The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[SlipZtrEm]

1: There should be made a list of what is considered offensive, not just personally for me.

Then congratulations, someone will find "being gay" offensive. Or, if we're limiting this to just speech, someone will find anything pro-gay (or, on a similar but different note, anti-homophobic) offensive.

2: No, I asked people to limit their freedom of speech from a good will, nothing more. I do think there should be legislation, but I didn't suggest it was ME making that legislation.

So you don't believe in free speech, then? If you believe there should be legislation dictating peoples vocabulary, no matter the outcome, it is suppressing some group of people.

3: Not really, missed the nuances there. I won't insult anyone ever, on purpose.

Except the parts in this thread. Where you have. On purpose.

Those that do, lose my respect and all forms of polite communication. However, it's not me that insulted in the first place.

So "monkey see, monkey do"? That's a dangerous approach to tolerance. It's also a distinctly non-MLK sort of thing to do.

- Yes, there has been quite a bit of insulting, both ways. I do admit that. Even if others won't.

I think you are confusing disagreements with insults. Alternately, you're confusing others' negative, dismissive responses to some of your suggestions or opinions as direct insults on you as a person. They are not the same.

I never dismissed others opinions. On the Freedom of Speech, I agreed to disagree. But there is no arguing with Famine.

I'll agree with you on that last bit; not once has there been a point in history where the idea of limiting speech has brought any sort of improvement to the quality of life. How someone can simultaneously champion for equality while also requesting oppression (of others) is beyond me.

* I'm not asking people to stop using offensive terms. I asked them to stop using the words gay, and faggot in a bad way. This has nothing to do with what Jordan thinks or feels. Be aware, that this is a request, nothing more. If the response had been, even from 2 or 3 people: "We will watch our vocabulary more now you pointed this out", the goal of my post had been made. I'm not making, nor breaking rules by that post.

Indeed, and if I'm remembering correctly, this originally had to do with a PSN outburst, correct? Well, on PSN, absolutely right it has nothing to do with Jordan, or GTPlanet; if you find something offensive on there, there are Sony-related channels to take that up with.

When you raise the same concerns on GTPlanet, however, it then becomes a GTPlanet issue. The irony being we do not tolerate people using homophobic insults such as "gay" pejoratively, anyways. But that has absolutely nothing to do with your feelings on the subject. It just so happens that's how Jordan prefers it.

*Yes, if people intend and purposely use words to hurt people, like I said before, that's wrong.

Then perhaps, to strengthen your argument, you shouldn't intentionally use words to attempt to hurt people, no?

And people, as much as possible should point out that it is wrong. Not start talking about Freedom of Speech like they don't care.

Define "wrong".

Referencing FoS =/= not caring. Quite the contrary. I can't stand homophobic comments in much the same way I was shocked and appalled when I heard a white supremacist group opened a new chapter right in my hometown. Both are two things I absolutely do not agree with. But just as much as it's my right to not agree with their viewpoints, it's their right to have them.

 

[Tornado]

In what way? Do you hate gay people and think that their existence is a sin, or do you think that everyone should be equal and the question about equality is so clearly in favor of equality for everyone that this topic makes no sense?

Kinda doubting that CoffeeGrunt hates gay people considering past romantic relationships, so it's probably the second thing.

 

[Crash]

Like so many things in life, not everything is 100% clear. So instead of using difficult words and stuff like that, not explain it like the mature person you are supposed to be?

It is your responsibility to understand what a word means, and ask for clarification if you're unsure, rather than just simply making an assumption. If you signed a contract, but didn't understand words in it, and assumed a meaning, when you break the contract because you "weren't 100% clear," you think a judge would let you off or allow you to break the contract because the words were "difficult?"

Because you don't want it to. You're not Jordan, NOR is there any kind of rule in the AUP that forbids me making the request. So don't tell me I can't.

Yes, he can. Famine is acting as a representative of Jordan, and is thus empowered by Jordan to make such a request.

No, I used them superfluously. They didn't have any addition to the sentence. Except the fact that other people might make jokes about overweight people when those people are actually there. (Which Danny pointed out).

If the words are superfluous, then why even put it in there originally?

