BostonAnne
Refugee
U2democrat said:
same.
Lincoln: America's Greatest President; also, Totally Gay!
- Thread starter Irvine511
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
petethechopp
The Fly
I love rewriting history!! Its quite grand to live in a time such as ours, when we are so socially, culturally and scientifically advanced that we can judge the entire course of human history by our own, correct standards.
Saying that Lincoln is gay is problematic at best. First, it assumes that their is a sort of checklist for gaydom. Is there? Can someone really score 4 out of 6 on the gay scale. What if someone scores one out of six and is in a homosexual relationship? Is he more or less gay than a person scoring 5/6 who is in a heterosexual relationship? If we're discussing stereotyping, then can someone explain to me what a "typical" gay person is like so we can stand Lincoln up next to them and find out how he measures up.
Next, we're using a standard devised in the here and now to judge the then and there. Always, ALWAYS, a bad idea. Standards of conduct for men and women, married and unmarried, were very different in the mid 19th centruy than they are today. So it seems, at the very least, we should try to figure out what a "typical" 19th century gay person was like and compare Lincoln to that standard.
Then finish rewriting the history books based on our enlightened findings.
Saying that Lincoln is gay is problematic at best. First, it assumes that their is a sort of checklist for gaydom. Is there? Can someone really score 4 out of 6 on the gay scale. What if someone scores one out of six and is in a homosexual relationship? Is he more or less gay than a person scoring 5/6 who is in a heterosexual relationship? If we're discussing stereotyping, then can someone explain to me what a "typical" gay person is like so we can stand Lincoln up next to them and find out how he measures up.
Next, we're using a standard devised in the here and now to judge the then and there. Always, ALWAYS, a bad idea. Standards of conduct for men and women, married and unmarried, were very different in the mid 19th centruy than they are today. So it seems, at the very least, we should try to figure out what a "typical" 19th century gay person was like and compare Lincoln to that standard.
Then finish rewriting the history books based on our enlightened findings.
U2democrat
Blue Crack Addict
I think at some point in every public persons life (or in this case after) their sexuality gets questioned. It's even happened to the lovely man in my avatar and signature. 
coemgen
Rock n' Roll Doggie
If you read the review again, it turns out Lincoln was only mostly gay. (sorry, I just had to do this.) 
MIRACLE MAX:
"Look who knows so much. Well, it just so happens that your friend here is only mostly gay. There's a big difference between mostly gay and all gay. Please open his mouth.
Inigo does. Max inserts the bellows in Westley's mouth and starts to pump.
MIRACLE MAX:
Now, mostly gay is slightly straight. Now, all gay...well, with all gay, there's usually only one thing that you can do.
INIGO:
What's that?
He stops pumping.
MIRACLE MAX:
Go through his clothes and look for loose change.
He starts pumping again.
MIRACLE MAX:
"Look who knows so much. Well, it just so happens that your friend here is only mostly gay. There's a big difference between mostly gay and all gay. Please open his mouth.
Inigo does. Max inserts the bellows in Westley's mouth and starts to pump.
MIRACLE MAX:
Now, mostly gay is slightly straight. Now, all gay...well, with all gay, there's usually only one thing that you can do.
INIGO:
What's that?
He stops pumping.
MIRACLE MAX:
Go through his clothes and look for loose change.
He starts pumping again.
BostonAnne said:
Most of the first abolitionists were religious groups, and many were often laughed off as extremists and zealots. They also got the old 'if you don't want slaves don't have them but don't force your beliefs on me it's my life' stuff thrown at them too.
While I have no idea if Lincoln was gay and I do not care, the part I do disagree with is him being our greatest president. I believe he failed to keep peace in the country and jumped the gun calling insurrection when the founding fathers of southern states feared a day when a state would be fired upon for wanting to leave and left the technical loophole in the 10th amendment (notice most of the last states to ratify were southern ones) So technically secession WAS constitutional and he had no right to call them in rebellion. He also suspended habeous corpus, and jailed the entire Maryland state legislature to keep them from voting to secede leaving DC boxed in enemy territory.
It also upsets me that he was looked upon as a hero to the slaves when in reality, when you study his beliefs, he never wanted a society where blacks and whites mixed and lived as equals- he wanted the freed slaves shipped back to Africa, like the ones who were sent to Liberia earlier in the 19th century. In his presidential campaign, he even said he didn't care if slavery continued where it already existed, he only wanted to stop it from spreading west to new terrritories. The abolitionists disliked him for this and tried running an alternative candidate.
What else could have been done? Anything peaceful that would have saved over 600,000 US lives, north and south, saved the property of thousands burned out, and helped countless slaves literally homeless after the war (which led directly to the poverty of blacks in inner cities and back countries) With farm machinery coming in by the 1880's, slavery would have been impractical and phased out by the last of the century anyway, and it would have been better for everyone involved including the slaves themselves in the long run. To me the entire Civil War was a tragic waste of life and property, millions of lives destroyed, hard feelings for generations. But of course no one has a crystal ball....
petethechopp
The Fly
replyint to coem
WTF was that?
I'm laughing my ass off and I don't have any idea why
Please clarify.
WTF was that?
I'm laughing my ass off and I don't have any idea why
Please clarify.
Last edited:
coemgen
Rock n' Roll Doggie
It's from a great movie called "The Princess Bride." I switched the word "dead" with the word "gay" in an attempt to bring some humor to the thread. I just thought it was funny that Lincoln scored five out of seven on the gay scale.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
That raises an interesting question. Are there degrees of "gayness"?
I doubt people, gay or straight, would want to be rank that way.
I doubt people, gay or straight, would want to be rank that way.
pax
ONE love, blood, life
It's not so much a "rank" as a spectrum. I believe it was first Kinsey's idea, theorizing that a few people are exclusively heterosexual and a few are exclusively homosexual, but most fall somewhere in between.
I have to say, this makes sense. I know quite a few people who identify as straight, but who have had some relations with persons of the same sex. Maybe they had them once many years ago or continue to have them today, but if they find them sexually stimulating and interesting, can we really say this person is 100% heterosexual?
This is not to say there aren't 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual people out there. It's just that they're the exception, not the rule.
I have to say, this makes sense. I know quite a few people who identify as straight, but who have had some relations with persons of the same sex. Maybe they had them once many years ago or continue to have them today, but if they find them sexually stimulating and interesting, can we really say this person is 100% heterosexual?
This is not to say there aren't 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual people out there. It's just that they're the exception, not the rule.
U2democrat
Blue Crack Addict
i read that 1 in 100 people are asexual, have no preference at all. that would suck!!!!!!
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
paxetaurora said:
I find this interesting as most prior discussion revolved around the orientation of an individual as who they are, not what they did.
I think Melon has stated that one who is not fully homosexual is bisexual.
U2democrat
Blue Crack Addict
What about those who aren't sure what they are?
Sherry Darling
New Yorker
Well, if nothing else, this explains by Walt Whitman was such a fan.
Oh captain my captain...
sd
Oh captain my captain...
sd
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
U2democrat said:
Gay
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
FullonEdge2
Refugee
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,314
OMG!!11!! I WANNA PUKE!111!
OP
OP
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
joyfulgirl said:
i was considering posting that pic as well -- too funny!
still, it does perpetuate a stereotype that i'm not totally comfortable with, but i'll just relax and have a good laugh.
U2democrat
Blue Crack Addict
that's great.
OP
OP
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
if only i had a 30" waist like that ...
FizzingWhizzbees
ONE love, blood, life
nbcrusader said:
you don't have to "rank" people on some sort of straight--gay scale to recognise that sexuality isn't as black and white as simply identifying as gay and straight. i don't really see any point in worrying about labelling sexuality anyway, for me saying i only like people of one gender or the other makes about as much sense as saying i only like people with brown hair or blue eyes. but that's just me.
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
Irvine511 said:
still, it does perpetuate a stereotype that i'm not totally comfortable with, but i'll just relax and have a good laugh.
I totally agree. That's why I didn't post it yesterday
but today I figured, you know, there's truth in stereotypes. I've known lots and lots of gays that resemble this picture, and many more that don't. But mostly it's just funny.
OP
OP
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
as i mentioned ... what i wouldn't give for a body like that! 
the face however ...
the face however ...
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
Irvine511 said:
A clean shave and a facial can do wonders.
OP
OP
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
"queer eye for the possibly queer, too, 19th century president"?
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
Anyway, that picture was attached to a great salon.com article from a few years ago when a different was-Abe-gay book was being published and it's a great article. I'd link it but you need a subscription to read it and it's too long to post in its entirety. It mentions, though, a diary, found under the floorboards, of Abe's lifelong friend Joshua Speed with whom he shared a bed and exchanged intimate letters for many years. At the time this article was written, the contents of the diary had not been revealed, as I understand it. Does the new book mention the diary?
joyfulgirl
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2001
- Messages
- 16,690
Irvine511 said:
U2democrat
Blue Crack Addict
Kyan would have a field day with that facial hair.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
sounds like a job for
Real Video
SNL
Real Video
SNL
deep
Blue Crack Addict
his gayness got him killed
OP
OP
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
i think an important question that has been asked is: does this matter? who cares if Lincoln was gay?
