Why Is Gay Marriage Wrong? - Page 15 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-15-2008, 03:47 PM   #211
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique
You're a gay conservative, you can't let this into your realm of acceptability. I get that. The pertinent issue for you is the pertinent issue for you, I get that also. I feel my view is more inclusive and for the better of bisexual people who wish this type of thing. I'm done with it, you or 3 other people telling me my views don't make sense or are leaps in logic doesn't necessarily make it so. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing.


i'm conservative in that i think polygamy is different from marriage equality. you're right. if you want polygamy, argue for that.

i can't make it any more simple than that.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-15-2008, 03:50 PM   #212
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Were it that life was always simple, though
__________________

__________________
acrobatique is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 03:54 PM   #213
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 09:11 AM
It's good to assume stuff.

It helps with the cred.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 04:00 PM   #214
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique
Were it that life was always simple, though


i don't deny that a bisexual often finds himself in a far more complex situation.

but i fail to see how the promotion of polygamy is more of a concern, or any concern at all, of marriage equality.

other than the predicament of a few bisexuals who would prefer to be married to more than one person, you haven't put forth any other pro-polygamist argument.

now's your chance -- go for it.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-15-2008, 04:03 PM   #215
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Martha, it's clear to me that your aim here is to snipe but I'm afraid you're going to be sorely disappointed if you for a second believe that I will be goaded into responding in kind. You'd likely get better results from re-training your sights on that Diamond character.
__________________
acrobatique is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 04:09 PM   #216
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

but i fail to see how the promotion of polygamy is more of a concern, or any concern at all, of marriage equality.
I know you don't, and I'm fine in knowing that. I have no burning desire to convert you to my way of thinking, I can only express my opinion, which I have, and it's up to you to either see it or not. Surely you don't truly believe that you are all-perceptive or all-knowing? I'd like to think there will be a few things I currently see in a certain light that I could ultimately see differently one day. It's happened a few times, and I'm sure it will happen again
__________________
acrobatique is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 04:20 PM   #217
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:11 PM
I don't imagine anyone in here finds it hard to grasp that there are some people who'd be perfectly happy to be involved in the sort of relationship acrobatique seems to be describing. And at the non-formalized level, there are doubtless already quite a few open marriages that look just like it, as well as quite a few non-marital relationships. But when you're talking legally formalizing such a relationship all the way around, then yes, it seems to me that at that point you're inevitably describing polygamy. "Mutually agreed upon semi-exclusivity" might be accurate at an emotional level, but if nothing else, the hypothetical husband in acrobatique's 'wife + wife + husband' scenario must be either a bisexual man who unlike his spouse(s?) is settling for "50%", or a straight man with two wives, or a straight man married to only one of the women (in which case he's formally "exclusive" with her in a way she isn't with him). All of those three are structurally polygamy. It's conceivable that the second woman is herself bisexual and married to both, in which case her role in the relationship really would mirror the first woman's both formally and emotionally--which seems to be the role acrobatique wishes to draw a unique status distinct from 'polygamy' around--but I don't see how that could also be true of the man. Again, that doesn't mean there aren't men out there who'd be happy to be in such a marriage--but it is a polygamous one, and I think their rights to it need to be argued on those grounds. Once polygamy is legal, then yes, you can say 'None of your business how exactly these interrelationships work.' But first you need to make the case why anyone--male or female, gay, straight or bisexual--should be able either to take multiple spouses, or to become the second spouse of someone who's his/her only spouse. You can't just say "Only bisexuals have a right to two spouses, but the precise orientation and sexual interrelationship of the parties involved is none of your business" and expect would-be heterosexual polygamists to not consider that unequal treatment.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 04:36 PM   #218
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 12:11 PM
I didn't describe a male + female + female bisexual union. I described a male + male + female one.

As for much of what you wrote, really I can't help but think, with all due respect, that you don't really have a real grasp on the truly bisexual person / union and your attempts to understand it are admirable, but fall short, I'm afraid. There is a huge difference between the heterosexual male polygamist and what I'm describing, honestly.
__________________
acrobatique is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 04:40 PM   #219
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:11 PM
I was working off of this,
Quote:
You're saying to the bisexual who wishes to be committed (and, for sake of context, sexually exclusive) to both of their partners 'hey bisexual girl, you have to make a choice, marry the guy, hell he can give you oral sex and well maybe it's not the same but hell, make that sacrifice' or 'hey bisexual guy, y'know, you have to make a choice - so every other Sunday, have the missus strap on a big rubber thing and ride you, it's not the same, I know, but you can make do'.
but that doesn't matter, my question applies just as well in reverse.

