City of Philadelphia Adds $199,999 to Boy Scout HQ Rent Due to Gay Ban

[BAW]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy
How about this? I´m currently reading "Capote", the biography (great book so far btw) and it tells of how the bigger, stronger boys would "use" (it was more along the lines of "molest") Capote in the night because he was the "lighter" one of the goup. Don´t tell me these things don´t happen in the army, in prisons, all over the place. So as you see, sometimes, you DO know who is gay and sometimes they are taken advantage of in these conditions. Even then, when we all know that there is a possibility of them becoming targets, you see no reason at all for separation?

How would I separate them? I don´t know. But I do think that keeping such close quarters between "opposite" sexual orientations might just be asking for trouble.

You realize that in the examples you used (men forcing themselves on other men in prison,etc), the perpetrators are usually STRAIGHT. It is an act of power and control, not uncontrollable homosexual lust.

[Diemen]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy



So, what are we suppossed to do? Just wait for people to "control themselves", expect people to "tolerate" because "that´s the way it should be"? You´re being idealistic.

Maybe Martin Luther King should have just given up. I mean, after all, plenty of blacks were getting beaten up and killed over the idea of social equality.

Women should've given up the fight for the vote.
Christians should have given up in the face of Roman persecution.
The American colonies should have given up in the face of British attack.
The Brits should have given up in the face of German attack.

Need I go on? Now I'm not saying all these are equal, but the point is the same. We make no progress when we cower in the face of oppression.

[BrownEyedBoy]

Originally posted by martha


Start it off by separating Spanish-speaking people and then wait. It'll take a generation for full acceptance to happen. I don't have anything against Spanish-speaking people but it's still a bit of a new issue for me and it will never appear to me as natural as my children most probably will view it.



Sounds good to me. If I don't have to deal directly with Spanish-speaking people, I'll be a lot less uncomfortable. They can have their own tents, bathrooms, neighborhoods, etc. It's a win-win.

It´s different. Spanish speaking people aren´t sexually attracted to english speaking people because of their "spanish speaking" condition.

[Diemen]

You do realize that someone can be attracted to your gender and still be able to control themselves in your presence, right?

What exactly do you fear in all this? That some man is going to come on to you and you'll feel all icky?

[Diemen]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy


It´s different. Spanish speaking people aren´t sexually attracted to english speaking people because of their "spanish speaking" condition.

Oh, by the way, it's not a condition, it's a natural part of who they are.

But that's certainly a revealing turn of phrase.

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy
It´s different. Spanish speaking people aren´t sexually attracted to english speaking people because of their "spanish speaking" condition.

If Spanish=Gay...then

"Gay people are sexually attracted to straight people because of their gay condition."

Um, don't gays usually have relationships with, um, other gays?

[BVS]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy
There´s really no point in arguing with people who won´t concede the fact that some people want their privacy. I´d rather not shower in front of someone who is attracted to my gender. And so would many other people. It´s that simple. But in interference you´re a bigot for even suggesting that you want your privacy.

Then shower after everyone else is done, seems pretty simple to me.

[BVS]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy

Just wait for people to "control themselves", expect people to "tolerate" because "that´s the way it should be"? You´re being idealistic.

What do you mean by "wait" to control themselves? Are people just thrusting themselves on you left or right or something?

Maybe he's being idealistic, but you're being paranoid.

[yolland]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy
You´re right. Screw segregation. Let´s have co-ed bathrooms. Just one bathroom for both males and females.

I love how for the sake of an argument people here will magically become oblivious to logical human behavior like separating bathrooms to ensure the privacy of opposite sexual genders.

If we'd all been raised with coed bathrooms and locker rooms then there's no logical reason to think that would be an issue. There's ample evidence from anthropology (e.g., studies of peoples among whom one or both sexes wear no clothing) to demonstrate that no, we are not hardwired to compulsively sexually assault one another at the sight of a naked body. In our own cultural tradition, it's seen as improper and immodest to be naked in front of people who have the other type of kit from you; those are (in theory at least) 'mysteries' they don't get to see outside of an intimate setting. And yes, that custom does create a sexual 'charge' around the situation (hence the proverbial teen-flick cliche of the secret peephole into the girls'/guys' locker room)--a 'charge' which would be missing in a culture with no such tradition. But for gay men and lesbians, it isn't a sexually charged situation because they share the body type of the people they're sharing the bathroom or locker room with, and that is the acculturated understanding of how those spaces are categorized; there's no 'mystery' involved. It's absurd to suggest that a gay man's experience of walking into a men's locker room, where people of his own body type are naked, has the same psychological effect on him that walking into the women's locker room would have on you--the former is culturally normative, whereas the latter is definitely not. Likewise, it's logical for a woman to be unnerved if a man suddenly appears in the women's locker room (and I can guarantee you happening to know said man is gay wouldn't be particularly reassuring in a moment like that), whereas it isn't logical at all for her to be unnerved if a woman she knows is lesbian walks in.

In a strange way this almost reminds me of the 'let's just have universal civil unions for everyone, including my neighbor and his dog' response to gay marriage--'Well if I have to put up with the possibility that someone of my own sex might cast a quick admiring glance at my butt while I shower (what's next?? being raped at gunpoint by the guy at the next locker?!?), then dammit, I don't think anyone should get any privacy at all.'

