News GayGamer.net subject to hate crimes

i thought mardi gras was a gay pride parade ? at least in Sydney

Edit:
I think its fair enough for them to have a gay gamer site tbh, if they want somewhere to talk about stuff like that, fine, as long as they don't exclude anyone else
Why shouldn't they have an area to discuss it, like we have a place to discuss mods, or all the other billion sites out there

As long as their not spamming their web address or posting disgusting ad's everywhere, hows it harming anyone else
Before this article i didn't even know about the site, and personally, i still doubt ill visit it, but its their right to have their own space on the web, where they aren't hurting anyone else

 

But thats what 90% of the world is comfortable with and totally is their life. A married guy has his family, thats his life, seeing it on TV obviously is not a problem. But then, we're you offended the first time you watched Will and Grace? I bet not, because it was funny and totally not offensive to a straight person 99.6% of the time.

I don't believe there is a win-win solution to be had here. Without some showing of heterosexual practices, television as we know it would cease to exist.

People keep stating how its uncomfortable for gay people to be in this heterosexual world, but do you have a solution to offer? They need just deal with it the way they always have. Couldn't negative treatment help to motivate and strengthen them spiritually?

I have no idea what I'm saying and am just rambling, but I swear there are some good points buried in there.

 

Throughout history what has been understood as "fact" has changed (with the exception of math) as our understanding of reality has changed. We no longer believe in the four elements or a flat Earth or... but those were once "scientific facts". I think the problem lies in the element of what objective proof is: we all define that with our subjective minds. Sometimes what we are willing (or not) to accept changes the proofs we accept. (see below)

Now that's truly quote-worthy

Actually the veil and the breast-feeding don't bother me - though the girls dressed the way only prostitutes used to concerns me.

Unless they have rejected what is sacred. (though I suspect our definitions of "sacred" differ)

"Screw sacred" is a step too far but you are correct in saying that "Marriage was not a religious invention" - It was designed by God who created the sexes (/me puts on flameproof suit - (yep, sex was God's idea))

An here's where I think the science runs into trouble. I agree with you 100% on the equal but different thing but what what would happen if someone published a paper saying the people with - oh, let's say green - skin had better hand-eye coordination and people with - lets say purple - skin were better at math while people with - orange? - skin had better higher levels of social skills? The culture both outside AND inside of the scientific community would not allow it. (I feel the need to clarify that I despise racism and even dislike the concept of "race". (though I like the concept of "tribes" as mentioned above). To me the value of a person lies not in what they can do or even who they are - it lies in the one that gave the life.)

Sorry, just had to quote that too. Another quote worthy of a sig

 

Being a mix of both, I can assure you that, as Bauul says, there are both biological and cultural differences. Just not necessarily in the areas that prejudiced people assume (e.g. intelligence). And nothing that makes one superior to the other. But those differences get loaded with values (better, worse, right, wrong, inferior, superior) and that's where the trouble starts...

I do. It is a form of terrorism, I think. And as I said before, if society doesn't allow people to intergrate, they will marginalise, and create their own nieches.

Just my quaint Dutch-English spelling.

Is that the logic behind how we treat women ("Hey, it's a man's world, honey"), the poor ("Handouts just reduce the incentive to get off their butts"), blacks ("They're savages anyway"), the mentally disabled ("They're mad anyway")?

The solution is simple: allow people to integrate. It works just fine in many cultures. As I said before: if they are not allowed to integrate, they will marginalise. And then they will start to compete. And they may just start to beat the majority at their own game.

No, those were beliefs. But when the ancient Greek Eratosthenes scientifically tested that belief with facts in 240 B.C., he found that those facts supported the assumption that the Earth was round --and even got a pretty decent approximation of the cirumference (he was 16% out).

Science did not come in vogue again until Descartes started to mutter "Cogito, ergo sum". But the ancient Greeks taught us that facts coupled to logical deductive reasoning allow us to test hypotheses. When they pass the test they are considered "true" for a given value of "true" (usually 95% statistical probability)". We may change our hypotheses and associated models/theories of reality as new facts crop up, and better methods of fact collection (measurement and observation) and testing, but the facts themselves don't change.

By that logic then, so was homosexuality. Even the Qur'an has a nice passage about celebrating the differences that God created in the human species.

It wouldn't (happened before), but that is not a scientific stance. Attaching some kind of moral or preferential value to such differences is not scientific. We know that men and women have differences in brain wiring resulting in subtle cognitive differences, for instance. But only an idiot would argue that one is "better" than the other.

 

Yes, and while those niches are understandable in a society where something is totaly illegal and subversive (like being gay in the 50's UK say) they will ultimately stand in the way of integration. I argue that in the UK we have today, a largely tollerant (not neccesarily embracing, but tollerant) society, people need to come out of those comfortable niches if they want to ever gain total and complete "so-what?" status when announcing their sexuality.

As for the counter-argument to my black/white thing, take black to mean a very dark-skinned caucasian (yes, they exist). The only differences there are going to be social, and there is no need for them in the long term.

 

I totally agree with you, but I think it is very much a reciprocal thing. Niches are a product of being prevented from integrating just as much as they promote that pattern. Nobody chooses to live in a ghetto when they can live in a nice middle-class neighbourhood.

I was assuming that black and white was referring to ethicity rather than skin colour per se, as is usually the context (And I know they exist. I'm a very light-skinned, blue-eyed Carribean, for instance. Is there no end to human variety? ).

 

Bloody Carribeans, get rid of the lot of em. Grumble moan.

See, pointless, if that was serious I'd look like a **** (I do generally, but that's a moot point).

Discrimination makes the discriminator (right word for the person who discrimates against someone?) look like an idiot.

