New SCOTUS nominee

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Or unless they're Episcopal or Orthodox priests.

Goddamn it! I'm being simplistic on purpose!


Also, we all know they don't really count.

[DrPhil]

She used God's name in vain when discussing priests. Uh oh!

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

She used God's name in vain when discussing priests. Uh oh!

Just step away from your computer when the lightning strikes.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Goddamn it! I'm being simplistic on purpose!


Also, we all know they don't really count.

HEY!! lol.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Just step away from your computer when the lightning strikes.

Nah, if lightning were going to strike me it would have by now.

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

HEY!! lol.

*whistles innocently*

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I don't believe that I.A.S.K. didn't know that "lesbo" is considered a slur and the context of her post could be perceived as bigoted and offensive.

Lesbo is as much a slur to me as gay (again gay isnt a slur).

Originally Posted by Drolefille

It would only be difficult for someone to view a feminine woman or a masculine man as gay if they base their views off of stereotypes. Yes, you're the only one who finds it funny to play "guess the orientation." And the fact that you think you can guess is the problem.
Here's the thing: Im not saying Kagan is or isnt gay. Im saying she comes across as gay to me. If we're going to play "guess the sexuality" (clearly since this happens to be your issue you miss the humor in even playing the game because it doesnt matter if she's gay and because realistically only Kagan could answer the question of her sexuality) then your guess is as good as mine. Mine happens to be gay. The problem might be that you're taking this seriously when the point of "guess the sexual orientation" and The Maury show is that neither of these can be taken seriosly. I cant look at the average person and tell which gender they'd like to screw. I can say Kagan gave me gay vibes.
And finally, and I feel the need to shout here: "LESBO" IS INAPPROPRIATE.

You're making judgments about how a straight woman looks/how a gay woman looks and much of it is based on whether or not she is making herself look in a certain way. That is at the least, heterosexist, and probably sexist.
Heterosexist: but the issue is im not making any determinations about her worth or value based on her sexual Orientation. Im guessing her SO. Its not good or bad it just is. If she's gay cool if not I was wrong. Being heterosexist or even sexist denotes a judgment of worth, equality, etc. and Im making none of the sort.



Homosexual is disfavored outside of clinical usage. Gay or LESBIAN is the appropriate term, queer can be acceptable if the individual self-identifies that way, but I'd recommend against using it while telling people you expect them not to live their lifestyle.
Thats interesting. Most guys I know prefer gay or homosexual. Women have by far had the most varying IDs ever in my experience Lesbo, Dyke, Gay, Lesbian (this is probably used least often) queer and others.
You seem to be incapable of grasping the following concept: When people say she looks gay, it is 99 times out of 100 implied that gay = bad/abnormal/weird. Imagine if "gay" were replaced with your race or religion with the same implications. "Stop dressing like that, are you trying to look X"
Don't wear that dishiki (or DuRag) are you trying to look black? Or maybe she looks jewish. Its been ages since I've changed the way I am because of what other people say and do. Some people use gay as a slur. I dont. Maybe Im weird in that I dont think being gay/lesbo/homo/dyke/queer is wrong or bad.


Do they "look gay?" Are they? Can your magic gaydar tell?
Dude looks sad as hell. I cant get over his eyes. He looks like those abused dogs in the animal shelter commericals. He does look like he watches star trek, is a relative of Larry King and is old. lol.
The lady, she looks really gay. Okay, Its unfair because I actually know who she is so I know that she's gay (Ellen is one of my favorite commedians). But if I didnt know her sexual orientation then I wouldt be able to give a guess at all. Im not saying you can tell the SO of all(or even most) people based on their looks. Some people do give off gay vibes and/or look gay. Some people set off my gaydar while others dont.



Priests are allowed to date and have relationships? Celibacy is being and remaining unmarried as well as typically encompassing avoiding sex, that involves not engaging in relationships. So you not only think people should deprive themselves of their sexual satisfaction, but that they should also deprive themselves of their emotional fulfillment and attachment and security that comes with having a partner. All to satisfy your sense of morality? Yeah I'm sure they'll get right on that.

LOL at you saying that I think people should deprive themselves of relationships of any kind. (Where'd you get that from? Or was it that you assumed that because I made the distinction that I am one of those nuts who thinks gay people dont choose to be gay, but that they can fight their gayness like the preacher who took his gay boy toy to europe [And im not even being sarcastic I actually really just want to know]) That is not my sense of morality. Far from it. I think that if you're gay you have every right to love, sex, Marry and do as you damn well please with who you'd like. And anyone who feels like you dont you should promptly tell to kiss your ass. I make the distinction between the two because I do not believe being gay is a choice but I do recognize that there are choices that exist for gay people that dont exist for others. Can you choose to hide your sexuality? Yes. Can you choose to ignore it? Yes. Does that make the fact that hiding who you are will make you better off in society right? Hell no. But it does give you an option that others dont have. My sense of morality is pretty basic treat people with humanity and love.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

Lesbo is as much a slur to me as gay (again gay isnt a slur).

