Openly Gay Mayor In Dallas?
- Thread starter MrsSpringsteen
- 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.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Smallville said:
Smallville
The Fly
Irvine511 said:
I'm glad, someone can see where I'm coming from. Thank you.
Sorry, Smallville, I saw you commenting on their comment and should have cut and pasted directly from the source. Lazy on my part, apologies!
I do think that this ilk though would prefer everyone stay closeted...although they'd probably find some other way to criticize the campaign then.
I do think that this ilk though would prefer everyone stay closeted...although they'd probably find some other way to criticize the campaign then.
phillyfan26
Blue Crack Supplier
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Messages
- 30,343
Smallville said:
I was asking a question based on what I interpreted from your phrasing of that statment. You explained yourself. It's over. Drop it. Please.
OP
OP
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
(Reuters)Gay candidate loses Dallas mayoral election
Sat Jun 16, 11:27 PM ET
An openly gay candidate lost his bid on Saturday to become mayor of Dallas in a race that attracted wide attention because of his sexual orientation.
Councilman Ed Oakley lost to businessman Tom Leppert, who took 58 percent of the vote to Oakley's 42 percent, according to official returns. Oakley had the endorsement of the Democratic Party, while Leppert ran a nonpartisan campaign.
A victory by Oakley would have made him the first openly gay mayor of a major U.S. city, according to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, a Washington-based gay rights group.
Neither candidate made an issue of Oakley's sexual orientation, although some outside groups did.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon.../stories/061707dnmetelexdalmayor.973d5d9.html
Sat Jun 16, 11:27 PM ET
An openly gay candidate lost his bid on Saturday to become mayor of Dallas in a race that attracted wide attention because of his sexual orientation.
Councilman Ed Oakley lost to businessman Tom Leppert, who took 58 percent of the vote to Oakley's 42 percent, according to official returns. Oakley had the endorsement of the Democratic Party, while Leppert ran a nonpartisan campaign.
A victory by Oakley would have made him the first openly gay mayor of a major U.S. city, according to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, a Washington-based gay rights group.
Neither candidate made an issue of Oakley's sexual orientation, although some outside groups did.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon.../stories/061707dnmetelexdalmayor.973d5d9.html
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
If he's the best, more power to him.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Flaunting your sexuality is completely unimportant in regards to your actual ability to run a city. Why use it to campaign? Because you're a crappy politician who needs a platform? Damn. I don't care if he's gay, I just want him to govern properly. Same with Mitt Romney...I don't care if his religion is insane, I just want him to be the best presidential candidate possible. Going to great lengths to flaunt your religion and/or sexuality will just skewer the votes. I don't care what you are...I want to know what you can do for us!
Going to great lengths to flaunt your religion and/or sexuality will just skewer the votes. I don't care what you are...I want to know what you can do for us!
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
LemonMelon said:Flaunting your sexuality is completely unimportant in regards to your actual ability to run a city. Why use it to campaign? Because you're a crappy politician who needs a platform? Damn. I don't care if he's gay, I just want him to govern properly. Same with Mitt Romney...I don't care if his religion is insane, I just want him to be the best presidential candidate possible.
erm, did you pay attention to the articles?
he never made an issue about it; it was right-wing pressure groups who used sexuality -- heterosexuality -- as a reason to vote for someone.
and i love how gay people get accused of "flaunting" their seuxality when they choose to not live inside a closet. the whole phrase "openly gay" reeks of heterosexism. how many of you are "openly straight"?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
LemonMelon said:Flaunting your sexuality is completely unimportant in regards to your actual ability to run a city. Why use it to campaign? Because you're a crappy politician who needs a platform? Damn. I don't care if he's gay, I just want him to govern properly. Same with Mitt Romney...I don't care if his religion is insane, I just want him to be the best presidential candidate possible.
Try reading it does wonders.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Irvine511 said:
Ouch, sorry, I just read the part of the article in the thread.
My point still stands, but I suppose it doesn't fit this discussion particularly well. Now, let me address the second half of your post:
When did I once say that Oakley was ever openly gay? My proposition was merely hypothetical. Irvine, you get too bent out of shape over these things.
Believe it or not, there is such a thing as being openly (RE: irritatingly) gay, and to point that out is not homophobic because, guess what, it's pretty damn annoying when heterosexual men choose to be overly masculine (RE: macho) to prove their lack of gayness. Also, quite pathetic. It goes both ways.
OP
OP
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
What exactly constitutes "irritatingly gay"? And why is that related to being openly gay? I can find many things irritating about human beings, and they never really have anything to do with their sexual orientation. Most of the time I have no idea what that is anyway.
Being openly gay to me means just saying you are gay and being as open as you feel comfortable about your personal life-no different than a straight person chooses to be more private or less private about theirs.
Being openly gay to me means just saying you are gay and being as open as you feel comfortable about your personal life-no different than a straight person chooses to be more private or less private about theirs.
Last edited:
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
Irritatingly gay folks = heterophobics. Those incredibly stuck up types, or, more commonly, those who are constantly assuming you're gay bashing if you say anything remotely negative about them personally. (Not related to their sexuality) It's like they use being homosexual as a handicap or something. 
That's really damn annoying, and I've come across my share of them.
That's really damn annoying, and I've come across my share of them.
OP
OP
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Uh, ok
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Assholes are assholes, but there's no such thing as irritatingly gay.
Are you irritatingly straight?
Are you irritatingly straight?
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
BonoVoxSupastar said:
LemonMelon said:
No, I don't think I am.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
But that's not being irritatingly straight, you would never call them "irritatingly straight", that's the difference.
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Well, actually I would.
Anyway, my point is that sexuality doesn't really matter much at all in the grand scheme of things, and it's annoying when it's brought up. The only reason I think this thread serves any purpose is because, if Oakley were to win, it would be historical (though, let's face it, there have probably been dozens of political figures that were still in the closet
)
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
LemonMelon said:
Well, actually I would.
But you didn't, you used the word "macho" so I really don't think you would.
LemonMelon said:
Yet when coming up with your titles you used orientation when describing one and not the other, so you're really contradicting yourself.
LemonMelon said:
The only reason I think this thread serves any purpose is because, if Oakley were to win, it would be historical (though, let's face it, there have probably been dozens of political figures that were still in the closet
Just like when the first woman, black person, or any other minority won public office...
LemonMelon
More 5G Than Man
So, I chose not to be redundant by avoiding to use the "RE: irritatingly ______" pattern a second time, and suddenly my point becomes invalid? 
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
LemonMelon said:So, I chose not to be redundant by avoiding to use the "RE: irritatingly ______" pattern a second time, and suddenly my point becomes invalid?
Yes, because macho doesn't equal straight. There are some very macho gay men. So your whole premise reeks of the very exact thing you accused this thread of...
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
i surmised that by being "openly" gay, then that's flaunting.
you've gone back and read, and revised, and that's fine.
i find lots of people irritating. i'm not into self-ghettoization.
you've gone back and read, and revised, and that's fine.
i find lots of people irritating. i'm not into self-ghettoization.
maycocksean
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Some people find certain people of color to be "irritatingly 'black'" so . . .
Stereotypes maybe?
Stereotypes maybe?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
^ Exactly
OP
OP
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
maycocksean said:
I think that's a good point. You can't be "irrititatingly" something you were born as-why should you deny what you were born as in order to not be "irritating' to others? What is irritating is behavior that is a result of deliberate choice and personality traits that are chosen and thus under our control. If a gay person happens to have an irritating personality that's an individual matter that has nothing to do with being gay-same goes for straight people.
