Ted Haggard -- still not straight (should he just pray harder?)

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
diamond said:
To arbitrarily dimiss Dr. Reisman as a "random conservative" makes you sound as bigoted as the ppl you claim are bigots.

Haven't you read the news? I think cultural relativism and "tolerance" (as defined under that framework) is crap, and, as such, I don't have to "tolerate intolerance." Instead, I'll let the facts and logic speak for itself.

"Dr." Reisman, due to her lack of credibility within the scientific world and her blatant political/ideological biases, is not a reliable source to critique science-based sexuality research.

That is all there is to it. She is a random conservative that holds a distinctly minority opinion that is not supported at all by mainstream science. Period. No "bigotry" involved.
 
A doctorate in Communications doesn't qualify someone as expert counsel on human psychology and sexuality, nor as expert evaluator of studies conducted according to scientific method. And more to the point, cut-and-paste snapshot summaries of whichever scholar's stances on whatever topic isn't a substitute for articulating an actual argument. If you want to integrate it into one, fine, but there's not much to discuss if you don't also own up to your own convictions on the topic.
 
The lack of qualifications isn't as significant as the content of the post, sex education is modifying America's youth (actually a very good thing; given incidences of unwanted pregnancy and STDs being lower with sex-ed), the pro-censorship attitude shows a complete disregard for free speech. Parading such a player is not supporting that position, it does however reinforce the type of repressive atmosphere that produces freaks like Haggard (by that I am not talking about his sexuality, rather the apparent attitude towards it).
 
Last edited:
Ted needs to enroll at Michigan University and "learn" how to be gay.
English 317, Prof. David Halperin
"How to be Gay: Male Homosexuality and Initiation"
 
INDY500 said:
Ted needs to enroll at Michigan University and "learn" how to be gay.
English 317, Prof. David Halperin
"How to be Gay: Male Homosexuality and Initiation"

It's probably some professor trying to be "hip" by creating some provocative course title for an otherwise mundane topic.

You see it all the time with news promotions, where they make an otherwise ordinary and boring story seem "new" and "exciting."
 
melon said:


It's probably some professor trying to be "hip" by creating some provocative course title for an otherwise mundane topic.


:yes:

I have to admit I got suckered into a few of those fun sounding classes. Was I ever irritated when they turned out to be boring as hell. :angry: Helps fine tune the bullshit meter though, so I guess they were good for something.
 
ENGLISH 317. Literature and Culture.

Section 002 — How to be Gay: Male Homosexuality and Initiation.

Credits: (3; 2 in the half-term).

Instructor(s): David M Halperin (halperin@umich.edu)

Course Description:

Just because you happen to be a gay man doesn't mean that you don't have to learn how to become one. Gay men do some of that learning on their own, but often we learn how to be gay from others, either because we look to them for instruction or because they simply tell us what they think we need to know, whether we ask for their advice or not.

This course will examine the general topic of the role that initiation plays in the formation of gay male identity. We will approach it from three angles: (1) as a sub-cultural practice — subtle, complex, and difficult to theorize — which a small but significant body of work in queer studies has begun to explore; (2) as a theme in gay male writing; and (3) as a class project, since the course itself will constitute an experiment in the very process of initiation that it hopes to understand.

In particular, we will examine a number of cultural artifacts and activities that seem to play a prominent role in learning how to be gay: Hollywood movies, grand opera, Broadway musicals, and other works of classical and popular music, as well as camp, diva-worship, drag, muscle culture, taste, style, and political activism. Are there a number of classically 'gay' works such that, despite changing tastes and generations, all gay men, of whatever class, race, or ethnicity, need to know them, in order to be gay? What is there about gay identity that explains the gay appropriation of these works? What do we learn about gay male identity by asking not who gay men are but what it is that gay men do or like? One aim of exploring these questions is to approach gay identity from the perspective of social practices and cultural identifications rather than from the perspective of gay sexuality itself. What can such an approach tell us about the sentimental, affective, or subjective dimensions of gay identity, including gay sexuality, that an exclusive focus on gay sexuality cannot?

