Sincere question....

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Topics such as the "Gay voice" thread should NOT be off-limits in a forum known as :Free Your Mind." These days we are supposed to be "open-minded" about sexuality issues, and, yes, it is even okay to question elements of any sexual lifestyle and discuss them. TheU2 can only hope to resolve his stereotypical views by exploring the basis of them. Those of you who attacked him (and I do not include any mods in this grouping), answer me, would you have come to my defense had someone asked a stereotypical question of the Southern accent? Would you have come to the defense of 80sU2IsBest if someone had stereotyped fundamentalist Protestants? TheU2 didn't even say anything AGAINST homosexuality in general

I admit that TheU2 posted the topic in his typical sarcastic tone. I had a conversation with him awhile back after he asked me why I do not include him in the "weirdo" classification as I do other members of the web-based community known as www.interference.com and I told him that he is not a weirdo but instead a freak, much like something at a carnival sideshow. He cannot HELP his tone, or style of prose, I truly believe. On the other hand, a "weirdo" can tone down his weirdness simply by not using nouns incorrectly as adjectives and prefixes.

TheU2 does not fear controversy; that can be a good thing, especially in a debate-oriented forum such as Free Your Mind. Perhaps though the freak went too far in pushing Sicilia's buttons, and this, as opposed to the subject matter being explored, discussed and debated, is where it went downhill. I seriously doubt TheU2's feelings were hurt by any names that Sicilia called him.

Have a great weekend.

~U2Alabama
 
Originally posted by SicilianGoddess:
You dont know the history between me and TheU2. And you obviously dont follow his posts. I agree I have a difficult time surpressing whats really on my mind, but he was the so called straw that broke my back in that thread. I'm not going to go into detail, but TheU2 doesnt respect the mods and the majority of his posts are purposely posted to get a stir out of people.

Anyway, I apologize to him and anyone else that was offended by my comment, it was posted out of anger.


History? I thought we were kinda cool....Sometimes my posts get closed, but I've always "lightened" my threads when you requested.

Follow my posts, they are pretty funny I think.

I respect all you mods out there.

No need to apologize, but i'll accept it anyway as proper courtesy. I don't get easily offended. Except sometimes when people bash the USA, but that's another story.

I do, however, apologize if my straw broke your back.

CK
 
i agree with what melon said about theu2 getting a new moniker. you blatantly post in a style that does not have any tact. i dont really care, but i know others do. you like to ride the fence by the way you act, particularly to me, and when someone finally tells you to smarten up you act like "what???? i didnt do anything! its not me its you!" perhaps acceptable for a child before theyre about to be punished rediculously hard for it, but i believe you should be above a 7 year olds mentality.

but i should say all of this has been handled way better than it used to be...

perhaps humans ARE progressing....

------------------
-death bear
 
Originally posted by U2Bama:
I admit that TheU2 posted the topic in his typical sarcastic tone. I had a conversation with him awhile back after he asked me why I do not include him in the "weirdo" classification as I do other members of the web-based community known as www.interference.com and I told him that he is not a weirdo but instead a freak, much like something at a carnival sideshow. He cannot HELP his tone, or style of prose, I truly believe. On the other hand, a "weirdo" can tone down his weirdness simply by not using nouns incorrectly as adjectives and prefixes.

TheU2 does not fear controversy; that can be a good thing, especially in a debate-oriented forum such as Free Your Mind. Perhaps though the freak went too far in pushing Sicilia's buttons, and this, as opposed to the subject matter being explored, discussed and debated, is where it went downhill. I seriously doubt TheU2's feelings were hurt by any names that Sicilia called him.

Have a great weekend.

~U2Alabama


There was no sarcasm in that thread. Can I not be serious sometimes? I'm a freakin CPA for god's sake.

Bama, you're logic of freak and weirdo is a bit flawed as I can control my tone and style of writing. That thread wasn't written in such a "freak" tone or style.

You're right, I don't fear controversy. I think it adds some spice to the forum. Maybe too much spice. Thats when the mods do come in and that's fine. It was not my intention to create any controversy there, though. In fact, I thought it was a much more tame thread than others that have transpired.

Apparently, Sicy's button was the size of giants stadium and I pushed it a couple of times. I apologize for that.

And you are right, my feelings aren't hurt. I'm not the sensitve type.

CK
 
I guess that is what I am getting at, TheCK; you often post in a sarcastic tone in non-serious threads; therefore, on the rare occasion when we see you post a thread that is indeed to be serious, that sarcasm is what people first see, much like melon pointed out.