the answer, i think, is yes and no.
we shouldn't care who presidents sleep with, and sexuality should have no bearing on how we view one's performance of his/her job. it's simply incidental to Lincoln the President, and this is simply a footnote -- and an unproven one -- to his legacy, and probably something of a waste of time. to imply that his sexuality may have played a role in the emancipation of the slaves is not only a stretch, but possibly dangerous -- could we point towards a moment of weakness on Lincoln's part (can't think of one at the moment) and say that was due to his sexuality as well? it works both ways; it's simply bad thinking to attribute the positive aspects of one's life and work to a traditionally marginilzed social difference and not also the negative ones. Lincoln was Lincoln, and that's what we should be focused on and 140 year old psychoanalysis is just a sideshow.
however, it does matter for some people -- probably those who are looking to further prove the utter naturalness of homosexuality, and to those who seek to battle it at every point. the fact that Lincoln may have been gay means a lot to that 3-5% of the population who are written out of history, who are given no role models, who are told in a milllion different ways that they are not fully human and cannot participate fully as either citizens or as human beings. to "claim" someone who literally towers over American history is tantamount to finding a new piece of yourself that you didn't know existed, and does much to combat silly stereotypes of gay men as limp-wristed and effeminate, as weak and ineffectual. it also says to everyone -- see, it's not so weird after all. see, it's all throughout history. see, this isn't a post-WW2 creation. see, gay people are everywhere. see, you would have denied ABRAHAM LINCOLN the right to get married and adopt children.
it also matters to those who battle the acceptance of the naturalness of homosexuality because it's both one more piece of evidence that they have to refute and make excuses for as they watch their case crumble, and it simultaneously gives them ammunition to shoot down ANY re-examination of history. it let's them say, those crazy left-wing academics are saying that ABRAHAM LINCOLN, of all people, was gay!!! see, they're all crazy!!! believe not a word they say.
at the end of the day, it remains a theory, and that were Abraham Lincoln alive today, he probably would have identified as gay, and probably would have pushed that well into the closet in order to further his political career. it would be harder to do, today, because we know what homosexuality looks like, we even know what the closeting of homosexuality looks like (pretty much like how Lincoln is described in the review of the book).
could Lincoln have become president today? hard to say, but i'm willing to bet he might have even been elected governer of New Jersey.
the answer, i think, is yes and no.
we shouldn't care who presidents sleep with, and sexuality should have no bearing on how we view one's performance of his/her job. it's simply incidental to Lincoln the President, and this is simply a footnote -- and an unproven one -- to his legacy, and probably something of a waste of time. to imply that his sexuality may have played a role in the emancipation of the slaves is not only a stretch, but possibly dangerous -- could we point towards a moment of weakness on Lincoln's part (can't think of one at the moment) and say that was due to his sexuality as well? it works both ways; it's simply bad thinking to attribute the positive aspects of one's life and work to a traditionally marginilzed social difference and not also the negative ones. Lincoln was Lincoln, and that's what we should be focused on and 140 year old psychoanalysis is just a sideshow.
however, it does matter for some people -- probably those who are looking to further prove the utter naturalness of homosexuality, and to those who seek to battle it at every point. the fact that Lincoln may have been gay means a lot to that 3-5% of the population who are written out of history, who are given no role models, who are told in a milllion different ways that they are not fully human and cannot participate fully as either citizens or as human beings. to "claim" someone who literally towers over American history is tantamount to finding a new piece of yourself that you didn't know existed, and does much to combat silly stereotypes of gay men as limp-wristed and effeminate, as weak and ineffectual. it also says to everyone -- see, it's not so weird after all. see, it's all throughout history. see, this isn't a post-WW2 creation. see, gay people are everywhere. see, you would have denied ABRAHAM LINCOLN the right to get married and adopt children.
it also matters to those who battle the acceptance of the naturalness of homosexuality because it's both one more piece of evidence that they have to refute and make excuses for as they watch their case crumble, and it simultaneously gives them ammunition to shoot down ANY re-examination of history. it let's them say, those crazy left-wing academics are saying that ABRAHAM LINCOLN, of all people, was gay!!! see, they're all crazy!!! believe not a word they say.
at the end of the day, it remains a theory, and that were Abraham Lincoln alive today, he probably would have identified as gay, and probably would have pushed that well into the closet in order to further his political career. it would be harder to do, today, because we know what homosexuality looks like, we even know what the closeting of homosexuality looks like (pretty much like how Lincoln is described in the review of the book).
could Lincoln have become president today? hard to say, but i'm willing to bet he might have even been elected governer of New Jersey.
Similar threads
