What is straight people's problems with gays?

[dsc]

I honestly don't get this. I admit, I don't get being attracted to women. I can understand what people see in men but I can't understand it in women. That doesn't make me hate or fear straight guys. I don't want to take away their perogative to marry, deny them jobs, or keep them away from my kids. I certainly don't think they are choosing to sin. So to those who are even uncomfortable with it, just what is the problem? I am really seriously asking. After all, the Governor of Texas just made it clear, I am not welcome there.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

1. We're afraid

you're having better orgasms than we are.

[dsc]

3. I wish

Lets just say I have been on quite the dry spell.

[shrike]

120. You mean you people aren't out there screwing like bunnies?

But I thought ... now my whole world view is changed! (grins)

[Catherine Vincent]

5. LOL!

They probably are. :-)

[OldLeftieLawyer]

69. SEE?????

I'm laughing.

Seriously, I think the same kind of fear that's behind racism is behind homophobia. Never underestimate the power of fear of the unknown, just as some whites fear blacks because they're different from what the whites have always known, so do people fear gays because they haven't a clue as to what gays do. It's simply fear, and it's - my theory - such an integral part of the human psyche (as in protective survival mechanisms), I'm really not sure it can ever be overcome.

That's a kind of gloomy explanation, I know, but I've seen it so many times, and it's always the same.

Besides, all those Gay Pride Parades aren't exactly designed to soothe the white-bread Middle American heterosexual psyche, are they?

Don't stop.

[Warpy]

35. Nah, I think most homophobic straight guys are half in the closet

or they're absolutely terrified some big, musclebound gay guy is going to treat them the way they treat women. Shoot, most of those guys are a combination of both.

Homophobic women are the real puzzle. I think they've just been brainwashed and never managed to see enough of reality to break through the programming.

As for the hateful televangelist crowd, I'm fairly certain most of those old boys are in Guckert's client list. Why else would they have been so silent about his sleepovers in the White House?

[FreedomAngel82]

47. Probably

I used to feel uncomfortable with it but now days I really could give a damn what or how someone feels. It's really none of my business.

[UTUSN]

2. It's Always: IMPOSING on Others. Same with Wingnut/Fundies. n/t

[Catch22Dem]

4. Not all straight people

I think you'd have a haaard time finding a straight guy on DU who would have a problem with you or who'd treat you with anything other than respect. That's certainly what you'll get from me. :D

[dsc]

9. I think that even many liberal straights have the ick factor

I wouldn't say a majority but some.

[cestpaspossible]

63. Project much?

lol

[Zhade]

36. Sorry, that's not been my experience.

For example, one person declared outright that I'm a "sinner" because I'm bisexual. He condemned me in his god's name.

This is a 1,000+ poster I'm talking about, so you can see that homophobia and bigotry exist here - just look at the Catholic DUers (thankfully, the very few) who support Ratzinger even after he has more than once condemned gay marriage (nevermind the fact that the Catholic church once recognized gay marriages in the distant past).

[Catch22Dem]

66. That's fucked up

I honestly can't even imagine thinking that way, but I'm glad I don't.

[newsguyatl]

6. and what's so fucked up about

this situation in particular, is that perry is a closet homosexual!

:freak:

[FreedomAngel82]

50. Is this the Texas guy??

I heard about that in another thread. :crazy:

[knowbody0]

7. who you're diddling

is about as interesting to me as how many bowel movements you have in a week. i don't get it either.
my grandfather always said you hate what you fear

[tjwash]

8. Most straight people don't have a problem with gays.

It's the self loathing, closet dwelling, born again bible thumpers that do. They just happen to get all the press.

[walldude]

17. Yup.. their 2000 year old book

tells them to hate you. I always love bringing up the old game "telephone" when someone quotes "scripture" to me. Remember that game? Where you all get in a line and the first person whispers something to the second person, second to the third, and on down the line. By the time you get to the end you have a whole new story. Well I'll be that after 2000 years of the telephone game the bible is not even the same book it was in the beginning. I mean really, the 12 apostles? No women in that group? Yeah.. I'm sure they were all as celibate as the current Catholic Priests. :eyes:

--edited for baaad speeling

[TexasLady]

because to admit out loud

what is a common wonderful thing that isnt sanctioned by the local preacher is a sin...against yourself apparently....here in tejas its do as i say not as i do....i can look in YOUR bedroom, just dont look in MINE....

[Kire]

10. you don't hate or fear straight guys

the title of thread says something different about that

looks like there's still time to add the word homophobic in there or something

[dsc]

20. when an average of 61% of the population

votes against gays as they have in 13 states I don't think I have been unfair to characterize straight people as having a problem with gays. Since around 6% of voters are LGBT that means closer to two thirds of straights have been voting for this stuff.

[FreedomAngel82]

51. It is unfair

What about those who are LGBT in "Bible belt" states? They're not supposed to be able to care for their family members?

[dsc]

54. I meant my characterization isn't unfair not the vote.

[Kire]

65. if you say so, then

by all means, characterize away

[Lerkfish]

130. FWIW, that's 61% of those who voted.

not of the population, so that is potentially misleading.

nevertheless, your point is well taken, I think there is (for some reason) an amount or number of people that are at best uncomfortable with the concept of gays.

I also think that the recent election was a well-orchestrated pogrom on the republican's part to whip up anti-gay sentiments into a frenzy by implying gays were trying to take over the concept of marriage or some other bizarre fear.
I don't think, without those amendments and their supporting fear-mongering that that many straights really care all that much in the abstract, either way.

Personally, I was socially conditioned to be contemptuous of gays (for no apparent or logical reason), but at the same time, being an artist, was constantly teased for being gay, which I wasn't. I think because of seeing that harrassment FROM THE OTHER END, made me develop an understanding of gay issues and why I completely support gay issues. When I kept getting harrassed for allegedly being gay, I realized how uberstupid the whole harrassment thing is.
I think there are straight people who FEAR gays, and the only valid reason I can come up with is they fear BECOMING gay, and have tendencies in that direction, so the only to prevent themselves from becoming gay (which they view as a bad thing) is to beat it out of everyone else.

On the other hand, as much as we can trust anyone's self-reporting of their own motivations (which is dicey), I know a female relative who is supportive of gay issues in the abstract, but gets "grossed out" to actually SEE gays holding hands, etc.

A gay acquaintance referred to it as the "ick" factor. Even the most progressive person might still have an "ick" reaction to gays relating to each other.

Myself, I am not turned on by viewing gay amorous activity, so therefore don't go out of my way to do so, but I have no problem with it otherwise.

[EFerrari]

157. *Sigh.* What kind of machines did they vote on? n/t

[dsc]

165. do you seriously believe those results are flawed?

I would love to think that over 60% of Ohioans didn't think gay marriage was evil, but I lived there long enough to know otherwise. I don't trust the machines in general, but the results on this issue are sadly exactly what I would have thought.

[EFerrari]

168. OHIO?! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

In all honesty, YES, you can't go by the "vote". You may have other information or experience, but the voting process in OH is in the toilet so please take it with a pillar of salt.

:hug:

[dsc]

169. I honestly thought the measure would pass more like 70/30

instead of 60/40. I think the AARP effort helped trim those numbers. Also gays like me told their families just how important it was to vote against it. My sister voted for the first time in her life to vote against that issue. But in all honesty there are places in Ohio where anti gay sentiment is so strong that you can almost smell it in the air.

[EFerrari]

170. In CA as well. Bigotry is an equal op pollutant.

But, I have no reason to fudge this fact: Ohio's voting process is about equal with Florida in being targeted and manipulated by the Replicants. So, before you give up on your former neighbors, consider that.

[dsc]

172. I have no illusions about the state of voting in Ohio

My dad had to go three times before he was allowed to vote so I know there were problems. And given the fact so many were in a county that issue 2 did poorly in it may have affected the margins a little, but I don't think on this issue it affected it too much. My county, which used standard voting equipment but had some voting problems, voted for the issue around the same margin as the state.

[EFerrari]

174. They suppressed the Black vote, the working class vote and

the youth vote. Students got robocalls threatening their financial aid and those that went to polls were made to stand in alternate lines!

And there was report after report of other even neater kinds of suppression.

Blackwell did his utmost to disqualify as many Dem registrations as possible. You remember the paper weight problem? And then, he subverted the whole purpose of provisional ballots: all of a sudden, your ballot wouldn't be counted unless you cast it in the right precinct.

And all that was BEFORE you factor in the machines.

Please.

And the Ohio "recount" was another thigh slapper. Blackwell again got away with everything but murder. There was no "random" sampling of precincts and Andy found clear evidence that the machine company was giving cheat sheets and other more -- ah-- technical help to precincts that didn't want to be hand counted.

Please 2.

Ohio may have a homophobia problem, we don't know. But we know FOR SURE it has a VOTING PROBLEM.

[dsc]

175. My dad got caught up in the provisional ballot question

He had requested, but not used, an absentee ballot. He had his ballot still at home. So he went to vote at his precinct. First time he was told he would have to go to the county seat, which he couldn't do since he had just had surgery, so he went home. I called him after hearing on NPR that an appeals court in Ohio said that the provisional ballot had to be accepted. He went to vote again and they sent him home again. A friend of his stopped by and had heard the same report I had so he went to vote again and finally was permitted to vote. He was the only one, out of several people who were turned away, who actually got to vote.

But I am still unconvinced these problems helped issue 2. Only the young out of the groups you mentioned were more likely to vote no and the other two were more likely to vote yes. Therefore, the evidence would still be out on what if any impact the shenagains had on issue 2.

[GodHelpUsAll2]

166. I think that 61%

is very misleading. 61% of people actually voting but I do not believe it's 61% of the population. And there in lies the problem.

Half of this country doesn't bother to vote. On anything. Not for President, not for local bond elections not for anything. What we have is an overzealous bunch that all makes sure they get out there and vote. What we have failed to do is to motivate the half that never votes. They won't even vote on matters that concern their children and them personally let alone issues that don't directly involve their lives.

I live in a suburb with a population of 36,402 give or take a few . On November 2 there were a whole whopping few hundred show up to vote in my precinct. We only have 14 precincts here. Do the math, it's sad. The turn out for the presidential election for the entire state of Texas for the presidential election was 46.3% of registered voters.

So when I see that 61% voted against gay ,marriage it tells me that the nut jobs did a far better job than we did at getting people to actully go and vote. And that my friend is a huge problem.

[MuseRider]

11. It is so sad and

I do not understand it either. It makes no sense to me but this might be an interesting thread to watch because maybe someone will have some insight into why some people feel that way. I keep searching because I wish to make some headway with those people but to tell you the truth, none of what they say makes any sense to me and they will not hear anything, anything other than what they already believe.

[Karenina]

105. I hope Yurbud won't mind this re-post...

yurbud Donating member (1000+ posts) Sat Apr-23-05 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
15. The real reason men oppose gay marriage


By Les Veeryl


Legalizing gay marriage will undermine marriage and family for one simple reason: most men find it extremely difficult remaining heterosexual.