At the core of gay experience there is not only identification but disidentification. Almost as soon as I learn how to be gay, or perhaps even before, I also learn how not to be gay. I say to myself, 'Well, I may be gay, but at least I'm not like that!' Rather than attempting to promote one version of gay identity at the expense of others, this course will investigate the stakes in gay identifications and disidentifications, seeking ultimately to create the basis for a wider acceptance of the plurality of ways in which people determine how to be gay.

Apparently it's been offered for about 7 or 8 years.
 
INDY500 said:
Apparently it's been offered for about 7 or 8 years.

It doesn't change my initial point. That course description is exactly what I was talking about. He just put a provocative label on a course about "gay subculture," which, like it or not, exists all over America and the world. It is no different than taking a course about "African American subculture," which most people would consider to be uncontroversial.
 
Indy, you did unterstand, though, that this course aims at people that already knew they were gay but didn't know much about gay subculture, or people that aren't gay but want to learn about this subculture? It's not to teach a straight man how to be homosexual in order to turn him gay, so what's your point?
 
INDY500 said:


Apparently it's been offered for about 7 or 8 years.



and you'll find that most cultural studies classes revolve around the notion that most cultural identities -- in fact, all cultural identities -- are ones that require a certain amount of conscious or subconscious performance in order for one to achieve such an identity.

gay is an identity. there are performative aspects of being gay. just like there are performative aspects of being black or Jewish or a right wing Christian Conservative. and much of a gay identity, in particular, is defining not just how you fit in with such a community, but also how you do not fit in with the community, and it's your points of difference with the community as a whole that becomes perhaps the most important building blocks in the self-creation of coherent, complex identity.

what's insulting -- and this isn't the first place that i've come across some kind of manufactured "outrage" about this class -- is that not only is it degrading cultural studies as a whole, but it's quite true that such a class would never have ever caught anyone's attention if you just removed the word "gay" and removed it with, say, "Jewish."

but the conservatives have tried to spin this as if it's some gay male who's just let it slip that being gay really is at some level a choice, that it is taught by older gays to impressionable 19 year old males who maybe had kind of distant fathers and overbearing mothers, you know, those kids "at risk" for homosexuality.

and it's one class out of, what, 4000 at Michigan any given semester?
 
INDY500 said:
Ted needs to enroll at Michigan University and "learn" how to be gay.
English 317, Prof. David Halperin
"How to be Gay: Male Homosexuality and Initiation"

why is this any different from a course in feminism?

there's plenty of college courses that touch on different aspects of life... why is this one any different from any of those?
 
Vincent Vega said:
Indy, you did unterstand, though, that this course aims at people that already knew they were gay but didn't know much about gay subculture, or people that aren't gay but want to learn about this subculture? It's not to teach a straight man how to be homosexual in order to turn him gay, so what's your point?

I don't think we can assume Indy understood that...
 
Irvine511 said:





-- and this isn't the first place that i've come across some kind of manufactured "outrage" about this class --
but the conservatives have tried to spin this as if it's some gay male who's just let it slip that being gay really is at some level a choice, that it is taught by older gays to impressionable 19 year old males who maybe had kind of distant fathers and overbearing mothers, you know, those kids "at risk" for homosexuality.

and it's one class out of, what, 4000 at Michigan any given semester?

I don't know about you, but I got my "manufactured 'outrage' about this class" somewhere between articles on "JFK's Lovechild,""Britney's Meth Habit" or "Paul Newman's Brave Last Days" in this weeks Globe while waiting in line at the grocery store.
 
INDY500 said:


I don't know about you, but I got my "manufactured 'outrage' about this class" somewhere between articles on "JFK's Lovechild,""Britney's Meth Habit" or "Paul Newman's Brave Last Days" in this weeks Globe while waiting in line at the grocery store.

What in the world does that to do with anything that was being discussed here?:huh:
 
INDY500 said:


Well, I do like movies about gladiators. Does that count?
:wink:



welcome to the club. your membership card is in the male ... i mean mail.

though, these days, we are much more about Spartans. ;)


300dvd250.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom