prefer men. To use your terminology, many transpeople are also gay.
posted by Priya Lynn on
“Comment one” said “I have no reason to believe that diversity is good in itself. If I have a problem to solve, I don’t need a whole bunch of /different/ perspectives, I need good ones.”.
Of course diversity is good in itself. By getting a whole bunch of different perspectives you’re less likely to miss getting the good ones.
posted by David Skidmore on
Transgender people don’t really fit into the gay spectrum. However, in common with gay men and lesbians they don’t conform to gender roles as expected. Gay people are attracted to their own gender. Transgender people wish to change genders. Both groups are abominations according to the anti-gay lobby.
So, gays and trannies can be allies but various issues warrant separate organisations. Sort of in the same way that lesbians have separate organisations from mainstream women’s organisations such as NOW.
posted by Ashpenaz on
The fact that I and someone else share the fact that we are considered “abominations” by some other group of people doesn’t mean we have anything else in common, or that we have to work together. Fat people are considered abominations. Old people are considered abominiations. I am much more worried about my elderly mother going to the hospital and being refused treatment or simply being neglected to death due to age. Why can’t we include old, unnattractive, and fat people in the gay spectrum? Why don we join together to fight ageism and looksism? If a transgender is helpless against their body, even more so are old, fat, and unattractive people. Let’s have GLBTFUO. Gay/Lesbian/Bi/Trans/Fat/Ugly/Old.
If you don’t want to include the Fat, Ugly, and Old in the Rainbow, then don’t complain when I don’t want to include the transgender.
posted by David Skidmore on
I’ll clarify and state that it is the gender issue that brings gay men, lesbians and transgender people together. That said, like many gay men I am also concerned with racism, ageism and other forms of discrimination. For instance, older gay men face two forms of prejudice and combating such prejudice often means taking on the gay community itself with its obsession with youth.
As I also said, gay men, lesbians and transgender people can unite on some issues – such as anti-gay violence – (gay bashers don’t care if their victim is actually transgender rather than gay). But there are other things on which we have to go our separate ways.
Of course there is nothing to compel “us” to work together. However, I find alliances more useful than separatism. Should I only align myself with HIV- gay men of German, Irish, Scottish and English ancestry called David Skidmore? That’d make the homophobe quake in horror I’m sure.
posted by Ashpenaz on
Gay is not a gender issue. Let me repeat–gay is not a gender issue. I am a man. I love men. There is no gender confusion there. Gay is not my feminine side reaching out to someone else’s masculine side. Gay is masculine loving masculine.
Gay men who express themselves with effeminate behavior are inauthentic. They are acting out of shame and brokeness. They are trying to gain acceptance by promoting a stereotype. Gay men need to heal themselves by fully claiming and embracing their masculinity. I don’t think the gay community should reward shamebased, appeasing, shuck ‘n jive, behavior any more than the black community should reward tap dancers and wise maids for submitting to a culturally acceptable roles. Effeminate gays are the house slaves, to quote Harry Belafonte, of the gay community.
posted by comment one on
Priya: “Of course diversity is good in itself. By getting a whole bunch of different perspectives you’re less likely to miss getting the good ones”.
They could ALL be bad, despite being varied.
David: “But there are other things on which we have to go our separate ways”.
Preferably when it comes to sex. LOL
posted by Richard on
Actually there is quite a bit of working going on with LGBT senior citizens and disabled people.
Gay is a ‘gender issue’ to most heterosexual people because they tend to believe that gay men and women are breaking traditional gender norms because of what they ‘do’.
We should not be excluding or “pushing down” effeminate gay men, in order to help mascluine gay men or vice versa. Or effeminate or mascluine gay women.
In pratical terms most people’s gender is somewhere in the middle. Can you boil water and change a tire?
posted by Priya Lynn on
Ashpenaz said “Gay men who express themselves with effeminate behavior are inauthentic. They are acting out of shame and brokeness. They are trying to gain acceptance by promoting a stereotype.”.
Nonsense. Effeminate gay men are just as authentic as masculine gay men. No man expects to gain acceptance by behaving effeminately which is exactly what straight people will hate them for, they behave that way because that’s the way they are. You don’t like effeminacy then don’t behave that way, but don’t think for a second you’ve got any right to dictate to any gay man that he should live according to your whims.
posted by Priya Lynn on
“comment one” said “Priya: “Of course diversity is good in itself. By getting a whole bunch of different perspectives you’re less likely to miss getting the good ones”.
They could ALL be bad, despite being varied.”.