Being a slur to you isn't really the point. That's not really an acceptable term in the LGBT community.

And I'm not sure how you figure that "lesbian" is not a widely used term?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

Lesbo is as much a slur to me as gay (again gay isnt a slur).

SuuuuUuuuuuuure....

This is where your common "my head isn't in my ass" sense should kick in.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

Lesbo is as much a slur to me as gay (again gay isnt a slur).

As well as, it does not matter what it means to you. Your lack of knowledge on this matter has been demonstrated freely throughout your posts, so stop relying on what things are "to you."

Here's the thing: Im not saying Kagan is or isnt gay. Im saying she comes across as gay to me. If we're going to play "guess the sexuality" (clearly since this happens to be your issue you miss the humor in even playing the game because it doesnt matter if she's gay and because realistically only Kagan could answer the question of her sexuality) then your guess is as good as mine. Mine happens to be gay. The problem might be that you're taking this seriously when the point of "guess the sexual orientation" and The Maury show is that neither of these can be taken seriosly. I cant look at the average person and tell which gender they'd like to screw. I can say Kagan gave me gay vibes.

You get gay vibes from a picture? Why can't you even begin to say what you base this on? Also, you're the one who decided that you could/should play "guess the sexuality" in the first place. None of us compelled you to do so.

Heterosexist: but the issue is im not making any determinations about her worth or value based on her sexual Orientation. Im guessing her SO. Its not good or bad it just is. If she's gay cool if not I was wrong. Being heterosexist or even sexist denotes a judgment of worth, equality, etc. and Im making none of the sort.

You do not understand that playing guess the sexuality of a public figure is something typically done to degrade someone. When you participate in typically discriminatory behavior, you will be viewed as discriminatory EVEN IF your intentions are innocent.

Thats interesting. Most guys I know prefer gay or homosexual. Women have by far had the most varying IDs ever in my experience Lesbo, Dyke, Gay, Lesbian (this is probably used least often) queer and others.

Then use those terms among friends where you know they know what you mean.

Don't wear that dishiki (or DuRag) are you trying to look black? Or maybe she looks jewish. Its been ages since I've changed the way I am because of what other people say and do. Some people use gay as a slur. I dont. Maybe Im weird in that I dont think being gay/lesbo/homo/dyke/queer is wrong or bad.

Obviously Kagan hasn't changed who she is either, that's not the point. The point is the implied criticism of race/religion/orientation in the statement.

Dude looks sad as hell. I cant get over his eyes. He looks like those abused dogs in the animal shelter commericals. He does look like he watches star trek, is a relative of Larry King and is old. lol.
The lady, she looks really gay. Okay, Its unfair because I actually know who she is so I know that she's gay (Ellen is one of my favorite commedians). But if I didnt know her sexual orientation then I wouldt be able to give a guess at all. Im not saying you can tell the SO of all(or even most) people based on their looks. Some people do give off gay vibes and/or look gay. Some people set off my gaydar while others dont.

But she looks nothing like Kagan! How ever could you tell! She looks gay because she is. He looks gay because he is. Adam Lambert looks gay because he is. Unless you've been hooking up with Elena Kagan, or she has come out to you, she doesn't look gay. Do you get the concept? There IS NO "looking gay." Your definition so far has been looking masculine as a woman or feminine as a man. And that's outright bullshit. Portia looks masculine? Sir Ian McKellen looks feminine?

We're not talking about hanging out with friends and getting the impression that someone might be gay. I'll give you "vibes" with people you know. I call bullshit on you being able to tell by Kagan's "mannerisms" that she likes women.

LOL at you saying that I think people should deprive themselves of relationships of any kind. (Where'd you get that from? Or was it that you assumed that because I made the distinction that I am one of those nuts who thinks gay people dont choose to be gay, but that they can fight their gayness like the preacher who took his gay boy toy to europe [And im not even being sarcastic I actually really just want to know]) That is not my sense of morality. Far from it. I think that if you're gay you have every right to love, sex, Marry and do as you damn well please with who you'd like. And anyone who feels like you dont you should promptly tell to kiss your ass. I make the distinction between the two because I do not believe being gay is a choice but I do recognize that there are choices that exist for gay people that dont exist for others. Can you choose to hide your sexuality? Yes. Can you choose to ignore it? Yes. Does that make the fact that hiding who you are will make you better off in society right? Hell no. But it does give you an option that others dont have. My sense of morality is pretty basic treat people with humanity and love.

