Gays in fraternites (pt. 2)

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

This is interesting because there are homosexuals across the spectrum.

Liberal, radical, conservative, Democrat, Republican, Independent...yada yada yada....of course it is more difficult to be an out of the closet homosexual if you're pushing for traditional marriage, which can explain why Conservative Republicans get outted by the media.

There are flamboyant and stereotypical heterosexuals just as there are flamboyant and stereotypical homosexuals. There are heterosexuals who try to force their lifestyle and viewpoints on everyone else and there are homosexuals who do the same.

Despite that fact, heterosexuals don't get pigeon holed and neither should homosexuals. Someone who has truly been exposed to the diversity of opinions held by people of different sexual orientations and masculinities-femininities will understand that.

This is only partially responsive to you, DST.

I've been around a fairly substantial number of gay people, at least for folks like me. Meaning that I've worked with them, gone to school with them, was friendly/hated them on some social level, not simply that I knew somebody around was gay. All but one were liberal. A few of them I genuinely liked, and a few were "flamboyant" and made me feel constantly uncomfortable.

Yet, despite knowing a fair number of gay people and having some gay people I'd gladly call friends, their attraction to the opposite sex still grosses me out. I don't loathe them, I don't muster up some distaste, it just naturally weirds me out. So why then would someone want to live either A) in a situation where most other people in the fraternity disapprove and are repulsed by your lifestyle or B) in a situation where they have to act covertly?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

This is only partially responsive to you, DST.

I've been around a fairly substantial number of gay people, at least for folks like me. Meaning that I've worked with them, gone to school with them, was friendly/hated them on some social level, not simply that I knew somebody around was gay. All but one were liberal. A few of them I genuinely liked, and a few were "flamboyant" and made me feel constantly uncomfortable.

Yet, despite knowing a fair number of gay people and having some gay people I'd gladly call friends, their attraction to the opposite sex still grosses me out. I don't loathe them, I don't muster up some distaste, it just naturally weirds me out. So why then would someone want to live either A) in a situation where most other people in the fraternity disapprove and are repulsed by your lifestyle or B) in a situation where they have to act covertly?

Okaaaaaay....

*******************

Anywho, aside from a few colleagues and associates, I do not have any friends or close associates who I know to be homosexual. So by no means am I saying that people have to go out of their way to be friends with anyone just because. At the same time, the "some of my best friends are gay" approach is funny just as the "some of my best friends are (insert some other minority group)."

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Okaaaaaay....

*******************

Anywho, aside from a few colleagues and associates, I do not have any friends or close associates who I know to be homosexual. So by no means am I saying that people have to go out of their way to be friends with anyone just because. At the same time, the "some of my best friends are gay" approach is funny just as the "some of my best friends are (insert some other minority group)."

Sure it is, when used the same way. I think that approach may actually hold some validity, when true, but it has become a crutch for white folks trying to avoid the "racist" label, most often.

I'm simply responding to your statement, which was "Despite that fact, heterosexuals don't get pigeon holed and neither should homosexuals. Someone who has truly been exposed to the diversity of opinions held by people of different sexual orientations and masculinities-femininities will understand that."

As someone who has been around what I consider to be a fair number of gay people, I find that though it is incorrect to pigeon hole them, they're a smaller group with some common concerns, so they certainly tend to share some common characteristics. My assumptions and experience indicate this, and though not infallible, I think it is reasonable to believe this is reality. So while saying "my fraternity believes this, and gay people all believe that, so we're not gonna take gay people" is based on some false assumptions, it is also quite possibly pretty accurate in effect.

As with my first response, this wasn't necessarily tailored to your post, but your assertions seem tangentially related to the common "but there may be black/gay/whatever people who are just like your fraternity" argument, so I included that in my reply.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

As with my first response, this wasn't necessarily tailored to your post

The only part of my post that was in direct reference to you was the "Okaaaaaay...."

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

The only part of my post that was in direct reference to you was the "Okaaaaaay...."

Like I said, tangential. I'm not really worried who it was directed to, it just brought up other things I wanted to talk about.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Like I said, tangential. I'm not really worried who it was directed to, it just brought up other things I wanted to talk about.

Yeah well since you kept giving me a play-by-play of your responses, I wanted to let you know.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Yeah well since you kept giving me a play-by-play of your responses, I wanted to let you know.

And so you have.