Only cultural pressure forces us to seek the company of women and competition with other men drives us to find the most attractive women, just as it drives us to buy the biggest SUV.

This is also why once we have gone to all the trouble seduce a woman, our sexual encounters are so brutal, brief, and disappointing for the woman. As much as we try not to think about it, it’s just not a man.

Most women become unconsciously aware of this over the course of their marriage, which is why they cut their hair progressively shorter and cultivate the physique of John Madden, hoping the resemblance will catch our eye and rekindle our original feigned passion.

The cultural norm of heterosexuality forces us to channel our desires into sports, so we have the excuse to touch each other in violence that society would not allow in love. As we grow older, this pattern continues with male exclusive outings like golf, hunting, and fishing. Wealthy men feel less of a necessity to preserve the façade of woman lovers and have male only clubs, where than can merrily chat naked in steam rooms and smoke cigars.

It is torture enough to be forced by our wives to watch Will & Grace and Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and see the care-free life of abandoning society’s blind devotion to procreation. I have to remind myself that it’s just a TV show, that there aren’t really people like that in the world.

But what if men were allowed to marry?

That could be enough to push many of us over the edge.

If I knew society would tolerate my true orientation, what would stop me from telling that blonde guy at the club that he looks good in the shower, and then asking him out for more than a beer? And unlike a woman, who requires months of pleading and showering with gifts before sex, another man would gladly give it up in the parking lot on the way to get the beer.

What would make my son, a handsome running back who just started shaving his chest, strive to achieve at school and establish a career if he knew instead he could simply find an older sugar daddy to marry who will shower him with gifts and pedicures?

President Bush has proposed banning gay marriage not out of ignorance prejudice or spite, but personal necessity. On a trip to Canada a while back, he said to the Prime Minister’s press secretary:

Well, you got a pretty face. You got a pretty face. You're a good-looking guy. Better looking than my Scott anyway.Text


More recently, he actually had a gay prostitute pretend to be a reporter in White House press conferences as some sort of role-playing fetish.

If even our president can barely restrain his homosexual impulses, isn’t obvious that a constitutional amendment banning marriage is all that stands between us and a fashion-conscious, color-coordinated, poodle-walking Armageddon?

[Burma Jones]

128. tee hee hee

there's more than a little truth to this......

[gollygee]

12. I think some straight people are afraid

that if gay people are seen as "normal" whatever that is, that their kids will see being gay as an option and will choose it. These folks believe being gay is a choice because they believe that god doesn't make mistakes and god made adam and eve, not adam and steve (and probably a few other stupid cliches) so they think anyone can choose to be gay. I really think they're particularly afraid their own children will make that choice.

I came to this conclusion after a maddening discussion with a bigoted family member. I hope for his kids' sake that they are straight.

[FreedomAngel82]

52. The thing I want to know

is how do you know God didn't make Adam and Adam? As I've always said: just because it isn't there (like ghosts) doesn't mean it's not real.

[KnowerOfLogic]

95. True, but circular; if they can't show anything wrong w/ being gay

then why are they afraid that their kids will become gay? You are right though, a large part of the fear is about trying to prevent their children from 'turning gay', but of course it all rests on the irrational fear/hatred of gays in the first place.

[Igel]

125. I don't know if the logic holds water, but there's certainly an

easy enough way out of the circularity.

Grandkids.

[digno dave]

124. right on...they don't want to have to look at adam and steve holding hands

as they walk down the street and have to explain it to their chioldren

[Kerrytravelers]

13. I missed it- what did the Gov of TX just do?

Sorry to be out of the loop here!

[rainman99]

18. I don't get it either.

I'm straight and from Texas and I still don't understand what's wrong with everyone. I guess the same reason there are racist people.

[peekaloo]

22. Bluebear's thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3800471&mesg_id=3800471

[Kerrytravelers]

23. Thank you. I had just logged on and hadn't read the GD posts yet

just the mainpage!

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

14. I'm tolerent and in favor of equal rights for all

but I do find the idea of gay sex repulsive.

So, when I think of gay people having sex, it kinda freaks me out.

(I'm just being honest, sorry if I offend anyone)

[spooked911]

27. If you're a guy, does a woman having sex with another woman bother you?

If you're a woman, does a man having sex with another man bother you? Or does both ways bother you?

Just curious.

[Vanje]

28. When I think of my grandparents having sex, ...

....as they must have done, it makes me feel icky icky icky!
It MUST be unnatural.

[FreedomAngel82]

53. Same here

You just don't think about it. My grandmother has told me this story a few times and when I was really young my family and I lived in Charlotte so we didn't get to see my grandparent so much. My grandmother gave my grandfather a kiss and I said to my cousin (who was there) " I didn't know they did that." I wasn't around quite as much as I am now. So it's all about getting comfortable and changing your way of thinking. If you're brought up in one of these bigoted families that drill in your head that being gay is evil of course you're going to feel different about it. It's all about how you're programed from those around you I think.

[Catherine Vincent]

29. I saw a flick of two guys.

Surprisingly it looked the same as if it was a woman and a man, in other words, it didn't look wrong.

[ruggerson]

85. That's okay

I find the idea of straight sex repulsive and disgusting.

But, I certainly still respect your lifestyle choice and will probably vote against a constitutional amendment to prohibit you from marrying the one you love.

[phylny]

159. Heh - that reminds me of a woman who lived next door to me in college.

This was back in the late 70s. She was a lesbian, as was her roommate, but she had a difficult time finding a woman, and would come over to our apartment and spin her tales of woe and loneliness.

She found out that my then-boyfriend (now husband) was coming to visit after a very extended time away, and made some sly comments about what I would wear when I greeted him, and that I'd probably be really tired the next day, etc. from all that lovemaking. (She also used to tell me to "cover up" when I answered the door, because she didn't want to have to deal with "seeing you all naked" - sorta melodramatic, like I'd answer the door with no clothes on, but I digress....)

Then she looked at me, all bewildered, and said, "How do you guys do it. I mean, what do you DO?" Then she thought about it for another few seconds and said, "EWWWW!!!"

To each his or her own, I suppose :)

[KnowerOfLogic]

96. OK, newsflash: a lot of gay people find straight sex repulsive,

therefore we just don't think about, since it's none of our business and it's not hurting anybody. And of course we are not trying to prevent them from having any of the rights that we want for ourselves.

[Puglover]

111. Im tolerantof straight people too

and quite frankly the thought of you and a women having sex doesn't do much for me. But I don't need to run around announcing that it "freaks me out" or that it's "repulsive" What's your point?


edit spelling

[geniph]

147. Hate to break it to ya, there, sport,

but there isn't all that much difference between "gay sex" and "straight sex." There's only so many ways to plug Tab A into Slot B, or Tab D into Slot C. The same body parts get rubbed whether there's two innies, two outies, an innie and an outie, or an ever-changing number of same.

Anyone who's really squicked by "gay sex" must have the world's blandest sex life, in my opinion. If it ain't dirty, y'all ain't doin' it right.

[KaliTracy]

15. it's fear. I truly believe that and

I've told many people who have negative feelings towards gays and lesbians as much --

Here's part of a (longer) rant I've used (which I also use if the need arises in conversation....):

When Domestic Violence, Emotional Abuse, Verbal Abuse, and Child Abuse can be eradicated from the HETEROSEXUAL lifestyle of marriage, then tell me that gays and lesbians don't have a right to profess their commitment and love to their union, and do so legally. When everyone in a HETEROSEXUAL family can meet for a holiday without any type of family strife, then tell me that gays and lesbians don't have a right to see their seriously ill loved one in the hospital because they aren't "blood" relative, and of course aren't married.

Heterosexuals do NOT hold a special key to the world of love. We are not special, nor are we all that compassionate. We often cannot see the world beyond our own bellybutton, it seems. But what it comes down to is fear of seeing someone that you thought was "so different" participating in the same mundane marital life as everyone else -- mortgages, bills, parent/teacher night, dirty diapers, car pools, celebrating holidays with extended family, cleaning cat barf, rushed dinners, toddler giggles, singing lullabies to a baby that’s been crying all night, laughing at inside jokes, arguing who took the trash out last, giving a huge family hug that doesn’t want to end. When you see gays and lesbians this way, then they aren't so "Deviant" anymore..... they are just like you and me.... and they always were.

[UdoKier]

16. Because Kinsey was right that all people are bisexual to some degree.

Some "Straight" men are threatened by that little tiny facet of their psyche that finds other men attractive. It threatens that which they think makes them worthy - their masculinity. Gays represent the little part of themselves that they hate, thus they transfer that hate onto gay men.


At least that's what my dimestore psychology degree tells me to believe.

[Cronus Protagonist]

34. I agree - that's totally been my experience.

Every time. They live in fear of who lives within them.

Poor bastards.


http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

[Lex]

19. You said

"I can understand what people see in men but I can't understand it in women."

Well, I can understand it, certainly. I can absolutely understand it. It's no different. Some people are attracted to the same sex, some to the opposite sex. It's the same damn feelings.

People are uncomfortable with it because they are TAUGHT TO BE. Unfortunately.

[toddaa]

21. As a confirmed hetero

I just don't get why I should be afraid of gay people. I'm happily married. If you were to get married to another man, I'd still be happily married. Am I missing something here? How is my marriage to my wife of 10+ years ruined by you getting married.

Level with us here, Mr. Gay Conspirator. What secret weapon do you possess that is going to ruin all of our hetero marriages? When I listen to fuckwits like Dobson, I get the sneaking feeling that you possess some ultra nasty anti hetero marriage weapon.

[FreedomAngel82]

56. I don't get it either

I've tried talking to various other people who think like them and they always reply with a Biblical response. But how does it effect YOU? Answer? I'm Christian and it doesn't effect me. I'm not the one doing it. I've been critized before because I claim the Christian faith as mine but I support the rights of gays to marry. It's about inforcing these people's beliefs into the government system and converting people. It's not about choosing to believe that particular religion or not. It's about you doing it or not. It's really quite disgusting I think.

[lonestarnot]

70. Agree...and they are doing just what Jesus said they should not do.

Judging others is not nice and not their jobs! Fuckwits get a clue, gay marriage is a nonissue to family! I have seen better gay families caring for children than I have seen some straight families who are drugging and drinking and could give a rats ass about their children. If these homophobic freaks would just get a clue that they are not the creator of life, then they would realize they are not responsible for the creation of lifestyles. Love one another is the greatest commandment, and this does not mean those who are just like you, it means all, and if you love someone you don't treat them as second class citizens you freaks! Oh! So I'm a sinner what can I say...

[Puglover]

113. actually toddaa

as a confirmed homo the only weapon I can think of that we might have is, us gays tend to be in more similar emotional spaces when we're done doing it. Kinda like, "damn that was fun, lets go have a beer"
I doubt however that would be enough to convert most str8 men.
:rofl:

[toddaa]

153. Sounds like a recruiting technique to me

Frankly, the moment you combine beer and sex, just show me where I need to sign.

[TeeYiYi]

24. They feel trapped and they're jealous. nt

TYY

[Eloriel]

Are you aware that there really was a study once upon a time

(90s, I think -- there was a small item on it in the AJC) where they hooked up sensors to men's penises and showed them homoerotic material. IIRC, the worse they objected (the more homophobic), the more sexually stimulated they actually were.

It's not called homophobia for nothing. There are people in this world who suppress their own natural sexual orientation so deeply that they're totally unaware of how much they're suppressing it. The rest of us are quite clear that we didn't "CHOOSE" our sexual orientation, but were that way naturally, these jokers really DID "choose" and they chose hetero because that was easier in this society.

And WHY is that easier? Because homophobes have made up lots and lots of LIES about gay men and women, and then proceeded to scare themselves nearly to death with those lies. To repeat myself, it very much reminds me of when my son was a toddler and he put on a scarey Halloween mask and went to say "Boo!" to Grandma, but Grandma (playing along) put up such a fright that it ended up scaring the scarer. Chuckle. I think that's what homophobes do, personally.

It's a sick, sad, twisted world in so many ways. Sometimes I'm quite weary of it all.

[tenshi816]

103. I remember that study

and I was reading something about it online just a couple of weeks ago, but damn if I can remember where. The results didn't surprise me though. My ex-husband was extremely homophobic (just one of the many reasons he's my ex) and he used to get visibly uncomfortable if asked exactly what it was about gays that bothered him so much, becoming all huffy and agitated with his responses. He was abusive towards women (me in particular) and I began to believe that he was conflicted deep inside about his own sexuality. Or course, the explanation may simply be that he was just a complete SOB fuckwit.

Another thing that I find interesting: why is it that so many homophobic men find the idea of two men having sex with each other disgusting, yet find girl-on-girl action really hot?

[LittleClarkie]

25. You dress better than we do

Beotch.

[EFerrari]

158. Better ties. And we resent the hell out of that.

:)

[Mich Otter]

26. What the hell?

It is so important in America to have somebody to hate.

How can we justify big budgets for the military if we don't keep the American people trained to be hateful?
Who will we hate next? Will it people of "your" religion or national origin?
There needs to be an "enemy" to focus hatred on otherwise people might start asking why all those people in Iraq are dying.

[Nevernose]

30. I think gay sex is pretty gross

Therefore, I won't have any gay sex. Problem solved.

I really don't care who you or anyone else is schtupping. WHAT DIFFERENCE COULD IT POSSIBLY MAKE TO ME?

Personally, I'm into brunette women, and it seems as if they're usually a little short (at least compared to me) and often Latina or Asian. A little bit wild in outlook doesn't hurt, either. I don't know -- maybe it's just how I'm wired. It works for me, though. If you're attracted to men, more power to you.

I don't know where my uncomfortableness with the idea of homosexual sex comes from. I have friends and family who are gay and/or lesbian, so am pretty regularly exposed to these kinds of affection (if not the X rated stuff). Is it nature? Nurture? All I know is that I don't care; I'm happy with women, and you can do whatever the hell you want to.

[iconoclastic cat]

43. "Gay" sex or anal sex is gross?

I'm confused by your terms.

[Nevernose]

55. Men touching each other intimately in ANY way

Completely irrational, I realize, since I willingly engage in most sexual acts with women that I would consider "gross" when performed with men (use your imagination here -- I know I do :evilgrin:). I just get the heebie-jeebies from the thought of men. You could maybe even describe it as a sense of *wrongness*. It doesn't mean that other people feel that way, or that other people don't have the God-given right to love (or have casual sex) with whomever they please, be it male or female, in whatever manner they choose, or that I'm a homophobe, or anything else.

I don't like most seafood, either, but that doesn't make it wrong, it just means I think lobster is gross.

[shadowknows69]

108. Well lobsters

probably don't find you particularly attractive either. :hippie:

[geniph]

149. Reminds me of what Quentin Crisp said...

he said the reason so many men are so homophobic is that they cannot think about a sex act without thinking of engaging in said act THEMSELVES. Therefore, a man thinks of another man having sex, and immediately visualizes having sex in that manner with him himself, thinks, "ooh, I don't like that thought," and therefore projects it to "I don't like that person for making me have that thought." It's one of the reasons women don't seem as knee-jerk homophobic; they fixate less on actual sex acts, and certainly they practice less transference in that manner of imagining themselves engaging in the imagined acts.

In other words, if the idea of having sex with another man is grossing you out so badly, you really need to quit thinking so much about having sex with other men.

[spooked911]

31. I don't know since I don't have a problem with gays

[Mythsaje]

32. Doesn't bother me

I think some of it's fear of a hidden side of themselves, some of it's a fear that somehow people can be "turned" gay, some of it's religious obsession, and, for some, it's because they may have had something happen when they were children that stuck in their head.

These are just guesses, since I don't suffer from it myself.

[xray s]

33. I think its more a straight male problem, for starters

It doesn't seem to be such a big deal to straight females (unless they are fundie types).

And there are straight males who accept gays too.

It's my experience that males with the greatest problem with gay men are also very agressive and sexually demeaning towards women. My theory is they project their attitudes towards women onto gay men. In other words, they think gay men think about them the way they think about women, and it freaks them out.

[More Than A Feeling]

48. Or else they think of gay men as they think of women...

and treat them accordingly.

[EFerrari]

160. Bingo. n/t

[annabanana]

106. this sounds about right to me...

It's a "power" thing, I think. The greater the homophoobia, the more insecure the homophobe.

[Tux]

37. I have no problems with GLBT

Except for the show Queer as Folk. I seen some shows on DVD with my gay friends and I have no idea how they can watch such a boring show. Has funny moments but not enough to keep my entertained. Sorry but that is a straight guy's review. Great acting though.

[TreasonousBastard]

38. Same reason we hate anyone different from us, but...

with homosexuals it's worse because it reminds us that no one is really 100% straight.

We don't fear you-- we fear the gayness within ourselves. Gay bashing is really self-hatred.

FWIW, I pretty much stay away from haters, so most people I know are OK with it. But even though we all decry the bigotry, there's still a small "ick" factor that's tough to get rid of.

[buff2]

39. I don't have a problem with it.

It's none of my business what other people do in their private lives.As long as people treat me right,I'm their friend...regardless of their sexual preference,color,religion or anything else. We are human beings FIRST and I think it's sad that so many people shun others for things they do that is none of their business.Times have changed so much...there is far too much hate in this country....thanks to the phoney "born again Christian" rightwingnuts.Anyway....not all straight people think the way they do,thank God. :hi:

[chelaque liberal]

40. The Ick factor

A point I have never heard anyone bring up....

Most of the sexual acts preformed by same sex couples are openly enjoyed by opposite sex couples. What difference does it make if your partner has the same anatomy, or do homophobes only do it missionary style?

[KaliTracy]

44. LOL

so true!

[iconoclastic cat]

41. I really think it's like Jerry Seinfeld says:

Because we can be talked into buying a suit we don't like. You might end up in a homosexual store. "Here, would like to try him in blond?"

[Skip Intro]

42. I'd bet most Americans have no problem with gays

Its just an intolerant, hypocritical, and unjustified gang of self-appointed god-speakrs who demand to tell you how you may and may not live.

Holy Mother of Christ it pisses me off so much. This nation isnt about restriction, its about freedom. Its clear who the enemy is.

Adults, mature adults, don't have a problem with it. The robertson's and the w's of the world lead a hollow, fragile band. They are so bereft of any meaning.

And I don't beleive they speak for the true will of the people. Americans are better than this. Its a radical fringe that seek complete authority over every action, every thought.

I mean, freedom is for everybody, or its not freedom, right?

Sorry, ranting, on a tangent.

I just dont think, at this point, with a sense of some realization by the public at large that a hell of a lot of peple have died because of bush's war, at this point, I don't think most Americans have an appetite for hating each other as much. Aside from the fringe, who without a doubt still hold power, I don't think America hates gays.

[FreedomAngel82]

59. Sometimes I wonder

about that too. If it's really just this small group of fundies who are backed by people like Phelps and Falwell and Robertson who make a lot of noise. :shrug:

[bunkerbuster1]

116. since nobody else has mentioned economics...

I agree that only a relatively small percentage of Americans are genuinely homophobic.

I don't think you can look at the support in 2004 for the idiotic anti-gay-marriage state referenda as an indication of genuine homophobia. A great deal of what drove that support was just good ol' stingyness.

Your average hetero Joe thinks of gay marriage and starts worrying about providing for survivor benefits, that sort of thing.

(the Democrats were such wussies that they never made the very legitimate case that gay marriage is a net financial positive given the social stability it brings, but I digress.)

Combine with offical church disapproval and Republican party disapproval, and it becomes easy to say "OK" to the God Hates Fags amendment, even though he really doesn't hate fags.

the trend toward hetero acceptance of the GBLT folks is inexorable; history will show the political battles as short-term things that made little difference in the long run.

I know, that's cold comfort to those who are being persecuted at the moment.

[Sparkly]

45. Same problem some men have with women's rights,

same problem some white people have with minority rights, same problem some rich people have with helping people out of poverty...

I don't know what the problem is, but I think it's the same problem.

Something about "If you have more, I'll have less." Fear of losing the status quo that gives their status some kind of power... :shrug:

[proud2BlibKansan]

46. I think some people just naturally fear

folks who are different from them. I had a conversation once with a homophobic guy and he just kept talking about gays being different and he didn't understand them and how could they, etc. I was hearing a fear of the unknown.

At least that is what I have always suspected.

[nonconformist]

49. Some are insecure in their own sexuality.

Some are just so narrow-minded that they dehumanize anyone who is different than they are. Some have been brainwashed into thinking that gays are the devil incarnate.

It is possible to support the rights of gays to have the rights of straight people without understanding the attraction. I know many straight men who feel this way.

[CTLawGuy]

57. many straight people have no problem with gays.

It's the fundies + other assorted troglodytes

I guess many of them think "I wouldn't like that, so it must be wrong."

[OrlandoGator]

58. They think homosexuality is a contagious learned behavior.

And they are afraid.

I'm straight. Gay people don't bother me at all. If they want to get married, more power to them.

[HughBeaumont]

60. Well, DUH!

It's because if you're allowed to get married, then my marriage will end, man-on-dog sex will follow, and my kid will want to cruise leather bars when he gets older!!

:eyes:

In Rick Perry's and Davy Dreier's cases, it's self-loathing. In the straight-men's cases, a lot of it is peers, upbringing and observation (i.e., the constant media/religious reich implication that being homosexual is either a see-un or a mental illness, etc). Then there's the "recruitment" fear that some of my co-workers amazingly bring up.

[cestpaspossible]

61. So because the Governor of Texas is a bigot

you therefore feel justified in painting with this broad brush?


I guess if some gay person did something bigoted against straight people, then a straight person would be justified in generalizing: "What is gay people's problems with straights?"


:eyes:

[Ms. Toad]

115. Well...the governor of Texas and > 14,350,000 other

bigots in the 11 states where straight people who have a problem with gays were given the opportunity last November to formally do something bigoted and have it recorded for posterity. (With majorities ranging from a low of 58% to a high of 86%)

I hardly think that's painting with a broad brush based on something one bigoted straight person did.

(Edited to add to the subject line)

[zalinda]

62. Okay, my guess is adolescence

Just think, when kids start to start having sexual feelings, the people that they are hanging around with are of the same sex. I've read that many guys will "fool" around. This is done very secretly and if anyone found out they would be really ashamed. You NEVER admit to it, because if anyone found out about it, you would be ostracized at school. And, since everyone wants to fit in, it becomes something that you have to almost violently reject. And when you hid something that deep, you tend to reject anything that has to do with THAT shame.

Girls don't have the same drive that boys do, so it usually doesn't go beyond kissing, and maybe a little petting. And, a girl can just say she is practicing, and it's not looked on as something really bad. Besides, if a girl wants to have sex, no matter what she looks like, she usually doesn't have a problem getting a willing partner.

Add to all this, the craziness of the teen years and all the mis-information, plus religious guilt, and it's easier to try to keep those who are gay away from you. And, the best way is to try to make them go away by any means possible.

zalinda

[kweerwolf]

80. Exactly right, zalinda

I've read that many guys will "fool" around. This is done very secretly and if anyone found out they would be really ashamed. You NEVER admit to it, because if anyone found out about it, you would be ostracized at school.

I know from my experiences that there were several guys I fooled around with during adolescence, all of whom have gone on and married (and I presume are completely heterosexual). I remember that experimentation because I'm gay ... but I will bet that if you asked the guys I experimented with in my early teens, but would say they have no recollection of it. Heck, they might even surpress the memory enough to pass a lie detector test about it. (Ironically, I was chatting with a former classmate at a reunion 10 years or so ago and she remembered me getting into trouble once for kissing a girl in second grade ... and I have no memory of it.)

It would be a difficult subject to study, but I'd love to know if guys like that grow up to be homophobic in adulthood.

[Merope215]

64. Kick the dog

It's just like that classic illustration of shit flowing downhill: husband yells at wife, wife spanks kid, kid kicks the dog. Everyone needs to feel better than someone. Straight people who actually don't like gays (as opposed to people, and by "people" I mean rich conservatives, who don't necessarily have a problem with gay people but oppose their basic rights for other and more cynical political reasons) tend to be people who have a tenuous grip on prosperity, in many cases. Rather than vote for someone who would enact economic policies that might eventually change that situation, they vote for someone who will allow them still to feel superior to someone else. Gays are really the only acceptable targets of shit left around these days.

This way Bubba Joe can be lurching out of his favorite biker bar at 3 AM, drunk and headed home to his trailer and another hungover day at a dead-end job that barely pays for the utilities and the food and booze, and think, "Well, at least I ain't one of them queers!"

I think it's probably as simple as that. Being a straight person who's never had a problem with people of orientations that are not my own, I wouldn't know firsthand. But that's what I think.

[sweetheart]

67. You chaps dress so damn well, and know how to be friends

with the ladies.... that just is so defeating for straight guys with
no dress sense, who objectify women and do not have a way of relating
beyond their dick.

In your case, you write so well, that surely straight people are put
off right away! :-)

I've really pondered your question as well... I thought it was
anal sex, but it seems thats a preserve for heterosexuals as well,
and/or cunnilingus, and as well-... a hetero thing... so it can't
really be the sexual thing either... and all i can imagine is its
just fear, threatening the imaginary boundaries of little tiny male
egos.

[Warren DeMontague]

91. If you define "objectification" as looking at pictures of attractive nude

people, or watching porn.. It's my experience that gay men are more than capable of exhibiting that kind of behavior, in spades. (I've also known plenty who spent lots of time 'relating with their dick', although the perennial hetero-bugaboo of the gay man wanting to screw all the straight guys is a totally nonexistent phenomenon, in my experience)

I'm not saying that's your definition of "objectification", but it does seem to be a fairly common one in some circles. Personally, I don't have any problem with that sort of behavior, i.e. watching and getting off on porn or attractive people having sex, or even relating with one's dick.. But if you're going to condemn that kind of thing, I would say it's only fair to be even-handed about it.

[sweetheart]

107. fair enough

by objectification, i was meaning more than sexuality, more than money,
more than appearances. I agree that it is not limited to any single
segment of society, males and females for that matter, just it is the
tendency to call the mating smell "love", and all the jerry springer
that results.

[okieinpain]

68. why do gays help repugs raise money, why do gays vote for repugs

they even vote for people like perry. where is the outrage from gay repugs over this man's comments. there are some big money raisers that are gay and in texas. seen any complaints from them.

[jonnyblitz]

71. good points! sickening isnt it.?

I have no use for my fellow gays who are republican and i seem to run into them all the time in chat rooms online. :puke:

[okieinpain]

94. I mean really it's something that puzzles the shit out of me. also

on that list are black people that vote for repugs. hell even powell admits that there is a need for affirm action, but yet there he is voting for these nuts.

Poor whites, man if anybody needed a union, but yet they buy that repug shit that unions are evil, and if they just work a little bit harder they will reach the american dream. I can understand that dems aren't the greatest thing since sliced bread, but man after having clinton for eight years how could you doubt that. Kerry is a decorated veteran, bush went awol, yet these same freakin people question kerry's service. it' just fu*king mind blowing to me.

[shugah]

72. there are some things i "get"

tho don't agree with. it's not a simple question "what are straight peoples problems with gays?" there are many and varied reasons that this straight person or that has this problem or that with homosexuality.

i don't think i've ever been homophobic or anti-gay but for me the way from not really knowing anything about gays to full support of gay rights and marriage has been a bit of an evolution and not always an a to b line. (yes, i purposely put something other than "straight" line ;-) .) in retrospect, full realization that civil rights are for everyone should have been a "duh" moment for me, as i have always been a liberal, but there it is.

i went thru several "phases" of "accepting homosexuality." y'know - the "i have gay friends," or the "i have no problem with what anyone does in the privacy of their home! but i'm glad (in an enlightened, liberal way, of course!) that my brother/son/neighbor isn't. that would be so hard for them. *sigh*," or "people are people, there are good gays and bad gays," etc.

anyway - the point is, i can see where, in the past, an LGBT person might have perceived that i had "a problem" with them- tho not in a hating way - discomfort may be the right word, tho not discomfort because i'm deeply closeted, but more because of a lack of knowledge. happily for me, i have had the great pleasure of knowing so many people, and some of the LGBT people i have known were actually extremely patient and tolerant of me. i guess anyone who bothers to know me can see that my heart is in the right place. i am fortunate that there have been some people who have taken the time to nudge my head in the right direction.

i think i "get it" now. my marriage, government/religious/societal sanctioned - all that sacred-ness and sanctity and whatnot is actually threatened as long as gay people can not make the same government/religious/societal commitment. i am very uncomfortable having more rights than someone else.

my son gave me an incredulous look and could not believe it when i told him that i once thought i opposed gay marriage. it was in context of a conversation saying that even old, set in their way people, if they were liberal, free thinking, and open minded could change their mind, adjust their thinking, and recognize what is right when they see it. he still gives me some greif about it from time to time - "mom! you were against gay marriage? why? that is so not like you! why were you?"

i never actually was against gay marriage - i just thought at one time that i was (without thinking it thru much). i've tried to explain to him some of the myriad reasons i was wrong... but, at the end of the day, i am proud that he can't beleive it of his mother - maybe my past ignorance can be forgiven because i raised my son right!

[ruggerson]

89. You were raised right too

Otherwise you wouldn't have the ability nor the commitment and self awareness to think things through, to imagine walking in someone else's shoes and to have the wisdom to change your ideas and your beliefs.

[The Whiskey Priest]

73. Well for one thing.....

You guys dress cooler than we do......

[Straight Shooter]

74. I've got no problem with it. Never have, never will.

I do have a problem with the Sexuality Police. If gays didn't exist, they would be on a rampage over something else, you can count on it.

[kweerwolf]

75. There's a link between homophobia and sexism ...

... at least in the minds of less enlightened straight men.

They thing of gay sex and the only way they can picture it is "taking the woman's role." In other words, those gays are behaving like women! The thought of such a thing makes them shudder.

It's the same sort of "logic" that in some cultures claims that if two men engage in sex, only the receptive partner is gay (or taking the woman's role). The penetrative partner can keep his straight credentials as long as he only plays the penetratic role.

This type of thinking has been around for centuries. In ancient Rome a man could have sex with a slave or younger man as long as he was the "top." But there were consequences ranging from being ostracized to fines or other punishments if a free man of Rome allowed himself to be penetrated by a slave.

To be horny and seek the nearest available "receptacle" is the male perogative. But to be that receptacle puts a man on the same level as women, according to outdated social morals that continue to creep into our more enlightened age.

[KnowerOfLogic]

97. You are correct; i think that the root of homophobia is really sexism.

It is the great fear of insecure mean and the weak women who cling to them that the sexes will somehow be reversed and men will be put in the role of women and vice versa.

[cestpaspossible]

99. Good post, insightful, I think, nt

[Ariana Celeste]

146. I hadn't even thought of it that way!

It sure makes a lot of sense. I bet that has a lot to do with it.

[elshiva]

76. Never understood it. You are supposed to love everyone and

respect them.

Another thing: WTF does one have to imagine anyone having sex if they don't want to! (Pretaining to the old "it's gross" theme). Mom and Dad having sex is puke, but it happens and it's fine, just try not to think about it...

[shugah]

77. unfortunately, many see only the "SEX"

in homoSEXuality. they don't see the real relationship between 2 people. for whatever reason, our society spends an inordinate amount of time thinking about, worrying about, dreaming about, fighting about, fighting against... SEX.

i guess the best way to combat anti-gay marriage propoganda would be to show the stats that all the gay people in committed relationships also fight about: money, how to raise the kids, picking up socks, time spent online/playing video games, in-laws, best possible vacation, what color to paint the bathroom...

[spindoctor]

78. Funny, but a poor argument.

What I will not accept is that being gay is the norm. That simply does not compute.

I don't believe I have a problem with gays, but I do feel (subjectively) that there are more annoying gays (men and women) than heteros.

Your typical 'riot queen', the overacting holywood modeled stereotypical fag, who expresses his gayness with every move and in every word irritates the hell out of me. Being gay is one thing. Being an idiot is another.
There are other examples like this in the hetero community. The young suburban 'gangsta' jumps to mind, but the ratio appears to be higher under gays.

Apart from that, its a free world. Whatever gets you through the night.

[ruggerson]

87. It ain't the norm, statistically, but it's perfectly natural

as in the fact that NATURE creates both gays and straights.

And bitching queens turn me off too, just as much as whining, insecure straight guys who feel the need to pump up their egos about the women they attract, because they're generally feeling that most women actually DON'T find them attractive.

Funny how most exaggerated personalities come directly from personal insecurities.

[Puglover]

114. :rofl:

"I do feel (subjectively) that there are more annoying gays (men and women) than heteros."
I'd love for you to explain this further.

[Ms. Toad]

118. I suspect

That what you are seeing only seems like a higher proportion because that's what sells. For example, when you watch a gay pride parade, you normally get shots of the 2% or so of the parade which is most flamboyant. You don't see the shots of the 98% of the rest of us who look like just like you.

The impact is not so strong when the media focuses on young suburban 'gangsta' (as it is also prone to do for the same reason), because most of the straight population is visible - so you know immediately that what you are seeing is out of the norm for that population. Most of the gay population is not visible - so it is not immediately obvious to you that what you are seeing is also out of the norm for our population.

That said, it was those 'riot queens' to whom we owe many of our freedoms today. They were the ones who were unable or unwilling to blend in, and who had nothing to lose when the police raided a gay bar called the Stonewall Inn one night (as they routinely did) and fought back, signaling the beginning of the end of gays quietly tolerating police harassment and worse.

So, even though their presence (and the inevitable media attention) adds to your perception that "there are more annoying gays ... than heteros" I would never ask them to silence themselves.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

121. You're probably waching too much TV

since you've underscored the stereotypical gay guy which is NOT the norm for gay guys

[Misunderestimator]

127. "there are more annoying gays (men and women) than heteros."

Where did you get this perception? From all your gay friends and acquaintances, or from the media's portrayal of us?

[jonnyblitz]

138. it's possible that many of the"normal" straight men and women

you encounter are actually gay and you don't know it..you just notice the flamboyant ones and think they are the only gay people and you assume all the "normal" acting people are default straight. you are falling for the stereotypes.

[spindoctor]

139. Another _subjective_ observation about gays (anser to all of the above)

Gays do not take criticism very well. The original poster blew me away because I would have expected my post to be hammered right away. lol

Four out of five gays prove me right though ;)

As to the above:

1. It is unlikely that my opinion on anything is influenced by TV. I watch a handful of shows, half of which are cartoons.
2. I am intimately familiar with the fight for gay rights. My cousin being a leading member of the gay activist movement since the early 80s.
3. I never said the majority of gays matches the image that I already labeled as stereotypical myself. My personal opinion, in answer to the original question in the thread, I expressed above.
4. I am comfortable enough with my tolerance levels to admit that there are gays that are too gay for my liking. On the same token, there are blacks that are too black, hispanics that are too hispanic and yes...whites that are too white. Every minority has its excesses that trigger annoyances with other people. I am not exempt from that.
5. Never ask me if 'these pants make you look fat'.

[geniph]

151. Good gracious, do you actually KNOW any gay people?

Stereotypical queens are most definitely in the minority. By a long shot. Sure, I know some. I know some goddam annoying straight people too. And some irritatingly stereotyped butch dykes. But they're in the minority. Most are just ... people.

[Cats Against Frist]

79. Depends on why you're asking

If it's a friendly Constitutional reminder, and a call for equal rights -- then the real question is why do people who don't like gay marriage feel that they have the authority to dictate what freedoms people get.

As for the larger question -- fear, obviously. And, because they're idiots.

That said, as a critical thinker, I'm turned off, slightly by some of the specifics of a lot of gay culture -- particularly gay male culture -- and unwavering propaganda -- and yes, I said PROPAGANDA -- that homosexuality is genetic, when it is, in fact, though NOT A CHOICE, a psychological condition that doesn't have an "on/off" switch, but affects people to varying degrees. (No matter what my opinion, however, I have no problem with the law protecting homosexualities to the furthest degree).

There is truth to the fact that overtly homophobic males could be latently gay -- or at least turned on by some of the peripherals of the imaginings of gay coital excercise. "Splitting and projecting" is the common psychological term for it -- so is the totalitarian mindset. Religious indoctrination and shame, to be sure, are also factors.

Again, that said -- both sides have their "faith," rather than their "facts" as the bow of their movements. Homosexual marriage is NOT easily acclimated into the culture -- and the cry for gay marriage legality is an excercise not designed to necessarily get the law to protect gay marriage, but to legitimize the practice. The Constitutional argument, and the argument that broadens civil liberties the most is the arguement for civil unions, i.e. the government does NOT define ANY marriage -- and the right of joining in union is indisputably left up to the joinees.

"Legitimization," however is an attempt to get people to accept the practice -- not "tolerate," but ACCEPT -- I have my theories about the necessity of this, for the pacification of deep psychological misgivings and shame about one's lot, which I'm sure will be displayed openly, when people defensively respond to my post. That said, it is just a theory, and I'm open to other possibilities.

Getting people to "accept you," is not mandated by the Constitution. They should have to "accept" homosexuality no more than I should have to "accept" attention to NASCAR as a legitimately engaging pursuit. They should have to accept it no more than I should have to stop drinking lattes and reading Foucault, because the 'muricans like watered-down horse piss and love sound bites.

So, yes -- though I think that the people who crow about the "homosexual agenda" are hysterical and looking for scapegoats for their own pathetic lives, it seems to me that perhaps what's pushing them is not that they really believe that there are gays waiting to rape their kids, but that the imbalance, and deception on the part of the homosexual lobby jams their tiny, tiny brains. They can't sense what it is -- dishonesty about the origin of homosexuality, the civil union v. marriage argument -- whatever -- but they're only like six percent smart enough (and total alarmist freakazoids) to figure out anything beyond suspicion and intution.

I say have an honest discussion about homosexuality, and promote civil unions, and that might help.

[noiretextatique]

82. legitimization is not the issue

at least not for me. i learned a long time ago not to give people the option to approve, disapprove, accept or tolerate...or whatever who i am.
the gay marriage issue is about civil rights, insurance, pensions, etc., not about getting straight people to accept anything. the issue is: are gays and lesbians afforded the same rights as straight people take for granted? well...that's a resounding no. so the issue now is: is the offically de-legitimizing gays and lesbians as people a growing trend?
we know the answer to that.

[zalinda]

110. Sorry, I really have to disagree with this statement

"That said, as a critical thinker, I'm turned off, slightly by some of the specifics of a lot of gay culture -- particularly gay male culture -- and unwavering propaganda -- and yes, I said PROPAGANDA -- that homosexuality is genetic, when it is, in fact, though NOT A CHOICE, a psychological condition that doesn't have an "on/off" switch, but affects people to varying degrees. (No matter what my opinion, however, I have no problem with the law protecting homosexualities to the furthest degree)."

If you look just at the animal kingdom, you will find homosexuality, and that can in no way be psychological. An experiment is going on right now about fruit flies. They are replacing a gene and turning them from being male to acting female. The gene altered male will dance and try to attract the non altered male flies. No, just as there is male and female in everyone of us, it is a series of genes which can dominate what our sexuality will be. Some will be very straight and some will be very gay. But, there is also a set in the middle which goes from being mildly bi-curious to let's get it on.

And, you will find that people from the same family in small communities will have variations within their sexuality. And, I'm pretty sure, but can't give facts, that identical twins are the same sexually. And, let's not forget, sexual activity itself. Everyone has their own level of sexually activity, which is determined by their body chemistry. While some people think once a month is plenty, there are others who got to have it every day. Sex is not psychological, it's hardwired, and it is the most driven part of our body make up.

zalinda

[Ms. Toad]

122. You are wrong, at least with respect to my family,

and any other gay family with which I have had discussions when you say, "the cry for gay marriage legality is an exercise not designed to necessarily get the law to protect gay marriage, but to legitimize the practice."

My 19 year quest for legal recognition of our nearly 24 year old marriage is for the sole purpose of obtaining the legal recognition (and attendant rights and benefits) not currently available.

My family, my geographical community, my faith community, and my workplace all know and embrace our family. We have been married in our faith community in a ceremony attended by more than 130 of our friends and family. We have insurance and other benefits provided by my workplace.

What we have been unable to accomplish is a legal relationship between my biological daughter and my spouse. Our attempts were denied expressly because our marriage (of approximately 18 years at the time) was not recognized by the state. In addition, we have not been able to obtain other rights and benefits which arise out of the three party contract between the couple and the state which is respected by all other states and countries, such as social security benefits for each other, the rights to share family wealth without gift tax implications, and legal recognition in our home state of our legal marriage in Canada last year. Civil unions are not granted that extra-state respect. Even within the state it would take decades of court cases to establish that all of the common law marital rights and privileges (those based in court decisions, not statute) also apply to civil unions, as each would need to be tested individually by an individual couple, at that couple's expense. Not to mention the difficulty of locating and amending each state law which used a marital term to ensure that each statute applies.

[Cats Against Frist]

129. I wish you luck with that

and I don't think that my assertion is absolute, in all cases. Civil unions, however, could be made to take care of all of those things. I think all marriage laws should be overturned and civil unions replace them -- and have the civil unions cover the same rights as traditional marriage. There's no reason why this can't be done, and be found Constitutional.

[Ms. Toad]

137. From a legal perspective

it is a very complex matter since it involves both statutory and common law, and involves the interrelationship between various state and country laws and constitutions. I tried to hint at that in my previous post without going into gory detail, which most folks aren't interested in.

Each state would need to amend all of its laws using a marital term (spouse, widow, husband, marriage, etc), and would need to relitigate each meaning of those terms that was developed through case law. For example my state's domestic violence statutes includes the term spouse which has been interpreted very broadly to include live in partners of either gender, but that definition does not apply to the use of the term "spouse" in the adoption laws, where the term spouse was used against us. All that has taken decades to work out for marriage (and it is still being worked out in the divorce/child custody/support arena).

As far as being found constitutional, you are probably correct, assuming state constitutional amendments to reverse the amendments just passed to bar recognition of any relationship between same gender partners. But, being found constitutional is not the same as being given full faith and credit under the constitution. A civil union (if every detail is correctly addressed) might address the state specific problems; it would not without significant litigation address the issues of how the civil union contract is viewed outside of the state (is it recognized by other states, is it recognized by the United States, is it recognized by other countries?).

Marriage is a legal term with universal recognition and well established law, and marriages in one jurisdiction are (for the most part) respected everywhere. Civil Union is not a universal concept. To make it one, all of the work that has been done with marriage (at tremendous cost to individuals) to create that universal recognition and well established meaning would need to be redone (at significant cost to the next generation of litigants).

Frankly, although your suggestion is a nice intellectual compromise, in practice it would be a nightmare.

This is not only my perspective from someone who hopes to have her marriage recognized, it is the perspective of someone who drafted opinions in a state appellate court the last time someone said let's just replace "a" with "b," in a matter which only impacted state law - not inter jurisdictional law. It was a nightmare and five years later, I have just run across another instance where I am still not sure of the implications of the replace "a" with "b" change, because the status of the particular statute in question has not yet been litigated.

(Edited because I accidentally hit post instead of preview)

[Cats Against Frist]

141. So while my suggestion is a "nightmare,"

it's easier to try to persuade a couple hundred million chimpanzee basketcases, and superstitious, bigoted freaks, whose collective brain power couldn't rival that of a fruit fly, to accept something that most of them think goes against "the laws of nature," and the other half thinks will result in an angry God raining fireballs from the sky on America?

Gay marriage doesn't have 50 percent support. Civil unions, by and large, do.

It's hard to argue that it's a Constitutional issue, rather than a legislative one, simply because the REAL equal protection isn't to protect "straight marriage" and "gay marriage," it's to provide legal protection and access for incorporated partners -- no matter what the definition.

I'm a cohabitating female, with a male partner. We have one child. I cannot get on his health insurance, unless I marry him. I don't want to marry him. I want a civil union. Now, if two people, with a kid, who love each other, are living under the same roof -- what the hell is the functional difference between that, and a "marriage?" I think I'm discriminated against, because I want the protections of marriage WITHOUT committing to the construct of marriage, at all. It's just as logical for me to be upset, and claim we need a status, that grants the same rights as marriage, without having to marry at all, as it is for homosexuals to want to marry.

**edited to add question mark

[Ms. Toad]

142. But you have to convince

the couple hundred million basket cases that it is worth their while to change thousands of individual state laws, and state constitutions, and federal laws, and (potentially) the federal constitution AND then rely on the financially backbreaking work of millions of folks like you and me taking the laws to court before they really are the same rights as marriage. As an example, the adoption law in my state doesn't reference marriage - it references stepparents and spouses. Does a civil union create a stepparent or spousal relationship? That would need to be decided in county court, paid for by my pocketbook (for a second time, I might add), and potentially in appellate court, and in the state supreme court.

By the way, you cannot avoid constitutional issues, It is a state constitutional issue in many states because the basket cases have made it so by amending the constitution; it is a federal constitutional issues because it is the federal constitution that requires each state to grant recognition to marriages that took place within another state or country - that reciprocity was established by litigation - the same litigation would be required to be duplicated with civil unions.

For example, Vermont has no authority to mandate that its civil unions be recognized in Virginia when a couple who entered into a civil union there travels to Virginia and ends up with one of them on life support and the other partner barred from seeing him/her or from making life decisions. That would be a court battle - and if a corresponding status has not been adopted in Virginia, it might be a losing battle. With a Massachusetts marriage, the only question is whether that marriage falls into a small category of exceptions to the constitutional requirement that Virginia give full faith and credit to marriages entered into in another state.

I have not seen any civil union construct that fully addresses intra state issues without placing the burden on individual litigants (e.g. the adoption issue), and none that even attempt to address the federal/interstate/intercountry issues - which are actually the bulk of the rights which cannot be duplicated by legal document couples can create.

I am curious as to what distinction (other than name) you see between a state sanctioned civil union and a state sanctioned marriage which grants the same rights as marriage but has no "functional difference."

No state requires a religious connection to marriage. In order to separate property/children/etc. there would need to be some equivalent of divorce (in reality, unmarried couple divorces typically end up in common pleas rather than divorce court now, couched as theft/property disputes). It would be very difficult to separate what is a statutory right versus a detriment (since what would be a right to one party might be a detriment to another), so statutory grants associated with marriage (whether you view them as beneficial to you or not) would still probably apply.

So what is it about marriage that distinguishes it from civil unions?

(By the way, from a legal perspective even if civil unions are recognized your employer would not be required to extend benefits to your partner - with few exceptions health insurance is solely up to the employer. Since marital status is not a protected class, your employer could extend benefits to married couples, but not those in a civil union. You might want to ask if you employer would extend benefits. Mine does.)

[johnaries]

81. You mean, you AREN'T trying to turn the rest of us gay?!?!?!

Speaking from my generation ( born 1957), most of us were indoctrinated into the idea that "gay" was "bad" from a very young age. "You hit like a girl, you fag!" "you run like a queer!" "are you afraid to fight, you sissy fairy?" I don't know where the hate came from before that, but we were taught by our "peers" that "Gay" was the worst possible thing you could be - even though we may not have known what "Gay" was.

Then, we hit puberty. We finally understand what "Gay" means although we don't understand what it means to be Gay. We just know that we shouldn't be one. Unfortunately, puberty is also the time when you can get an erection if the wind blows the right way. So, guess what happens? We are with a male friend and the wind blows the right way. We immediately panic "does that mean I'm Gay? No, I CAN'T be Gay! Can I?" And after that some of us feel the only way we can prove we are not Gay is to openly despise, demean, and if possible destroy everything and everyone who could be construed Gay.

Or at least that's what I interpret in my personal observations.

As for me, the wind blew the right way at the wrong time once, and I honestly asked myself "am I Gay?" By being completely honest with myself, I knew that I liked the vagina's and the breasts and nothing was going to change that.

I believe that if more of us were honest with ourselves and learn to accept ourselves for who we are rather than what we think people expect us to be, we wouldn't have so many of theses issues.

But, that's just me!

[noiretextatique]

83. the most egregious haters are jealous

because they don't have the balls to live openly themselves. some are closet cases, others are envious because they probably enjoy their same sex friends more than their opposite sex partners ;-)
some straight men seem to feel threatened by gay men...lesbians. a friend of mine just got attacked by a man who she told to leave her gf alone because he was being an obnoxious ass. he followed her to the bathroom, waited for her to come out, pretended to apologize, then coldcocked her..knocked her right out. i know butch-looking lesbians have problems with some men, but so do more feminine ones like my friend...the haters seem to get even more pissed if a woman they consider attractive is not available to them, or if she claims a woman they find attractive. i think this has to do with entitlement.
with gay men...well, we saw what happened to matthew shepard.
others have sacred hatred, backed up by religious texts, or their interpretation of them.

[The Traveler]

84. I don't have a problem with gays

I think most straight men that do are afraid for some reason. Fears are often baseless and culturally incubated. Ever see a big tough guy just freak out over a spider? Same thing.

[Warren DeMontague]

86. THIS straight person doesn't have a problem with them... unless

they are Gay Republicans.

Yet, supposedly, y'all are a threat to my family and the sanctity of my marriage.. So, get this: For 6 odd years, I had a wonderful, nice, middle-aged gay male couple living next door to me. Never had any problems with them at all. Every once in a while I could hear someone pretty talented playing the piano on a warm afternoon, but other than that I hardly knew they were there.

Then they moved out, and some fucking twentysomething NASCAR nightmare moved in. Some kind of drag racing team or something, with about five busted-ass vehicles, an abandoned truck with no engine parked illegally, and endless supply of surly, snarling, short haired punks in and out at all hours. Hammering, Revving engines, using buzzsaws. The peak of this experience was when I politely asked one of these guys not to park right in front of my mailbox, because the mailman doesn't deliver the mail then. The guy flips out (because apparently in the time since I was a lad it has become de rigeur to flip the fuck out for absolutely no reason at all) and starts making crazy death threats, at which point I called the cops on him.

So-- please-- can I have the gay couple back so they can threaten my moral fiber and the sanctity of my marriage? Please???

Seriously, I couldn't care less who you sleep with or love, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult yadda yadda.

The world needs more love, not less.

[enid602]

88. pie

They don't wnat to see yet another piece of the ever-dwindling pie going to yet another minority group.

[Lexingtonian]

90. a nice can of worms you've opened, dsc....

For the more simpleminded sorts of people, their theory of homosexuality is exactly what people of the middle ages considered the signs and symptoms and typical behaviors of demonic possession. They accurately believe in the same means by which it occurs and the same means of its removal from the person. For somewhat more rigorous people the picturesque demon part of this explanation is gone but the elements are conserved in the public mind.

Having lived in society as they have, homosexual people are said by social tradition to be devious and treacherous, craven and hidden and immoralists, and social tradition has said that the danger is great to average, uneducated and sexually unsophisticated, people through the centuries. I've had the misfortune of losing what seemed to me a good friendship over an illustration of the origin of this involving a onetime teacher of mine, a gay man who could not give up his delusions that I was gay and ultimately wanted sex from me, though never overtly saying so, in return for writing me a recommendation to postgrad education. I consider him a victim, really, and nothing terrible happened other than that my pending applications were rejected when he never mailed any recommendations out, but situationally it was a really vile betrayal of a relationship I was certain would stay platonic in the best, other, sense of the word.

There's the 'ick' thing about gay sex, but the conflation of gay people with somehow inevitable contracting of AIDS is more revealing. Gay sex is still widely imagined to transfer some quality or quantity that is extraordinarily dangerous to non-gay people. With the causation of homosexuality as mysterious, or at least lacking a strong scientific notion, as it is, the danger there might be doesn't have strong constraints in the imagination of the moderately rational average straight person.

There's also the selfdestructiveness of gay people that is very hazily perceived, and that makes them suspect. There are a lot of things, ultimately all lumped as 'gay culture' when actively embraced, that are perceived as Otherness in very variable ways. The fact of it being made on its surfaces smart, appealing, seductive by intent, yet combined with the Otherness is interpreted as containing a general design on the uninitiated.

Otherness is the essential issue. Homosexuality is a running anomaly and complication for straight adolescents. It's an irritating violation of the Divine Order of The World to the nature god worshippers that most traditionalists in American and European society have been, a violation that seems overt and inexplicable and deeply problematic to the followers of strong nature theisms aka paleo-paganism. In a lot of ancient cultures things of such anomaly and violation- malformed neonates, one half of a pair of twins, the mentally ill, people with certain kinds of physical diseases- were killed, with demonism playing its part in the explanation scheme.

Each of these things has a civilized solution. Some of it involves scientific research, some of it is social change and social courage, some of it is championing of Modernity's project as a whole- the overthrowing of theism, Nature Theism in particular, in the minds of people and the notions of Divine Order these belief systems invariably entail (many of them actually apocryphal).

[bridgit]

92. the question doesn't seem phrased quite right...

there's more nuance than that imo, for instance...

i am in the theater, hubby is a multi-media artist, we are straight and yet patronize 'gay' eateries on the whole & establishments for our incense (gay men are forever hitting on my boyfriend along with the occasional lesbian & every body thinks i'm cute so it's a win-win situation :shrug:); several of our dearest friends in this world are gay; three of which being as queer as $3 bills, would tell you as much, and could care less whether you stood up in church all called them "fagots" in front of your, or any, congregation for that matter. by invitation, we will be attending the gay pride festival saturday next i think it is. gay men are some of my boyfriend's more up front & commissioned patrons no...pun...here.

but they, the vast majority of these friends & patrons, have identified a long standing trend that they feel, and we see what they are saying when they do so; that it tends to be the crotchless leather, chain geek & sex puppy slut muffin parade that just freaks the hell out of 'straight people'.

even still, while edward feels that virtually everyone is gay and that if they aren't then they need to be or admit that they are; curtis, a 1st chair symphony oboist, understands the politic a little better. while civil partnerships are being dissolved across the land by way of bush admin gobbledygook; it is a common gay misnomer, that heteros are able to get away with bending each other over on the checkout isle @ safeway.

i think we're all just trying to live our lives. i've seen boyfriend doing it since we threw in together, and now i recognize it in my successful 'gay friends' as well; it is all proactive motion from within small elegant circles now imo as well.

as for sin? there is only one; falling short of the glory of god i have heard it said. and that is a very wide berth when you think about it.