Your original sentence implies that you only don't make fat jokes around fat people, which implies that you do make fat jokes otherwise.

Because it might explain why I called you names?

So once again, you say that people should not be able to call other people names, yet you are doing the exact same thing here? Why do you get to do the very same thing that you don't want other people doing?

Also, reading through everything, Famine has not even been close to offensive to you ever, yet you continue to call him names, just because he disagrees with your opinion.

Yeah, 'cause discussing the point is useless with you here. You don't want to understand what I say anyway.

Oh no, Famine, and many others, completely understand what you are saying. They are also disagreeing with what you're saying and explaining their rational, while you have just completely ignored it or turned everything into hyperbole. It's more like you're refusing to understand what Famine, and many others, are saying.

Simple. Basic intention of the usage.

Really? Because when I first read your "joke," I thought you were referring to New Zelanders.

Also, many people use the word "gay" or "faggot" to describe things without intending to offend. Heck, I have even met people who use those words without knowing what homosexuality is, let alone identifying those words with it. So by your logic, that means these people can use "gay" or "faggot" all they want?

Wrong, there is nothing about being able to ask people to change their behavior, as long as it doesn't collide with the AUP.

And no one has to listen to you at all, as long as their resulting action or inaction does not run afoul of the AUP.

"Everything".

That alone should give you a clue.

Yup, anything and everything can be offensive. I can say something as innocent as a car is blue, and that could potentially be offensive to someone who is colorblind and can't see blue.

If any speech gets banned, then the precedence is there to ban all speech.

 

[photonrider]

Peace to all . . . gay, angry, unhappy, whatever. Waste not thy time.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Peace to all . . . gay, angry, unhappy, whatever. Waste not thy time.

Have a gay old time at Christmas everyone!!!

 

[homeforsummer]

1: There should be made a list of what is considered offensive, not just personally for me.

Who gets to write this list? Why do they get to decide what is offensive and what isn't? And if many people write it, how do they choose? One person may find it offensive that someone else finds something else offensive. Another may find it offensive that someone else is even allowed to choose what they find offensive. Can you not see why this "list" is a completely unworkable idea?

2: No, I asked people to limit their freedom of speech from a good will, nothing more. I do think there should be legislation, but I didn't suggest it was ME making that legislation.

Neither of these things = Freedom of speech.

It would have been better if you've never used the term "freedom of speech" because I don't think you understand what it means. Any limitation to speech precludes having freedom of speech.

And the stupid thing is, you've already got your wish, on GTP at least. Using words like "gay" and "faggot" in a pejorative sense is already worthy of penalties here, so even those that say them day-to-day refrain from doing so on GTP.

And for the record, I never use those words in the manner to which you so object in daily life. I choose not to use them because people might find them offensive. I already self-censor myself with something like that. But I'll be damned if I wanted their use in society to be banned - it's nobody else's right to decide what I can or can't say.

Yes, there has been quite a bit of insulting, both ways. I do admit that. Even if others won't.

Err, no. You've taken it upon yourself to insult others when they've presented entirely logical and polite arguments to you.

It's just that - as has been said several times - you're treating the issue with such sensitivity that you seem unable to determine the difference between responses to your argument, and insults to your person.

The only one actually genuinely insulting people here is you.

 

[NLxAROSA]

1: There should be made a list of what is considered offensive, not just personally for me.

They did that in Uganda. Being gay is on the top of their list, and it's punishable by death or life-long incarceration.

 

[Gonales]

They did that in Uganda. Being gay is on the top of their list, and it's punishable by death or life-long incarceration.

If you don't read what I pointed out before, please don't single out a statement and reply to it. Makes you and me both look ridiculous because you don't seem to be paying attention and I seem to be saying something that's completely different than my original statement.

 

[Famine]

Half right.

 

[Joel]

If you don't read what I pointed out before, please don't single out a statement and reply to it. Makes you and me both look ridiculous because you don't seem to be paying attention and I seem to be saying something that's completely different than my original statement.