Perhaps you CAN control your tone and style of writing, but you cannot control how people interpret it.

I stand by my generalization of you as a freak. Evidence indicative of such status is seen in your weird "eyelids" photo and your "I Save My Farts For When People Enter The Room" thread.

I believe you didn't intend controversy in this one, but you are still a freak.

~U2Alabama
 
Originally posted by U2Bama:
I guess that is what I am getting at, TheCK; you often post in a sarcastic tone in non-serious threads; therefore, on the rare occasion when we see you post a thread that is indeed to be serious, that sarcasm is what people first see, much like melon pointed out.

Perhaps you CAN control your tone and style of writing, but you cannot control how people interpret it.

I stand by my generalization of you as a freak. Evidence indicative of such status is seen in your weird "eyelids" photo and your "I Save My Farts For When People Enter The Room" thread.

I believe you didn't intend controversy in this one, but you are still a freak.

~U2Alabama

Bama -

[sarcasm]I love you[/sarcasm].

I appreciate the freak remark....

When is the post jan. 6th thread starting up. [satire]I believe I'm up for a few more awards now.[/satire]

CK
 
Oh dear. Sometimes ppl tend to forget that the mods are just like us, only with certain abilities to control this board. To blame the mods for the closure of threads is stupid. Of course they do the actual closure, but im guessing based on the general direction a topic heads in and of course their own judgemnt. To have all the purest intentions also doesnt give free license to post what ever someone feels like -try applying the rules of real life to here. Its no point to say "I meant no offence", if overall, there was anyone uncomfortable or taken offside with something. Sometimes I wonder why Elvis bothers with this site, all the shit that people can go on about and all the issues he has to deal with, like all the others here who mod, but then I think to myself, hang on, Elvis and co are more likely ignoring the fact that 3% of this place causes shit, and are more concentratig on the 97% that is really a lot of fun. No one is ging to mod better or worse than anyone else.



[This message has been edited by Angela Harlem (edited 01-12-2002).]
 
What on EARTH is the problem with asking whether or not a homosexual person is born with a "gay voice"? I'm sorry, in the question itself there is nothing offensive, what is offensive is someone finding such a ridiculously dumb question (sorry TheU2)as such. I mean, I was completely astonished to find people find such a question as 'offensive', and that, more often than not, denotes self-importance and self-promotion. For God's sake, it was just a question - and a silly one at that, but no more silly than some topics that get a posting here.

Having said that, TheU2, you have to admit it was one stupid question. How on EARTH do you think that gay people have a 'gay voice'. Why not go further and ask if they have a 'gay walk'? Ofcourse not! There are plenty of gay people who are more 'manly' (I hate that term) than I will ever be, and there are some who are so 'straight-acting' (hence the expression, straight-acting gay people)you'd think they were a red-blooded straigt male, like one of my best friends, for instance.

Also, I don't think that homosexuality is something inherent, I think its more to do with the circumstances of life that have shaped you as 'a person', its not something you are born with.

I don't actually think the mods were justified in getting rid of TheU2's "Gay Voice" thread, if they wanted to be helpful they should have removed other threads going back ages ago when people weren't talking about the 'gay voice' but questioning whether or not homosexuality was wrong - now THAT is stupid.

For goodness sakes, what's the big deal?

Ant.
 
Originally posted by Spiral_Staircase:

Is there a guide somewhere that addresses what kind of topics/discussions are unacceptable around here (Feedback as a whole, not just FYM), and what leads to "banishment" or closing of threads?


Miss Spirality,

Just for education's sake, I think these are a few topics that could get you banned...NOTE.. I'm not saying I would ban you or anyone for these, But just Trying to get this question .. this SINCERE one apparently, so we all know what will get us the Big Fat boot.. Posters, I'm not necessarily posting these, more just adding to the thread some things that may be cause to get you banned.

-Any post with the words '******', 'chink', 'kike', 'cracker', or 'polak'.

-Any post that calls for a reincarnation of the 'REAL KKK', complete with threats to the minority races in the free world, Though apparently their latest agenda issue.. 'Any Movie with Jennifer Aniston in it is Bad', is gaining momentum in the free enterprise.


-Any post that directly references the stereotypes of 'Dirty Hispanics', 'Drunk Irishmen', 'Well Hung Blackmen', 'Greasers', or 'Mushroom Bruising Faggots'.