Originally posted by Bono's American Wife
You realize that in the examples you used (men forcing themselves on other men in prison,etc), the perpetrators are usually STRAIGHT. It is an act of power and control, not uncontrollable homosexual lust.

There have been quite a few sociological studies done on this, too...often the rapists call their (repeated) victims their 'bitches' and seek to create an environment of humiliation and intimidation above and beyond the rape itself. Non-normative social situation, non-normative social dynamic. Of course a similar dynamic applies to men raping women (which ties into why I said above that in the hypothetical of a man suddenly appearing in the women's locker room, a woman's reaction would not likely be different if she happened to know that particular man was gay).

[maycocksean]

Originally posted by Irvine511




maybe this is generational, but i can't imagine being out in 8th grade.

DEFINITELY generational. The times, they are a-changing. . .slowly maybe, but they are changing. I'm seeing more and more students that I teach coming out and it not being as much of an issue. (Not all of them, of course and I wouldn't ever suggest it's "easy" now, but certainly more so than when I was in 8th grade).

[martha]

Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy


It´s different.

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

[Moonlit_Angel]

Originally posted by Diemen
You do realize that someone can be attracted to your gender and still be able to control themselves in your presence, right?

. Any guys I've been around that I've liked, I've been able to control myself from throwing them to the floor right then and there, so you know, I'm thinking homosexuals aren't any different in that regard.

Originally posted by Diemen
What exactly do you fear in all this? That some man is going to come on to you and you'll feel all icky?

The question that begs to be asked is up now. I hope that you see an answer to it.

BrownEyedBoy, this really has nothing to do with privacy. As pointed out, there are areas in the world where there are unisex restrooms, and where nude men and nude women gather together (ever hear of nudist colonies)? And they seem to handle things just fine overall. So that comparison falls flat. It's just absolutely ludicrous to try and separate homosexual males from heterosexual males because one might hit on the other. If you really, honest to god feel uncomfortable, fine, then like suggested, wait until everyone else is done showering or hanging out in a room together or whatever.

And like I said earlier, if a guy DOES hit on you, JUST TELL THEM YOU AREN'T INTERESTED. And I'd say it's a very safe bet that 99% of the time, they WILL back off and leave you alone.

I just love how this is such a common fear among straight people-like they seem to think they're suddenly gonna become a magnet for gay people or something. What on earth makes you think that? Homosexuals have their preferences just as anyone else does, just because someone is gay doesn't mean they're going to fall all over every single person of their gender that moves.

You know, just like how I don't fall all over every single guy that crosses my line of vision. Once again, people are making this issue way, way, WAY more difficult than it needs to be.

Angela

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
BrownEyedBoy, this really has nothing to do with privacy. As pointed out, there are areas in the world where there are unisex restrooms, and where nude men and nude women gather together (ever hear of nudist colonies)? And they seem to handle things just fine overall. So that comparison falls flat.

Well, the comparison falls flat, I agree, but I disagree with that particular explanation. I still think that having gender-divided bathrooms makes sense. I think orientation-divided bathrooms are absurd.

Nudist colonies are a separate issue.

[martha]

Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
just because someone is gay doesn't mean they're going to fall all over every single person of their gender that moves.

To be fair, we don't know how hot BrownEyes is.

[BVS]

We learned nothing from Ally McBeal...

[Moonlit_Angel]

Originally posted by martha
To be fair, we don't know how hot BrownEyes is.

...this is true . Good point.

phillyfan, eh, I too understand the reasoning behind separating men and women as far as bathrooms and such go, but I think the examples overall still fit anyway. I was just trying to say, "See, now here's a couple examples where men and women are partially or completely undressed in close quarters, and they generally seem to manage to control themselves just fine, so why couldn't the same happen in a room full of men or a room full of women?"

Angela

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
why couldn't the same happen in a room full of men or a room full of women?"

And the key to this question is the answer: it already does.

[melon]

The general vibe I get from this narrow line of thinking is that, "Hey, I'm 'tolerant'...as long as I'm not 'inconvenienced' at all." Really, this is the height of self-centeredness. So-and-so has a pathologically irrational fear of "homosexuals" coming after them, and instead of sending that person to counseling to understand that these fears are wholly unfounded, we're now supposed to "segregate" an entirely invisible class of people, just so that person is "comfortable."

Let's cut through the crap, frankly. All this talk about removing homosexuals from locker rooms is beyond hysterical...and flat out isn't going to happen. The ones that are out aren't generally a threat, because they're probably secure and mature enough to handle themselves properly like an adult. And the small minority that could be a threat? They're the ones that would flat out insist that they're "heterosexual," and so you're never going to know. One way or another, this is an entirely moot point.

All that I can really say to this downright absurd attitude is to grow up. Seriously, grow up and get over yourself. You're going to deal with all kinds of different people in life, and you're never going to be able to get rid of them all. In that highly unlikely chance that you spot a man doing something unethical/unsavory, I'm pretty sure that you could get him removed. You deal with perverts--who, very clearly, exist within all kinds of sexual orientations--on an individual case-by-case basis; you don't stereotype an entire class of people, presume them all to be perverts, and get them removed from your presence. Because, by definition, that would make you a bigot.

[Moonlit_Angel]

to melon. Thank. You. Well said.

Angela

[Diemen]

Indeed.

[/thread]