Possibly, but that’s much less likely to be the case then if you limit yourself to opinions of only those who are like you. The less diversity in perspectives you get the less likely you are to get the one good answer.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Ashpenaz said “If you don’t want to include the Fat, Ugly, and Old in the Rainbow, then don’t complain when I don’t want to include the transgender.”.
The fat, ugly and old aren’t sexual outlaws like gays and transpeople are. The average bigot doesn’t distinguish between gays and transpeople, they oppose us all equally, that is why we are united. Who died and put you in charge of who’s part of the rainbow? As far as I’m concerned you’re not part of the rainbow yourself, you are far more of a hindrance than a help to those of us who truly are part of the rainbow. Your illogical anger at effeminate gay men shows you’re the one who’s broken and acting out of shame.
posted by David Skidmore on
Thank you, Richard. It is clear that gay men, lesbians, transgendered people (and bisexuals to an extent) are united by gender issues but the gender issues facing gay men are somewhat different compared with transsexuals. However, they are still gender issues. Gay men are quite generally quite comfortable in their masculinity. But whether gay men exhibit masculine behaviour or are effeminate (but still prefer sex with men than with women) they are seen as “unnatural”, “sick”, “perverted” etc because they want to have sexual relations with the wrong gender according to anti-gay bigots.
Btw, I’d be interested to know of any anti-gay organisations which condemn gay men and lesbians but have no problem with transgender people. Any thoughts?
posted by comment one on
My thought is that it happens. In Iran, homosexual men are condemned. But if they were willing to get a sex change, suddenly things were ok. There was a story about this.
Priya, I think you are conflating quantity and quality.
posted by Bobby on
“Within the GLBT acronym, the whole status of bisexuals is uncertain.”
—Of course it is, because they’re not really part of the gay community, they’re outsiders.
A bisexual comes to the gay community seeking fun, but when he seeks marriage, children, family, respectability, he or she returns to the straight community.
They don’t have to spend thousands of dollars in in-vitro fertilization, they don’t have to fill papers to adopt kids. All they need to do is turn to the opposite sex.
Their status is uncertain because they can have all the fun without the sacrifices.
Look at all those straight girls kissing girls in straight clubs? Look at all the “lesbians until graduation” in college. Look at Girls Gone Wild. Bisexual girls are loved by the breeders. Bisexual boys are loved by their parents, because even though Tommy might like dick, he’ll still marry Jane and provide his homophobic parents with grandchildren, so who cares if Tommy is a little quirky? He’s still doing his duty, and if he has to cheat on his wife with men, who cares, right?
Yeah, poor bisexuals, they have suffered so much.
posted by comment one on
addendum to the last comment..
Of course, that’s more indicative of approval of heterosexual relationships not, that transsexuality is more approved than homosexuality.
posted by comment one on
Bobby, that’s only people that can choose to be attracted to a particular gender. That’s a whole different category of people. Bisexuals are just those capable of liking both genders. They don’t choose and could find themselves in a homosexual relationship facing the same problems as total homosexuals. Some homosexuals (like those that are celibate) escape some of the problem coupled homosexuals face just like bisexuals in heterosexuals relationships. Try not to resent a group like bisexuals or transsexuals for the aforementioned reason because we’d have to hate on ourselves too.
posted by comment one on
Of course when it comes to sex, screw the GLBTQ..etc etc community. LOL. I only want to be part of the exclusively-gay-biological-male-centered-sexuality community. LOL
posted by David Skidmore on
Oh dear, poor Bobby. All these bisexuals having some much fun and Bobby’s left at the altar. Well, Bobby this is the land of the free etc. Go off and become a bisexual and you too can share in the good times. On the other hand, I remember Michael Dane’s comments on his own bisexuality – “I can go to ANY bar and then go home alone.”
posted by Bobby on
GLBTQ Community? People who are “questioning” aren’t really part of the gay community. There’s no questioning muslims or questioning christians or questioning republicans. You have to KNOW who you are to be part of a community.
Comment one, I understand what bisexuals are. I’ve also dated them and have seen first hand how they treat women like princesses and men like whores. I’ve seen how they introduce their opposite sex partners to their parents, but never their same-sex partners.
I’ve seen them telling gay jokes in the company of breeders while fucking gay boys in the privacy or their college dormitories.
Bisexuals usually don’t like same-sex relationships, they just don’t respect us. They all want to marry and have kids the breeder way. But at the same time, they have same-sex desires, so they’re in the perfect situation to fuck both the gay and the straight community in more ways than one.
Besides, I also suspect a lot of so-called ex-gays, the ones that are actually successful in their conversion, are really latent bisexuals.