Just due to the fact that there is no real policy except a loose little ditty, I just figured I'd try and give people an idea, or some ideas for the mods to reply to and let us know various sorts of things that would or would not be 'Stars in Salome's Eyes', I know I'm not a mod in here, but The rest of the other posters have chimed in.

TheU2, I'm sorry I didn't get to know you.

Cheers and Go Buccaneers!!!! DUNGY RULES!!!

Lemonite Unplugged
~Promoting a Healthier and Prozac Free Forum


[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 01-12-2002).]
 
It's not easy being green.
wink.gif


Originally posted by SicilianGoddess:
... being a mod is not very easy, though most people seem to think it is.

The "world of moderating" on Interference has always seemed kind of interesting to me (how it's done, etc., yeah I'm weird, so sue me), but I think overall you guys do a helluva job around here...

disco
 
Originally posted by Salome:
Originally posted by Lemonite:
Elvis correct me If I'm wrong.
I'm not Elvis, but you are WRONG



Ah, my dear Salome.. I expected more from you, that's a cheap way to make a point.. I purposely put that in to see if someone would take up on that inclusion, and sadly, without using much ingenius creativity you took the bait.. No matter though.. Anyways, Are you saying that I'm Wrong.. in suggesting that Using such vulgar phrases would be out of line.. Translation for those under the influence.. That It IS OK to use such slang and prejudiced terms in posts in a free and liberous manner?... Again, I'm not spitting any specific feelings or beliefs on my part, Just throwing out things to help get the question answered that this thread initially posed.

Correct yourself please, unless that is what you wanted to say...

Lemonite Unplugged
~Promoting a Healthier and Beneficially Orwellish Forum


[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 01-12-2002).]
 
I personally think that little short of child pornograghy should be cause for locking a thread. Let the people who get their feelings hurt defend themselves, not be "protected" by thread closings. If somebody uses the word "******" let 500 posters yell at them instead of locking the thread. If a gay person with a lisp was offended, let them speak up. What's the big deal?

Free speech rules and should be fiercely protected, even in an online public fan forum.
 
Originally posted by joyfulgirl:

Free speech rules and should be fiercely protected, even in an online public fan forum.


Well said, beautifully, eloquently, and damn sexy.. I think that is what we all are trying to express, and you Joyfulgirl Hit it on the Nail.. perforated.. head.

Lemonite Unplugged
 
Originally posted by Lemonite:

Ah, my dear Salome.. I expected more from you, that's a cheap way to make a point..
well, I thought your post was worthy of it

you are wrong

------------------
Salome
Shake it, shake it, shake it
 
Originally posted by Salome:
Originally posted by Lemonite:

Ah, my dear Salome.. I expected more from you, that's a cheap way to make a point..
well, I thought your post was worthy of it

you are wrong


Maybe it was because you didn't know what our American slang was.. I guess I should have converted it to Dutch.

Anyways, suggestions cannot be either right or wrong.. But I'm glad you do not have standards of expulsion in terms of various language 'nicknames', or the intro of topics.. Sal Congrats, Kudos, and Healthy Living, we appreciate your hard work.


Lemonite Unplugged
~Promoter of Free Speech... In America at least



[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 01-12-2002).]
 
Originally posted by Anthony:
Also, I don't think that homosexuality is something inherent, I think its more to do with the circumstances of life that have shaped you as 'a person', its not something you are born with.

Since it was brought up, anthropologists have brought up that they believe that, in the study of non-Western, isolated tribal cultures that have no inherent sexual taboos in their culture, that man is inherently bisexual.

But it is difficult to truly pinpoint. The "origin" of homosexuality is just as much of an enigma, scientifically, as the origin of heterosexuality. People naively think it has to do with testicles and ovaries and XX/XY chromosomes, but I believe that there is more to it than is currently known in science. Sexuality, to me, is probably the greatest enigma in science, perhaps with the origin of personality being second.

Regardless, I do not think that one's sexuality is a choice. If it is due to genetics, then, obviously, one has no choice. If it isn't due to genetics, that doesn't automatically point to "choice." Look at language, for instance. Did we choose to speak our native tongue, which is, in my case, English? In addition, if English was determined to be evil tomorrow, I still couldn't forget it.

Oh, but the origin of all this homophobia is clear, and all one had to do was to look at both tribal cultures and read thousands of years of mythology. Under more primitive tribal societies, they were matriarchal (women were seen as the mystical bearers of life--"children") and homosexuals were seen as, interestingly enough, "sent from God," actually. At the bottom of this hierarchy was the heterosexual male. Somewhere in time thousands of years ago, this societal structure was overthrown, and, to coincide with this societal coup, men created myths that painted the former structure as contrary to nature. Women were now, "inherently," subservient to men, due to the wording of the creation myths, life came from men and women only bore the "waters" to incubate life, and homosexuals were, instead of being "sent from God," were now "contrary to God." Obviously, as time passed on, people only knew of the creation myths, which they now believed to be the truth, and forgot the former society. Hence, the rise of patriarchal society.

Regardless, it appears that most people's minds are already made up on the subject.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
 
And, to succinctly answer TheU2's "Gay Voice" question, it is both nature and environment. Some gay people do grow up with higher pitched voices, but a lot don't.

However, the media has painted it as what every gay person sounds like, so a lot of gay people try and emulate this because they feel they have to to be accepted within the gay community. They are already rejected by the rest of society, so, in a way, by being "more gay" than other gay people, they think they can attract more attention amongst their peers. It's the same principle as how, for instance, sorority members all seem to dress and act the same.

However, I can assure you, the "gay voice" types do not constitute most homosexuals. When I was in the U.K. and I visited a couple bars, most there were just like any heterosexual. You probably, if walking down a street, would never know the difference. In fact, in Edinburgh, I was surprised to see the straightest, hottest model type in one, but the media is never one to stray from stereotypes.

According to the media, all gays are effeminate, all lesbians are butch (minus the "hot" ones that are simply objects for straight men to oogle over), all straight women hate men secretly, all straight men are stupid, bad fathers, and are incomplete without their wife to act as their mother, all blacks live in ghettos, all Hispanics are stupid and don't know English, all Southerners are dumb and religious fanatics, and all teens are inherently rebellious and sex obsessed. There is such a thing as "a grain of truth" in stereotypes, but stereotypes, by definition, make that little grain represent the entire pie.

Unfortunately, people, without realizing it, tend to emulate these media misconceptions as societal expectations. And that is the conundrum, but is a testament to the power of mass media on people's minds.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
 
Originally posted by melon:
It's the same principle as how, for instance, sorority members all seem to dress and act the same.

I suppose that you are only illustrating this as a stereotype, and not an absolute/accurate truth, right?
 
Originally posted by U2Bama:
I suppose that you are only illustrating this as a stereotype, and not an absolute/accurate truth, right?

Yes, I am illustrating this as a stereotype. I knew some very bright and interesting sorority members, not to mention some very bright and interesting fraternity members, but I also saw how they reacted as a group at times, which conformed to the media stereotypes. That's what I find interesting.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time
 
Originally posted by melon:

It's the same principle as how, for instance, sorority members all seem to act the same.



Yah.. they're all ho's.


Lemonite Unplugged

~Writing this with a Brother who is dating a Girl belonging in a sorority, a Best friend of my Girlfriend, while floozy at times and belonging into a sorority, is intelligent and opinionated.. But It's a hell of a coincidence that they both wear the tiny tiny clothes, place a premium on going out and flirting et al.. Ach.. Achk.. Geezus. I can't even believe we've now got to justify ourselves..


[This message has been edited by Lemonite (edited 01-12-2002).]
 
well said, melon.

i (read: the opinions of me, myself, and i; and no one else) think all forms of sexuality may be with you when you're born, or you just sort of develop into them. going along with your suggestion that men are born bisexual, could explain heterosexuality. a baby grows up and sees their parents, two people who (hopefully) love each other, and realise it's the "right" thing.
but, like i said, since there's been no real scientific proof for either side (nothing i would really consider, that is) i'll just sit on my seat right here on the fence.
wink.gif


------------------
when you stop taking chances, you'll stay where you sit. you won't live any longer, but it'll feel like it.
ME!
 
I missed all of this, this week was exam week for me so I had to concern myself with other academic related activities for a large part of my time (envious?) but I will just contribute by stating that I back the decisions which were made, and I think that there are other factors involved here.

It would be nice if mods could please everyone, but ofcourse that's not the case, and that's ok... because when in life is this possible anyway, really?

So all we ask is that everyone has a bit of understanding as to all of this when a thread is closed or a banishment is decided on, or whatever other administrative actions take place. I don't think elvis would allow the managment of his website to ever reach a point of being unreasonable... he is actually a pretty decent guy (shocked?)
wink.gif
 
I don't know if this is the right place to put this, but since I can't respond to the original thread, I just wanted to apologize to TheU2 for misreading one of his statements. Sorry!
 
Back
Top Bottom