I never claimed to 'have a real grasp on the bisexual person' nor do I see how that's relevant to the question of why legalizing what you're describing wouldn't in practice also necessitate legalizing heterosexual polygamy.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 04:57 PM   #220
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique
There is a huge difference between the heterosexual male polygamist and what I'm describing, honestly.
Not really, there's still one that "dominates" the relationship.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 04-15-2008, 05:45 PM   #221
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland


I never claimed to 'have a real grasp on the bisexual person' nor do I see how that's relevant to the question of why legalizing what you're describing wouldn't in practice also necessitate legalizing heterosexual polygamy.

Well you did try to rationalize out the scenarios in your mind (or at least thats what your words on the screen conveyed) in a way that shows that you very much believe that understanding all the intricacies is necessary / relevant to you agreeing that there might be a difference. I'm saying don't agree, alright by me, because it's going to be fairly impossible for me to convince someone who doesn't really understand the bisexual dynamic to come to terms with it as being different from the hetero polygamist who just wants to get his jollies with as many wives as possible. Even for a man + woman + woman bisexual scenario there's a philosophical (if you will) gap there in how the man views the women (if he's a real man) and their role. Their role is not the same as the passive 4th wife of the Texas polygamist. If you can't see that I don't know on what other basis I can discuss it with you, really.
__________________
acrobatique is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 05:50 PM   #222
Registered User
 
acrobatique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 68
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Not really, there's still one that "dominates" the relationship.
Really now? Who dominates the relationship in a male + male + female bisexual relationship? Who dominates in a female + female + male bisexual one? Think carefully, it's not as obvious as you might think. And of course not every situation is the same.

Honestly, not to stereotype but that comment you made...it sounds pretty typical of how a heterosexual male perceives these types of things, and that's fine if that's what they are able to understand, but it is quite different from that Texan cult polygamist. Quite.
__________________
acrobatique is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 06:00 PM   #223
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique



Well you did try to rationalize out the scenarios in your mind (or at least thats what your words on the screen conveyed) in a way that shows that you very much believe that understanding all the intricacies is necessary / relevant to you agreeing that there might be a difference. I'm saying don't agree, alright by me, because it's going to be fairly impossible for me to convince someone who doesn't really understand the bisexual dynamic to come to terms with it as being different from the hetero polygamist who just wants to get his jollies with as many wives as possible. Even for a man + woman + woman bisexual scenario there's a philosophical (if you will) gap there in how the man views the women (if he's a real man) and their role. Their role is not the same as the passive 4th wife of the Texas polygamist. If you can't see that I don't know on what other basis I can discuss it with you, really.




i can fully agree that polygamy isn't always what we saw in Texas. i think everyone has said that, and i think everyone is well aware that there could be a happy threesome couple living in the NJ suburbs who aren't about to rape any 13 year old girls any time soon.

however, that is still a polygamist relationship. how is it not?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-15-2008, 06:07 PM   #224
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: West
Posts: 51
Local Time: 05:11 PM
Without gay marriage, how will we ever see in print the union of Patrick Fiztgerald and Gerald Fitzpatrick ?
__________________
U2Scot is offline  
Old 04-15-2008, 06:14 PM   #225
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by acrobatique


Really now? Who dominates the relationship in a male + male + female bisexual relationship? Who dominates in a female + female + male bisexual one? Think carefully, it's not as obvious as you might think. And of course not every situation is the same.

Honestly, not to stereotype but that comment you made...it sounds pretty typical of how a heterosexual male perceives these types of things, and that's fine if that's what they are able to understand, but it is quite different from that Texan cult polygamist. Quite.
The person that is bisexual will always be the dominate one, if there partners are of one sexual preference. They get to call who sleeps in the second bedroom, etc... Plus if we're talking about a legal marriage then they are the ones with legal ties with the two others and the other two have absolutely no legal ties with each other.

Wow, you are full of assumptions, generalizations, and condensation aren't you?
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com