As for transsexuals, I never said anything about transsexuals, my post was about bisexuals.
posted by comment one on
I question whether those are true bisexuals you encountered. In my own analysis, to behave bisexually or homosexually isn’t necessarily real bisexuality or homosexuality. I used term “like” before, but I actually should say “love”. I think you have to have a love of both sexes in order to qualify as bisexual – not just sexual attraction. Those guys might just be closeted or confused, which can hold true for bisexuals and homosexuals alike, or they are really heterosexual guys who just used you for sex because they could.
Anyone that supports you can be part of your community, just as you can be part of any community of people you support. That’s the way I see it. The LGBTQ… community is nothing more than the human community who support equal rights for LGBTQ…’s.
posted by David Skidmore on
“I understand what bisexuals are. I’ve also dated them and have seen first hand how they treat women like princesses and men like whores. I’ve seen how they introduce their opposite sex partners to their parents, but never their same-sex partners.
“I’ve seen them telling gay jokes in the company of breeders while fucking gay boys in the privacy or their college dormitories.”
You could say the same thing about closetted gay men, Bobby. And the use of the term ‘breeder’ indicates a bitterness towards heterosexuals as well as bisexuals. Is there anyone you do like?
posted by Bobby on
I like the term, “breeder,” David. Straights use the word “faggot” without fear or concern for our feelings. Comedians who might get in trouble for using the n-word, unless they’re white, have no problem with the f-g. So I use breeder. Besides, most heterosexuals I know don’t find that word offensive, that’s what they like to do anyway, breed.
“to behave bisexually or homosexually isn’t necessarily real bisexuality or homosexuality.”
—That’s true in the case of prisoners and people who get paid for sex or marry for money or convenience. The bisexuals I dated where not under any coercion, they where not straight men experimenting.
“I think you have to have a love of both sexes in order to qualify as bisexual – not just sexual attraction.”
—I disagree, we have a sexual orientation, not a love orientation or an affectional orientation. That is why sometimes two straight men can have a platonic relationship just as strong as any marriage, but without the sex.
Consider heterosexual misogynists, they hate women but love having sex with them.
And also consider that the very people who are questioning probably don’t consider themselves part of the gay community, so you’re including people that don’t really want including. Think of that phenomenon among blacks, the ones who go on the down lo, who like having a girlfriend, a wife, and have sex with men on the side. These people can’t be consider part of our community, they’re simply using us. No different than a breeder going to a gay bar because he or she likes the music.
“Anyone that supports you can be part of your community,”
—African-Americans don’t see it that way, they may call Bill Cliton America’s First Black president, but Bill will never be considered a member of the black community.
The gay community is composed of those who are clearly different and who have no place in the straight world. Gays, lesbians, transsexuals.
I work with breeders, but I know I’m not one of them. For me to be one of them I would need to get a girlfriend. Bisexuals on the other hand can enjoy the breeder lifestyle and all the perks that come with it.
You see what I mean? I don’t get that choice. So unless I discover some secret attraction to women, I’m stuck in the gay community whether I belong or not. Bisexuals on the other hand, have a choice, and they often choose the breeder lifestyle before the gay lifestyle.
posted by comment one on
“That’s true in the case of prisoners and people who get paid for sex or marry for money or convenience”.
How can you be sure convenience wasn’t the motivation for the guys you dated? Acting on convenience isn’t limited to bisexuals, homosexuals, or heterosexuals.
“I disagree, we have a sexual orientation, not a love orientation or an affectional orientation”.
I can’t agree. But, for the sake of argument, even if I define sexual orientation strictly in relation sexual/erotic feelings, those feelings of love have to be accounted for too. In such a case, perhaps one has only a sexual orientation to the same-sex, but had a love and possibly sexual orientation, toward the opposite sex, or any other combination.
“African-Americans don’t see it that way, they may call Bill Cliton America’s First Black president, but Bill will never be considered a member of the black community”.
I beg to differ as an AA. In addition to Bill, there is the Rev. Pfleiger, a preacher in a predominantly black Catholic congregation in Chicago. I would bet many people consider him, because of his years of activism in support of black people, part of the black community. Then there is Obama, a BI-racial man, who is considered in the black community AND black – not mullato.
“Bisexuals on the other hand can enjoy the breeder lifestyle and all the perks that come with it”.
If they find themselves with the opposite sex, maybe. But if they find themselves with the same sex, then maybe not.
“You see what I mean? I don’t get that choice”
No, because you aren’t acknowledging that bisexuals don’t choose either.