[AntiCoup2K4]

93. All prejudice comes from one source : ignorance.

And a lot of people dismiss that because they confuse ignorance with stupidity, though they are not the same thing. Most stupid people are ignorant, but not neccessarily all ignorant people are stupid.

You are ignorant if you have never (at least to your knowledge)known a gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered person, and therefore believe what you hear about such people from media types, politicians, your church, and possibly your own relatives. And this applies to racism, sexism, and any other form of ignorance as well

The only way to overcome such ignorance is to know at least one such person (a gay person in this case) Once you see the reality of such people and that it doesn't match the propaganda that you believed for years, then you have a choice.

Some will let go of their ignorance and realize that gays are pretty much like anybody else.

Others will say something like "Well I still think queers are going to Hell, but he's such a nice guy"

That's when ignorance becomes stupidity ;) And I know this as a recovered homophobe from a family of still (slowly) recovering homophobes.

[question everything]

98. You need to separate the reactions by men and by women

about homosexuals and lesbians.

At some point, people imagine what they really "do." For straight men this is disgusting and even frightening, if, at some point, they had a homosexual tendency. For women, on the other hand, it is mostly a shrug.

Similarly, people are less up in arm about lesbians because imagining what they do is not such a turn off to both sexes.

There is also the fact that there is "fluid" exchange between men, but not between women and this fact, too, can turn off people when they try to visualize this.

Then there is the good ol' bible where sex between men is "abomination" while there is nothing about sex between women. One reason, I think, is that there is no "wasted" seed and, again, visualization of fluid exchange.

[cestpaspossible]

100. Our precious bodily fluids.

I first became aware of it, during the physical act of love...Yes, a profound sense of fatigue, a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I-I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence. I can assure you it has not recurred, they sense my power, and they seek the life essence. I do not avoid them...but I do deny them my essence.

[Warren DeMontague]

104. We need to stop painting everyone with a broad fucking brush, actually.

If you think *all* straight men are freaked out by gay people, you obviously haven't spent a lot of time in the Bay Area.

[question everything]

132. No of course not

but the question was why do some - emphasis "some" dislike gays and this is one answer

[Warren DeMontague]

143. actually, the question of the thread is, "what is straight people's

problem with gays".

There should have been a qualifier like "some", but if you look, there isn't.

In a sense, this is almost identical to a thread we had a couple months ago, although the wording isn't quite as incendiary. Look, I will be the first to acknowledge that LOTS of straight men have varying degrees of discomfort ranging up to open hostility towards gay men. Of course, lots of humans exhibit day-to-day behavior that I consider extremely stupid (I'm not prejudiced, I hate everybody)

...It's my experience that these threads are often started by GLBT folks who have the misfortune of living in certain places in, say, Texas or North Carolina, where -yeah- on a daily basis they seem to be running into a lot of neanderthal, ass-hat attitudes. Then they post a thread asking "What the hell is wrong with you straight people?" ... certainly the frustration is warranted but it bears repeating that we're not ALL homophobes.

[Misunderestimator]

112. LMAO.... No "fluid exchange"...

between women?!? :rofl:

[question everything]

134. No, and this why there is a difference

in the acceptance of homosexuality between men and women - this was my point.

[expatriate]

101. I don't think there's one reason for it, honestly.

There are a lot of myths about gay people that are bruited about by straights. Some of them are (and let me say right now, I don't believe any of these myths, but I've heard a lot of straights saying these things):

Gay people are horribly promiscuous, particularly gay men. They engage in anonymous sex, they're fickle, they're only interested in casual pick-ups, glory holes and anonymous sex.

Because of their promiscuity, gay people spread disease.

Gay people spread disease; this is why we have AIDS.

Gay people, gay men particularly, want to "convert" straight people.

Gay people, gay men particularly, want to "convert" young kids to being gay.

Gay people have arrested development, have gotten stalled in some juvenile mindset, and are undependable, flighty and shallow.

If you bring up the fact, to people who believe these things, that since birth control became easily accessible and dependable, many straight people have also become promiscuous, those who believe these myths become very uncomfortable. If you mention that venereal diseases are just as widespread in the straight community, and that AIDS is rapidly being spread through heterosexual contact, they get even more uncomfortable.

The people who believe that gays "convert" straight people to be gay have been taught that by other folks. It's a common misconception, possibly believed because of cases of homosexual pedophilia - and it's nearly impossible to convince people who make that leap of logic from pedophilia to adult gay behavior that homosexual pedophilia doesn't have anything more to do with mature gay sex than heterosexual pedophilia has to do with mature straight sex.

The stuff about gay people having arrested development, being undependable, etc comes right out of some old psychological theories, among them the notion that gay people are attracted to their own sex because they get stalled in a prepubescent phases (where boys think girls have cooties and girls think boys are icky). This has been disproven, but those old notions have gotten into popular culture, and lots of people still think these are "proven facts".

Between these myths and the fact that gays represent the "unknown" or "the other" to many people who have had limited experience with gays - you've got a lot of room for misunderstanding and prejudice.

Sadly, very similar myths have been attributed to other groups throughout history - Jews, blacks, other ethnicities. It's the old majority rule versus a minority. Gays are different from the majority of people - so the less enlightened will always go with the notion of the majority being, somehow, "right" - so any minority, particularly if their practices can be construed to be potentially harmful to the majority (those gays who will "convert" you or molest your children), are to be feared.

[baron j]

102. Homophobic people are worried

that you will aim your gay raygun at them, and they'll be uncontrollably attracted to you, thereby winning you another toaster oven.

Really, it's just lack of worldly experience. Some grow up, leave for another place, and or get to know someone who happens to be GLBT and then learns that he or she isn't an alien from another world, and that one's sexual preference is just another facet of one's identity, not one's <i>raison d'etre</i>.

I think you would be welcome in the liberal, Austin area of Texas. You'll find compassion and hate everywhere.

[shadowknows69]

109. I'm sorry Christians

but your religion has had huge amounts to do with it over the centuries. Its not really taboo in a lot of world religions and in many instances the spiritual leader/shaman of the tribe was a bi-sexual male at the beck and call of the chief or priestess. See that anthropology course I took wasn't a waste of money after all.

[Lerkfish]

131. there are homophobic non-religious people as well....

I think its more of an individual prejudice to do with ignorance or intolerance. Even though churches can exhibit that, they certainly do not have the monopoly on it.

[EnfantTerrible]

117. I believe that it stems from

an aversion to anything that makes us question ourselves. I know that from my own experience as a straight male. My questions about and aversions to homosexuality all occured when I was in my adolescence and teen years... stemming entirely from ignorance and a lack of knowledge about who I was and what my role as a male in this society was "supposed" to be.

I've worked in environments that were dominated by the hetero male attitudes and posturing that equate being gay with being weak. Dominance and strength was the gold standard. I'm not proud of the fact that in my formative years I participated in behavior that perpetuated this misconception. I have since come to learn how stupid and small minded I was. This comes as a result of growing up and being secure with who I am. Some of the most important and influential people in my life are gay. Everyday I am thankful to know them and even more thankful that they care about me.

We, as a society, are adolescent... we don't know who we are really (as is obvious by our present actions in the world and most specifically in our choice of leadership) and until we are finished growing, present attitudes will continue. Until they don't anylonger. It is the slow process of evolution that will one day rid us of these fears and prejudices. Each generation makes a little more headway, I think. As our children learn from us a different set of criterian for viewing each other and the world, so will this, and many other, problems of the world be eliminated.

[shrike]

119. I don't get it, either

It's a mystery to me. (I'm straight) I've seen otherwise rational people explode in a frenzy of gay-hating. It makes absolutely no sense. Why?

[WLKjr]

123. it's because they gays are trying to turn the rest of us gay

and gays have the bigger penis....


That makes them scared.



/sarcasm :rofl: :D

[enigmatic]

126. I have zero problem

I've never understood it, either; I don't care who wants to sleep w/ who, and it's none of my business. I'll fight w/ my brothers and sisters who are Gay and Lesbian to help them achive equality in the eyes of the law til I die; it's the right thing to do, period.

[Burma Jones]

133. I prefer the companionship of a woman

and sex is tied into having a long term relationship with someone. I have always wanted kids, and we have two, and heterosexuality is the easiest way to go about that. I could have sex with either gender, but I would rather live and be partnered up with a woman.

I haven't had sex with a man, but I'll bet it can be pretty intense. I will say though, that if I were to ever have sex outside of my marriage, it would probably be a guy, gotta try something different once in a while you know....


On edit: Geez, I didn't address the post - I gotta go with the fear of their own ambiguity being the cause of most Homophobia, followed closely by the fact that we haven't been raised with any same sex role models....

[BiggJawn]

135. I don't get it either.

I just don't understand it. Can't help myself, really, even though I KNOW it will end up the same way it always does: me flat-broke out in the street with my heart stomped flat.
But I always go after another woman...

I don't get it.

I don't understand why people think they ought to set policy for Gay people, either. Shoot, let 'em get married. Let 'em experience the fun and games of a divorce proceeding...Why should us Breeders have all the "fun" and have to carry the whole legal profession on our backs?

All because of how somebody interpets a hard-to-read Book.

[FlaGranny]

136. I have no problem with gays.

I have seen gay porn films with both sexes. Neither disgusts me. What does turn me off - WAY OFF - is the thought of performing gay sex myself. I guess that means I'm 100% straight. I imagine it's the same feeling a 100% gay person has toward performing sex on the opposite sex. I also imagine that a bisexual does not totally empathize with either a 100% gay or a 100% straight person's feelings about the matter.

In any case, I believe in equal rights for everyone and I believe that everyone should live the life they want to live without shame and it's nobody elses business.

[Sentath]

140. reluctant to share this, but here goes... (its a bit raw)

oh kay I realize that 'muck'-ing may not play a major role in everyone's life, but at one time as a totally isolated young man in SEK I mucked as my main form of social contact.

I don't remember how it came about, but i teleported my characher into the lair of an 'owned' character who couldn't leave that room of the muck because of a collaring program that forced the character to be in whatever room that its owner was in. I .. I simply cannot tell you how squicked-grossed out-terrified-shaken I was. And, I've had similar reactions to unexpected passages of fiction.

I'm not so bad about it anymore, but I could, if supported by my peers, and reinforced by the culture around me, have become violently prejudiced. And I think, upon reflection, that it is in at least one aspect that: as a person who has consciouslly 'sold bits of his soul' / 'killed off parts of himself' to fit in, I saw before me someone who I thought had sold all of himself just to be a pet. If I'm remembering accurately my next reaction was bitter betrayed anger. Something along the lines of '(*&^-it! I've worked and fought so hard just to remain a little myself, how dare that %^^&ing sell-out think he's #((^ing happy!'.

NOw, years later I can also see that it would have been a faustian bargain for me. Here was what I might have been, what I wanted packaged in a form that I could never have, a twisted mirror that I still shiver to glimpse.