 

I live in a gay neighborhood in a big city. It's very nice living there, it is very comfortable and I feel safe, I can just be myself without fear. May sub-cultures seem to do the same thing, they self-segregate themselves. Some because of fear, some because of shared culture, some because they are forced into ghettos, it depend and the state, region, country you live in. For me it is fear that brought me into and keeps me in our cities gay ghetto. It is difficult to help someone else understand how much fear and shame alot of us constantly have. I don't know, maybe for gay's who grew up in more recent times don't have such fear and internalized shame.

Kind of funny. When a particular sub-culture gets integrated to the state where it is eh, no big deal then it seems that over time those "ghettos" fade away and turn into tourist attractions, lol. This is the french quarter, this is china town, this is german town, etc. Most people don't frown on those places, in fact they celebrate the distintive flavor they have added to the American stew.

Anyway, my two cents.

 

Agree. Segregation is the biggest cause of all problems, then those removing themselves wonder why people dont understand them.

 

Very true. I remember walking around Boston one day, admiring the very distinct Italian flavor of the area. I walked under a bridge and everything was suddenly Irish. You could actually see the line where the two areas met, and it marked a time when each of these cultures had to fight to survive.

This is very typical of how each ethnic group established themselves in the USA during their various periods of emigration. Each grop faced segregation and minority status upon arriving in America - "Help Wanted: Irish need not apply" was not an uncommon sight once upon a time. These groups banded together with their own and formed small communities that worked together for support. This is what Nexxo talked about earlier in the thread: If they weren't allowed to integrate, they formed communities and competed against the established majority. After pockets of rebellion and eventual integration, barriers broke down and the people eventually spread out among the general populace.

-monkey

 

The point is (he sighed in exasperation), that they did not start the segregation. The straight majority did. But I guess it is not nearly as much fun excluding people if they don't want to join in anyway.

 

And my point is that I did not start the segragation, but that some people choose to continue it. Stop being a generalising apoligist ffs. Plenty of cultures, sub-cultures, and groups get s**t on by other people over the years. I can't help that, what I can say from my own point of view is that untill there is total integration, there is going to be prejudice, and the straight majority as you name it is never going to adjust it's entire culture to be like the gay minority one which has been carved out due to exclusion in previous generations (and nor should it). I am not saying gay people should fit in. Just that I see no reason why they shouldn't, that I personally don't like the idea of differentiation simply based upon what hole you poke, and that my belonging to a straight majority doesn't make me guilty of the homophobia, bigotry, and general ****wittery of history.

 

Seems strange that gay people have been such an integral part of our society, with countless contributions to our way of life, especially from the fields of Art and entertainment and yet there is still this stigma attached to homosexuality. We need to adopt the Star Trek way of life. Alas for most Of us, I doubt we will see anything resembling this kind of harmony within society for many centuries to come.

 

They were accepted as facts in their day and anyone that challenged that was excluded from, and mocked by, the scientific community of the day (which was admittedly tiny). Still, once excluded the lack of funding usually killed off that line of inquiry - I honestly believe that that still goes on today.

That could also be debated but I'll pass on that for now.

I have heard at least one brain researcher claim that funding for research in the area of brain differences between the sexes and between "races" was very hard to come by and she felt that it was even discouraged by her peers (this was on Quirks & Quarks on CBC (the Canadian equivalent of the BBC) - though I have read it elsewhere as well.)

that set of series, while interesting, is internally contradictory on many many things. (The latter seasons of DS9 are my favourite though)

 

We need something to unite us in fear, like oh say... an attack from an alien species? 100% guaranteed that would clear up everything.

 

You're right. If we were all dead there would be no more problems.

 

The world does not revolve around what you do or think. I'm speaking from a historical perspective. The segregation you see now is a product of the ostracision in the past (whether we are talking about gays or ethic minorities). Society may be more tolerant now, but that was a process that took time. Similarly, the process of gays (or other minorities) de-segregating themselves will take time. As I keep saying: it is a reciprocal process. You can't expect one side to just come across wholesale, especially if they were the victims in the first place.

Nor have I suggested that it does make you guilty of that. But neither mainstream society nor gays necessarily think like you (or me). However on a more personal level, tolerance and integration requires that you are at least able to understand their point of view (no matter how wrong or illogical it seems to you).

As I said: that was not science. Science does not assume; science tests. Of course the scientific community is not a democracy and financial, economical and political interests interfere in its practice, but that does not invalidate science itself anymore than the interference of such interests in the practice of religion invalidates religion itself.

Sorry, no. If God created sex, He created the whole ball of wax, including homosexuality.

Again, politics interfere in the practice of science, but that does not invalidate science as a discipline. Just as politics interfere in the practice of religion, but that does not invalidate religion in itself.

 

this has to be one of the most heated debates in recent threads... so I'll just flip my 2p's worth into the mix...

The ol' tinternet is full with sites dedicated to groups, themes, hobbies, styles, its the very nature of the beast. There's a whole lot more that combines these groups, it is human nature to form groups, whether virtual or not. I wonder if there would be this much fuss over a "Singles-Gamers" site, oh... wait... that's stereotyping too!

long and short, My pet hate is to see one entity forcing its views on others, virtual terrorism like this is just small minded. But above all else "Opinions are like farts, everyone's but yours stink"

 

Sorry to bring the thread back from the dead but I think you've pretty much hit the nail on the head there dude, nice one

 

He also created our hands, does that mean every work of our hands is his doing? (If you believe in free will then the answer is no)

Just as the ideals of a given religion are not always the practice we see of that religion, the ideals of science are not always the reality of the science we see. - I think you and I are saying the same thing but from different angles.