I don’t think your beef is really with bisexuals. But if you still don’t want to date bisexuals for reasons other than assumptions about their behavior, that’s just fine.
posted by comment one on
How about this acronym, “NHNP”? The non-heteronormative-promoting community? lol
posted by comment one on
[edit]but has a love and possibly sexual orientation, toward the opposite sex, or any other combination.[/edit]
posted by David Skidmore on
I hate the term “faggot” and I hate the term “breeder”. People who use them are carping, whingeing, negative bores who seem to want to enclose themselves into some sort of politically-correct fortress where they can be politically pure without engaging with the outside world.
Of course, that’s tough luck because in the real world there are gays, lesbians, bisexuals and even straights (shock! horror!). Now excuse me while I go up the road and buy a paper from the breeder who runs the newsagency.
posted by Bobby on
David, I hate the word queer, but am I gonna stop anyone from using that word? No. So rather than tell people what words they can or can’t use, I’m gonna use whatever words like. Of course, I’ll never say breeder in front of a breeder, but that’s because I’m polite.
posted by Bobby on
“How can you be sure convenience wasn’t the motivation for the guys you dated?”
—Because I didn’t pay them to have sex with me, I didn’t coerce them. They had sex with me because unlike a woman, they don’t have to buy me dinner or get to know me.
“I can’t agree. But, for the sake of argument, even if I define sexual orientation strictly in relation sexual/erotic feelings, those feelings of love have to be accounted for too.”
—You do realize how many thousands of gays go through life sleeping with hundreds of different guys, never having relationships? Some gays are professional one-night-stands, some gays don’t seek love. Love doesn’t count. You don’t need love to be gay, straight, or anything.
“there is the Rev. Pfleiger, a preacher in a predominantly black Catholic congregation in Chicago. I would bet many people consider him, because of his years of activism in support of black people, part of the black community.”
—They tolerate him, like Eminem. Did you know for example that Eminem never uses the n-word? Every other wrapper sings “nigga this, nigga that.” But Eminem can’t do it because he’s not one of them, they would kick his ass if he ever did. Pfleiger also uses the same preaching style from the black church, and African-Americans tolerate it, but he’s not African-American. In fact, while gays try to include everyone, African-Americans don’t. Think about it, biracial marriages are frowned upon in the black community. Ask any white man that has married a black woman, they’ll face prejudice in both the white and black communities.
“Then there is Obama, a BI-racial man, who is considered in the black community AND black – not mullato.”
—Because he’s not a light-skin black. It’s all about looks. Read “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil,” which is a true story, and you’ll find a community of light-skin blacks that have fancy charitable balls where only light-skin blacks are invited. In the other book, “Hiding my candy” by the drag queen from that movie (who’s African American), she speaks of the prejudice light skin blacks have towards darking skin blacks.
If Obama was one of those light-skin blacks, or one of those blacks that can almost pass for white (and some do), then you bet he’d face a lot more prejudice from his own community.
“If they find themselves with the opposite sex, maybe. But if they find themselves with the same sex, then maybe not.”
—Well, and that’s the choice they have. Why would a bisexual want to marry me when he can marry a woman and have children that way? I even knew one gay-bisexual couple where the man was going to have sex with his best girlfriend to have a baby. And his boyfriend didn’t seem to mind. You see what I’m saying? He didn’t have to have sex with this woman, he could have done in vitro fertilization like most gays do. But instead, this wonderful bisexual decided to use his desire to breed as a perfect opportunity to get some poontang. I’m telling you, it’s disgusting.
“No, because you aren’t acknowledging that bisexuals don’t choose either.”
—They don’t choose attraction, they do choose their lifestyle.
Don’t take it from me, ask how many lesbians have been hurt by bisexual women that turn straight, that dump them for men, that simply wanted to experiment? Women unlike straight men, are much more flexible sexually, they are more willing to try new things, that’s why Hugh Heffner can get his bunnies do do bisexual stuff, he couldn’t get stuff like that from straight men.
So fine, maybe I’ll use the acronym LGBT because there’s a few honest bisexuals that have sex with both genders and let the entire world know they are bisexual.
But all those other lying bisexual bastards don’t have to be included, they have to be outed.
posted by comment one on
“Because I didn’t pay them to have sex with me, I didn’t coerce them. They had sex with me because unlike a woman, they don’t have to buy me dinner or get to know me”.
Don’t you recognize that this is an example of convenience?
“You do realize how many thousands of gays go through life sleeping with hundreds of different guys, never having relationships? Some gays are professional one-night-stands, some gays don’t seek love. Love doesn’t count. You don’t need love to be gay, straight, or anything”.