I'm somewhat over that now. I'm mine, I own me, no mortgages on whats left of my soul. I can see things in the distance and approve or disapprove, it changes niether me nor them.

[geniph]

144. Damned if I know

I've never understood how one can be NOT attracted to an attractive person just based on their plumbing, myself. I've never understood anything but bisexuality on a truly emotional level. But I try not to be prejudiced against the monosexual. ;-)

[leftofthedial]

145. we're jealous of their fashion sense

[ArkDem]

148. They hate them for their freedom.

[geniph]

150. With a lot of homophobic men, it's fear of being feminized

The most homophobic men I've known have all been misogynists of the worst kind. They fear, demean, hate, belittle women in all manner of ways. They see homosexuality as being feminized - accepting what they see as the "submissive" role. That's one of the reasons you'll run into so many 'straight' guys who claim to not be gay while still having sex with other men; they don't take the role of the receiver, so they aren't feminized. These are the "Imnotgaybut" guys who post on adult forums that they really want to have another guy suck their dicks (they all invariably start their posts with "I'm not gay but" which is why I call them that).

They see women as being something to despise, so anything that makes a man even remotely feminine is something to despise as well. They fear the feminine side of their own nature.

[VOX]

152. This straight male has *zero* problem with gays, or gay sex...

or gay anything. Maybe it's because I was born and raised in Sou. Cal., and have lived here all my life. My older brother is gay, I've worked with gays, I've gone to school with gays, and I've had gay friends. I've been hit on by guys a few times; it's flattering, and it doesn't bother me.

It's just not a big deal, no matter how I regard it.

The only thing I worry about is the fact that my brother and his partner aren't more politically active and involved, especially since they have so much to lose as the country lurches steadily rightward. :grr:

[Skittles]

154. dsc, a lot of us straight people don't get it either

I've never figured it out. But - f*** Governor Goodhair - he's a moron.

[livinginphotographs]

155. Can I second that?

I don't care who you fuck, to put it bluntly.

And from what I've noticed, most of the straight guys who are so concerned about gay guys hitting on them have nothing to worry about. Even women wouldn't usually touch them with a ten-foot pole, and I give gay guys the benefit of the doubt of having much better taste than to hit on some hairy, pot-bellied Klan member.

[Skittles]

176. LOL OMG the ones all paranoid gays will hit on them

I tell them WOMEN DON'T GIVE YOU THE TIME OF DAY SO WHAT MAKES YOU THINK GAYS ARE SO HOT FOR YOUR ASS????? :o

[dsc]

156. In fairness I somewhat posted this tongue in cheek

but was more kidding on the square. It really is a hard to understand phenomena for many of us that so many straights are so virulently anti gay. But clearly not all straights are that way. I did find many of the answers interesting and at least some are similar to those I believe.

[EFerrari]

161. TONGUE IN CHEEK!

ACK!

:rofl:

(pSSSSSSSSSST ---- don't forget the portion of the pop that have some kind of problem with any type of sexual practice.)

[Maat]

162. Hey, I'm the secretary of the local PFLAG!

In all seriousness, I just KNEW you were being tongue-in-cheek.

[Catherine Vincent]

163. Wow! This is still going on.

[misanthrope]

164. Here's one take...

...taken from the satire of The Misanthropic Bitch (no relation):


Let's dispense with the stereotypes. I am not a nut. I am not a foaming-at-the-mouth-right-winger. Nor am I a closet homosexual compensating for the guilt I experience because of dirty, dirty sexual feelings.


I am simply pro-parent and pro-family. I am for the children, and as such, I undertook a daunting task that took me to the seamy underbelly of America's sexual culture.


It was shocking. Horrifying, even. But my eyes and ears did not deceive me. What my minister at Landover Baptist Church told me was true.


Homosexuals have an agenda, and I am here to expose it.


What spurred me to infiltrate the homosexual camp and find out what fiendish plot they were cooking up?


It was The Christopher Lowell Show on the Discovery Channel.


I know I should have watched my son Joseph more carefully. But I only turned my back for a few minutes to write a letter to my congressman encouraging him to ban this Internet thing I keep hearing about on "The 700 Club." Homosexuals are using it to lure innocent children into a life of perversion!


God has blessed us with many technological and medical advances over the years, such as fertility drugs to allow infertile Christian couples to keep our ranks populated.


A heathen might argue that if God had wanted infertile couples to have children, He would have given them the necessary plumbing to aid procreation. That's just crazy pagan talk.


So, while I praise God for recent advances, this Internet thing has me worried. I haven't been so worried since I learned Tinkie Winkie bats for the other team. That revelation prompted me to regulate television viewing in my home, and now little Joseph only watches the God-approved Veggie Tales.


(Although Larry the Cucumber is rather phallic. I'm starting a letter writing campaign tomorrow to change his name to Larry the Squash.)


In order to finish my letter, I left Joseph in front of the television watching the wholesome Veggie Tales. I thought it would be safe. I've told joseph not to change the channel, and he knows to mind his mother.


After I finished addressing, stuffing and licking the envelope, Joseph walked into the dining room and exclaimed, "Mommy, the wall trimming doesn't match the curtains!"


The wall trimming doesn't match the curtains. I was speechless. My little man, who enjoyed re-enacting the Crusades with his GI Joe action figures, berated me for my interior decorating.


What did I do wrong? I pondered. Didn't I refrain from unconditional love? Didn't I make him eat steak every night? Didn't his father take him to all those Promise Keeper meetings? Didn't we buy him Austin 3:16 tee shirts?


As this was racing through my mind, I heard a lispy voice emanating from my living room, and it was then I realized I can only do so much to protect my son from the homosexuals. They were now taking over the airwaves and beaming their interior decorating tips to America's sons.


What could I do? How could I stop them? Well, as former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed once said, "Keep your friends close, but your enemies even closer." I had to-for my son, for all our sons and daughters-find out what the homosexuals were planning.


I told my best friend Maggie what I planned to do. She shook her head and asked why I was obssessed with homosexuals. She didn't understand. Most Americans don't. They're oblivious to the threat.


To them, Ellen is just a harmless, marginally funny comedienne and Rupert Everett is a strikingly handsome actor.


But no more. I'm bringing the threat to light. You're going down, Ellen and Rupert.


Not knowing any homosexuals, I ventured to the local feminist bookstore. Lesbians go there. I've seen them, canoodling and pretending that eternal damnation doesn't await them.


An odd-looking woman named Ani DiFranco was scheduled to appear at the bookstore on a Wednesday night and a poetry "slam" was to follow. This was my chance.


I threw on my husband's flannel shirt and an old pair of jeans. I wasn't sure I'd blend in, but the lesbians accepted me with open arms. I concocted a life story and they ate it up. I was in.


They told me that the next meeting was at the secret room in the Pottery Barn downtown. The password was "mimosa" for the men and "beer" for the women.


I didn't dare tell my husband what I was planning. He's forever condemning my "meddlesome" plans. "Mrs. Kravitz" he calls me. Well, I'd show him, once I had my hands on The Homosexual Agenda.


I sneaked out of the house the night of the meeting, telling my husband that I was attending Mary Perganol's baby shower.


Mary's bed-ridden because she's pregnant with nonuplets, and the ladies at Landover Baptist wanted to cheer her up. Carrying nine of God's blessings at one time can bring down even the most dedicated Christian woman.


Finding the Pottery Barn wasn't difficult. There was a parade of rainbow flag-covered cars lining the street. I walked around to the back and knocked on the door.


"Whasss the pathword?" said a disembodied voice. I stammered for a second and finally blurted out "Beer!"


I heard the door being unlocked. I was in. I was definitely in.


Seated in a circle were the town's homosexuals, many of whom were prominent citizens. This went further than I had suspected. Even the mayor Judy Bennett was there! But I had pegged her as part of the plot. Real women stay at home with their children.


I won't bore you with the details of the meeting, other than to say that Councilman Bruce Thompson's Salmon Benedict was delish. All that matters is that I secured a copy of the official Homosexual Agenda directly from the Head Homosexual-Christoper Lowell himself!


The agenda starts out innocently enough: breakfast, jog in the park, manicure and hair appointment, watch "Martha Stewart Living," brunch.


It's the two o'clock hour that strikes fear in my heart:


1) Assume complete control of federal, state, and local governments. Refurbish Oval Office. Move headquarters to Christopher Street.


2) Break down children's natural resistance to homosexuality through the musical video "That's Homosexuality!"


3) Petition for recognition of homosexual marriages, thus destroying all healthy heterosexual unions, particularly those in the Bible Belt.


4) Erect re-education camps to convert heterosexuals.


5) Establish breeding gulags to feed our desire for a continuous stream of prepubescent love slaves.


6) Force all churches to embrace Unitarian-Universalism.


7) Turn the Internet into a bastion of home/lesbo love.


8) Get beauty rest to prevent wrinkles and grey hair caused by the stress of plotting for world domination.


With this proof of an impending homosexual takeover, I stormed over to my friend Maggie's house and threw the Homosexual Agenda in her lap. She glanced at the paper, giggled and mouthed "It's a joke."


A joke! Well, I was indignant. As I looked at my unbelieving friend, I clicked my tongue and said, "Maggie, wait until I tell you what the queers are doing to the soil."

[PassingFair]

167. I think that the REAL reason...

is, and let me state that I personally believe this fear to be irrational and unfounded, they are afraid that you will "get your hands" on children and molest them if you are allowed to.

They fear that you will adopt children for the express purpose of abuse.
They fear that you will breed (with the help of lesbians) children to abuse. And that the law will be unable to stop it.
After all, the righties smack their children around with impunity. They don't want the law coming in and taking their kids away.
That is why they fear your getting equal rights in marriage.
Just my take on this.
I have no problem with gays/lesbians AT ALL.
But I think this is behind their knee-jerk reactions, and why the worry so much about the "sanctity of marriage" thing.

[Redstone]

171. You shouldn't paint with so broad a brush.

How about "some straight people's problems with gays" ins tead of such a blanket qeustion?

As you probably know, some of us straight folks do not have "problems with gays."

Redstone

[The Flaming Red Head]

173. My Mom is 71

and she and I went together to vote against the Marriage amendment here in Arkansas (to define marriage as only between a man and a woman) and she said she doesn't get it, she thinks if people pay taxes and work, then why shouldn't they have the right to get married and live fully in society. I'm with her, if you pay taxes and work then you should have the same rights as everyone else, unfortunately our views were not the mainstream, here, but we tried.

[BrightKnight]

177. You are welcome in Texas.

I am a straight man. My family has been in Texas since the 19th century. I don't know anyone that would say you aren’t welcome here. Real Texans are not hateful folks.

I'm not saying that there aren’t people that would say that here.

-----------

Homosexual hating is the last refuse of hate politics. It is no longer acceptable to be an open sexist, racist or anti-Semite.

The Texas neocons need a lot of hate politics to cover the stink of their corruption and mismanagement.

-----------

Life is short and I can't understand why anyone would want to waste their time hating other people. It seems like such a heavy an unnecessary burden.