The fact is, there's people who find the mere existence of homosexuality to be offensive. So if we're trying not to offend anyone, there's a justification for it to be on this list of yours. A legislated list of what is or isn't offensive would differ from person to person, and you can guarantee that there would be a lot of people offended by gay public displays of affection, gay marriage, and gay people's existence. The great thing about free countries is that you're allowed to do and say these things (save for marriage in some countries) regardless of the offense it may cause someone else. To suggest others shouldn't be afforded that right because they offend you is absurd.

 

[Tornado]

If you don't read what I pointed out before, please don't single out a statement and reply to it. Makes you and me both look ridiculous because you don't seem to be paying attention and I seem to be saying something that's completely different than my original statement.

Yes. Advocating that some higher power administer punishment based on what is considered offensive is completely different than some higher power administering punishment based on what is considered offensive.

 

[Crispy]

To me, I really don't care if your Gay or straight. You deserve no more special treatment for being gay then I do for being straight. What you do with your personal life is none of my business nor anyone else. I just would rather gay people didn't make out in public, just like I would rather not see some random teens making out on my shopping trip. Keep that stuff at home.

 

[Dennisch]

To me, I really don't care if your Gay or straight. You deserve no more special treatment for being gay then I do for being straight. What you do with your personal life is none of my business nor anyone else. I just would rather gay people didn't make out in public, just like I would rather not see some random teens making out on my shopping trip. Keep that stuff at home.

And then 2 smoking hot girls go at it and every man in a 50 mile radius goes nuts, Looney Tune style.

 

[Gonales]

And then 2 smoking hot girls go at it and every man in a 50 mile radius goes nuts, Looney Tune style.

Most of the times yeah. But some get jealous, or feel like they 'deserved' one of us... and get violent. Best thing would just be if people did not react at all you know.

 

[arora]

Most of the times yeah. But some get jealous, or feel like they 'deserved' one of us... and get violent.

I seriously doubt all of that.

 

[Encyclopedia]

I seriously doubt all of that.

Me too. Especially the last bit.

Get violent?

 

[Zenith]

Most of the times yeah. But some get jealous, or feel like they 'deserved' one of us... and get violent. Best thing would just be if people did not react at all you know.

Never in my life had I heard of that happening.

 

[Daniel]

Most of the times yeah. But some get jealous, or feel like they 'deserved' one of us... and get violent. Best thing would just be if people did not react at all you know.

That is completely untrue. I doubt that if someone walked upon two girls having a PDA, they wouldn't barge in and say "Get the 🤬 off her, let me have a go!"

They'll probably throw a curious glance over, and (if they were mature enough), walk away. It's not everyday you'd see a same-sex couple showing affection in public due to two reasons I can see: The fear of being ridiculed, or simple because there are statistically less same-sex couples than heterosexual ones.

Simple affection (i.e. hugging, holding hands) is fine. Romping right next to me while on the train from school is not, regardless of the sexual orientation of me, or the couple.

A while back this happened to me. I was taking my dog for a walk in the park, and came across two women kissing on a picnic blanket a little bit away from everyone else. Did I interfere and ask for a threesome? Hell no, I simply walked away like anybody would because it wasn't my business. And to be fair, they weren't near anyone else.

 

[Danny]

they wouldn't barge in and say "Get the 🤬 off her, let me have a go!"

 

[Dennisch]

When it's two girls I tend to think immature thoughts.

When it's two men I think : Good for you guys.

When ever it is an hetero couple I think : Get a frikkin' room.

 

[Gonales]

I seriously doubt all of that.

Me too. Especially the last bit.

Get violent?

Never in my life had I heard of that happening.

Yes it happens. I've had it happen to me and my (at the time) girlfriend. At some point a couple of guys pulled us apart, making statements about the fact that we needed guys to take car of us, and when I tried to get free they became violent. Thank god some other people interfered, but... As I stated before... Stuff like this happens. Not only to me but to people around the world.

 

[Tesla]

That's the first I've ever heard of something like that happening. 'Stuff like that' doesn't just happen. Were you together in front of someplace with a high proportion of inebriated males aged 18 to 35 by any chance? Would you expect two men to receive no attention if they were going at it outside the main entrance to, say, [bring on the stereotypes] a NASCAR race, or the Superbowl?

P.S Those men must have found it offensive that you were with another woman instead of them. We should ban heterosexual men from thinking, then that will never happen again.