How exactly is celibacy/chastity/choosing to "ignore" your sexuality a choice that only gay people have? Anyone can not be in a relationship if they so desire. Anyone can pretend not to have romantic or sexual feelings.

In fact, far more often gay people are still forced, pressured, or expected to hide those feelings or be ostracized, fired, excommunicated, etc. That's not much of a choice.

If you expect people to "fight their gayness" and yet not expect people to "fight their straightness" then you're discriminating. I assume that because you make some false distinction that gay people have a choice that straight people do not that yes, you expect them to make that choice for some moral/ethical/religious/other reason.

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

Being a slur to you isn't really the point. That's not really an acceptable term in the LGBT community.

And I'm not sure how you figure that "lesbian" is not a widely used term?

Lesbian is the least widely used term to self ID among the homosexual women I know. But my point here was that the goal wasnt to be offensive (there's way better ways to do that) its simply a word that I don't (or rather didnt) identify as unacceptable (and that those who are LGBT around me dont either). Its simply a case of saying how I feel in mixed company and not using a censor.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

SuuuuUuuuuuuure....

This is where your common "my head isn't in my ass" sense should kick in.

Or maybe your Im not that sensitive and dont cater to the feelings of a message board name sense? I dont mind using lesbian though.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

I dont mind using lesbian though.

Good. End of discussion.

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

As well as, it does not matter what it means to you. Your lack of knowledge on this matter has been demonstrated freely throughout your posts, so stop relying on what things are "to you."
I did.

You get gay vibes from a picture? Why can't you even begin to say what you base this on? Also, you're the one who decided that you could/should play "guess the sexuality" in the first place. None of us compelled you to do so.
The whole guessing game was started by conservatives, right wingers, and some people before me in this thread.
You do not understand that playing guess the sexuality of a public figure is something typically done to degrade someone. When you participate in typically discriminatory behavior, you will be viewed as discriminatory EVEN IF your intentions are innocent.
I get why some people do it and that some people will find the game offensive.

Then use those terms among friends where you know they know what you mean.
I do.

Obviously Kagan hasn't changed who she is either, that's not the point. The point is the implied criticism of race/religion/orientation in the statement.


But she looks nothing like Kagan! How ever could you tell! She looks gay because she is.NO! She doesnt look gay at all. I was being sarcastic. He looks gay because he is. Adam Lambert looks gay because he is (he is? I knew he was channeling way too much Lady Gaga to be straight (and I knew that from watching one performance. Ironically he was thrusting his crotch into the faces of women during that show)). Unless you've been hooking up with Elena Kagan, or she has come out to you, she doesn't look gay. Do you get the concept? There IS NO "looking gay." Your definition so far has been looking masculine as a woman or feminine as a man. And that's outright bullshit. Portia looks masculine? Sir Ian McKellen looks feminine?

We're not talking about hanging out with friends and getting the impression that someone might be gay. I'll give you "vibes" with people you know. I call bullshit on you being able to tell by Kagan's "mannerisms" that she likes women.
That's fine.

How exactly is celibacy/chastity/choosing to "ignore" your sexuality a choice that only gay people have? Anyone can not be in a relationship if they so desire. Anyone can pretend not to have romantic or sexual feelings.

In fact, far more often gay people are still forced, pressured, or expected to hide those feelings or be ostracized, fired, excommunicated, etc. That's not much of a choice.

If you expect people to "fight their gayness" and yet not expect people to "fight their straightness" then you're discriminating. I assume that because you make some false distinction that gay people have a choice that straight people do not that yes, you expect them to make that choice for some moral/ethical/religious/other reason.

You clearly missed a lot of my points here!
LOL at you saying that I think people should deprive themselves of relationships of any kind. (Where'd you get that from? Or was it that you assumed that because I made the distinction that I am one of those nuts (by nut i meant crazy illogical person) who thinks gay people dont choose to be gay, but that they can fight their gayness like the preacher who took his gay boy toy to europe [And im not even being sarcastic I actually really just want to know]) That is not my sense of morality. Far from it. I think that if you're gay you have every right to love, sex, Marry and do as you damn well please with who you'd like. And anyone who feels like you dont you should promptly tell to kiss your ass. I make the distinction between the two because I do not believe being gay is a choice but I do recognize that there are choices that exist for gay people that dont exist for others. Can you choose to hide your sexuality? Yes. Can you choose to ignore it? Yes. Does that make the fact that hiding who you are will make you better off in society right? Hell no. But it does give you an option that others dont have. My sense of morality is pretty basic treat people with humanity and love.