You’re wrong, Bobby. Love (and not the kind you feel for a parent and friend or an overtly sexual kind) counts for just as many. Like erotic feelings, it can be stratified along gender lines. At this point, it’s only important that you recognize this fact since we won’t agree on what feelings “should” exist for a person “to be” gay, straight or bisexual.
“They tolerate him”
That means nothing. Aren’t there gay men that you merely tolerate?
If Obama was one of those light-skin blacks, or one of those blacks that can almost pass for white (and some do), then you bet he’d face a lot more prejudice from his own community.
Obama IS a light-skinned black man, can pass for white.
http://tinyurl.com/22hrox
“Well, and that’s the choice they have. Why would a bisexual want to marry me when he can marry a woman and have children that way”?
Because they want to marry YOU and raise children with YOU?
“I’m telling you, it’s disgusting”.
I’m sure. But that’s just an anecdote.
“They don’t choose attraction, they do choose their lifestyle”.
Yes, like total homosexuals do. Gay men have been impregnating women for years and living a “perfect” heterosexual life for years.
“But all those other lying bisexual bastards don’t have to be included, they have to be outed”
Like those lying closeted, confused, or manipulative bastards that are gay? 🙂
posted by Bobby on
“Don’t you recognize that this is an example of convenience?”
—Well, maybe it is. You’re right.
“You’re wrong, Bobby. Love (and not the kind you feel for a parent and friend or an overtly sexual kind) counts for just as many.”
—Love alone isn’t sufficient, if it was, everyone would simply marry their best friend, no matter what gender they happen to be. My two best friends are straights, and as much as we love each other, I’m no substitute for a woman.
“Like erotic feelings, it can be stratified along gender lines.”
—Are you saying that everyone is really bisexual but people choose to conform to gender norms? I don’t believe that, we like what we like. Misogynists will still want to have sex with women even if they can’t stand women, even if they can’t love them and are unlikely to ever marry them. If misogynists had a choice, they’d be gay.
“That means nothing. Aren’t there gay men that you merely tolerate?”
—The difference is that those gays don’t have a way out. They can’t choose a heterosexual lifestyle, bisexuals can make that choice.
“Obama IS a light-skinned black man, can pass for white.”
—Nope, he still looks black. Believe me, I’ve seen lighter blacks than that. Some where so light that they never suffered under segregation.
“Because they want to marry YOU and raise children with YOU?”
—That’s not how the world works, most people take the easy root. Blacks marry blacks because it’s easier than marrying whites and facing prejudice. Ugly people fall in love with ugly people because it’s easier than chasing after pretty people. Bisexuals marry the opposite sex because it can allowed them to get promoted at work among other benefits.
“Yes, like total homosexuals do. Gay men have been impregnating women for years and living a “perfect” heterosexual life for years.”
—Well sure, some gays are cowards, and when they’re outed, the community hates them.
But bisexuals have the ability to enjoy vagina’s and dicks, that’s what makes them so threatening. The fact that they’re between two worlds, the gay world and the breeder world. That’s why nobody trusts them.
Remember Anne Heche? She’s a perfect example of what bisexuals do. She was cheating on Ellen with a cameraman, imagine how Ellen must have felt, not only was she cheated, but she was cheated with someone she couldn’t compete. And look at how society rewarded her, her christian family stopped hating her, her fans came back, she got better movies, she became a bigger sex symbol than she ever was. Hey, the ultimate breeder boy fantasy, seduce a lesbian.
What Heche did was evil, there’s more honesty in gays having sex in the bushes or in bathrooms, because at least there’s only sex involved, and not feelings, not love.
“Like those lying closeted, confused, or manipulative bastards that are gay? :)”
—As bad as those gays are, they can’t escape. They’re stuck with us forever. They have no way out.
posted by comment one on
Ok, I’m done. 😉
posted by Pepe Johnson on
“I suspect that our diversity, like our unity, is merely a linguistic construct, designed to mean anything people want it to.”
Exactly. If we try to communicate a specific message with clarity, they aren’t likely to donate money to our organization because they may not identify with us. But if we are somewhat ambiguous, they may find something to like by interpreting it their own way and open their wallets.
People should have the freedom to be themselves and to be let alone to live their lives so long as they don’t interfere with the lives of others.
Diversity is valuable for leaders – whether they are community leaders, government leaders or military leaders – so long as those leaders understand how to leverage diversity. A diverse group of people can be stronger than a group whose members have many common characteristics depending on how well they identify with the cause that brought them together in the first place.