 

[Gonales]

P.S Those men must have found it offensive that you were with another woman instead of them. We should ban heterosexual men from thinking, then that will never happen again.

Is it wrong to say that I feel there is some sarcasm in that post? If so, I only have one more thing to say in this thread: Seriously guys, grow up. I don't care if you don't agree with my opinions, but get over it. :/

 

[FoolKiller]

Yes it happens. I've had it happen to me and my (at the time) girlfriend. At some point a couple of guys pulled us apart, making statements about the fact that we needed guys to take car of us, and when I tried to get free they became violent. Thank god some other people interfered, but... As I stated before... Stuff like this happens. Not only to me but to people around the world.

I don't know what's wrong with Belgian guys, but even the most homophobic guys I know here in the states will do what any self-respecting heterosexual male would do, pull out their camera phone and hope it doesn't stop.

In fact, we want women to fight because we have some deluded vision of it ending in kissing.



The only time I have seen a negative reaction to two women kissing was when they both looked more like overweight dudes. And the reaction then was more of being grossed out than violence or wanting in on the action.


All that said, I could see someone like my dad reacting negatively, but he doesn't hang around the places where one is likely to see two women kissing. And when he was flirted with by transsexuals in New Orleans he only gave them a sarcastic remark to them and saved his disgust for when he told people about it later. So, even the most hateful people I know wouldn't become violent.

I've seen guys who try to take a girl away from guys that they think they are better than, and I'd imagine they would do something similar in the two-girl situation, but then it has little to do with the homosexual thing than the fact they think they are cool enough to just walk in and get any girl by saying they want her. How those guys get any dates, without drugging them first, I'll never know.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Yes it happens. I've had it happen to me and my (at the time) girlfriend. At some point a couple of guys pulled us apart, making statements about the fact that we needed guys to take car of us, and when I tried to get free they became violent. Thank god some other people interfered, but... As I stated before... Stuff like this happens. Not only to me but to people around the world.

Where do you live? The Alabama region of Belgium?

Well If I came across two guys making out, I'll probably feel nauseous. If I came across a straight couple I ignore them, unless they blatantly interfere with my personal space, then I must intervene.

If two women are going at it, then who am I disrupt such a thing?

 

[Villain]

Sooooo... uhhh.... About them homos... They're really bad for society, right? An abonination of Nature's Will and an offense in the eyes of the Lord.

No. Wait! Homosexuals are fine and not hurting anybody.









Isn't that what we're meant to be debating here?

 

[Daniel]

Yes it happens. I've had it happen to me and my (at the time) girlfriend. At some point a couple of guys pulled us apart, making statements about the fact that we needed guys to take car of us, and when I tried to get free they became violent. Thank god some other people interfered, but... As I stated before... Stuff like this happens. Not only to me but to people around the world.

I've never heard of that. The only rational explanation I can see is that they were extremely drunk and just wanting their 'ins'.

Isn't that what we're meant to be debating here?

I thought so too, but Gonales went a bit overboard saying that anyone who says otherwise should go to jail; it should be illegal to talk offensively. Unfortunately, she doesn't get to decide what is and isn't offensive. What if I say a joke that everyone would laugh at, and one person of the 7 billion people in the world found it offensive?

I can imagine that going down well in a trial.

"Prosecutor, why do you want to jail this man?"
"He said a rude joke."
"...Court dismissed."

 

[Maccer_42]

I can imagine that going down well in a trial.

"Prosecutor, why do you want to jail this man?"
"He said a rude joke."
"...Court dismissed."

We actually do that in the UK... http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/08/april-jones-matthew-woods-jailed

 

[Gonales]

Didn't go overboard really. Just stated my opinion. But nobody seems to have noticed my post number 2533. Seriously. Before anybody actually posts anything else about me... read it. :/

But I do approve of the article posted by Maccer.

 

[Daniel]

But locking up won't help. Maybe more people should step up in favor of homosexual equality (and overall equality), so these narrowminded people don't get the wrong example by media and stuff?

Locking them up won't help, but neither will restricting their freedom of speech. They have the right to voice an opinion, no matter how far-fetched or bigoted it is.