I assume that because you make some false distinction that gay people have a choice that straight people do not that yes,

I said Gay people have a choice OTHERS do not have. I did not say they have a choice that straight people dont. Gay and straight people have pretty much the same choices. I was making a distinction between other groups who are discriminated agains that dont have the ability to hide their ism. So, black/latino/ethnic people, women, etc. These oppressed groups do not have the option to hide or cover up who they are to get equal treatment. A gay white male can choose not to diclose to avoid discrimination at work whereas a black/latino person or a woman would not have that option.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

You clearly missed a lot of my points here!
LOL at you saying that I think people should deprive themselves of relationships of any kind. (Where'd you get that from? Or was it that you assumed that because I made the distinction that I am one of those nuts (by nut i meant crazy illogical person) who thinks gay people dont choose to be gay, but that they can fight their gayness like the preacher who took his gay boy toy to europe [And im not even being sarcastic I actually really just want to know]) That is not my sense of morality. Far from it. I think that if you're gay you have every right to love, sex, Marry and do as you damn well please with who you'd like. And anyone who feels like you dont you should promptly tell to kiss your ass. I make the distinction between the two because I do not believe being gay is a choice but I do recognize that there are choices that exist for gay people that dont exist for others. Can you choose to hide your sexuality? Yes. Can you choose to ignore it? Yes. Does that make the fact that hiding who you are will make you better off in society right? Hell no. But it does give you an option that others dont have. My sense of morality is pretty basic treat people with humanity and love.

I did not miss any of your points, you've only now made an attempt to clarify to where your points are actually understandable. In addition you continually used language that is discriminatory and predominately used by anti-gay groups. For example, there still is no "gay lifestyle" just as there is no "gay look." I'm glad you've been willing to listen during this conversation.

I said Gay people have a choice OTHERS do not have. I did not say they have a choice that straight people dont. Gay and straight people have pretty much the same choices. I was making a distinction between other groups who are discriminated agains that dont have the ability to hide their ism. So, black/latino/ethnic people, women, etc. These oppressed groups do not have the option to hide or cover up who they are to get equal treatment. A gay white male can choose not to diclose to avoid discrimination at work whereas a black/latino person or a woman would not have that option.

Now I understand what you were trying to say, although I hope you understand why it was so difficult to understand what you meant when you didn't actually provide detail. Yes, gay people can sometimes hide their orientation for a variety of reasons, however it isn't easy and as I said before it's not really fair to call it a choice when it isn't freely chosen. There are few people who would choose not to talk about their primary relationships, or avoid having relationships altogether if society wasn't pressuring them to. But their visibility isn't different from most religions, barring individuals or sects that promote a specifically identifiable type of dress. (Orthodox Jews for example)

And many pro LGBTQ organizations encourage people to come out to increase visibility of the population because being a more hidden minority tends to increase prejudice.

However, I don't do a lot of comparison between how hard it is for one group vs another because this isn't the Oppression Olympics.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

You clearly missed a lot of my points here!
LOL at you saying that I think people should deprive themselves of relationships of any kind. (Where'd you get that from? Or was it that you assumed that because I made the distinction that I am one of those nuts (by nut i meant crazy illogical person) who thinks gay people dont choose to be gay, but that they can fight their gayness like the preacher who took his gay boy toy to europe [And im not even being sarcastic I actually really just want to know]) That is not my sense of morality. Far from it. I think that if you're gay you have every right to love, sex, Marry and do as you damn well please with who you'd like. And anyone who feels like you dont you should promptly tell to kiss your ass. I make the distinction between the two because I do not believe being gay is a choice but I do recognize that there are choices that exist for gay people that dont exist for others. Can you choose to hide your sexuality? Yes. Can you choose to ignore it? Yes. Does that make the fact that hiding who you are will make you better off in society right? Hell no. But it does give you an option that others dont have. My sense of morality is pretty basic treat people with humanity and love.

I said Gay people have a choice OTHERS do not have. I did not say they have a choice that straight people dont. Gay and straight people have pretty much the same choices. I was making a distinction between other groups who are discriminated agains that dont have the ability to hide their ism. So, black/latino/ethnic people, women, etc. These oppressed groups do not have the option to hide or cover up who they are to get equal treatment. A gay white male can choose not to diclose to avoid discrimination at work whereas a black/latino person or a woman would not have that option.

That's literally the dumbest thing I've ever read. Next people will just expect women to have sex change operations, people of color to do the whole MJ thing...we can all make choices, but none of us should be expected to.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

That's literally the dumbest thing I've ever read. Next people will just expect women to have sex change operations, people of color to do the whole MJ thing...we can all make choices, but none of us should be expected to.

I think she's trying to point out that they're a hidden minority and can hide it whereas women or PoC cannot. Which is true. But that gets too close to the next step which is, "therefore women/PoC have it harder than gay people" or alternatively "therefore they should hide it." I'm not sure she's trying to make either of those points though because she kind of has a tendency to suggest heterosexist things without necessarily meaning them.