Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

On Sexuality and Gender

ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 12:31:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

Exactly. Let's abolish gender.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 7:41:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 12:31:49 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

Exactly. Let's abolish gender.

You can't abolish gender as a biological function obviously. You can abolish people clamoring for a gender label.
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 7:50:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 7:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Exactly. Let's abolish gender.

You can't abolish gender as a biological function obviously. You can abolish people clamoring for a gender label.

Indeed, 'male' and 'female' are biological terms, but I do not think that such superficial biological facts produce necessary properties of or normative principles about someone's personality.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:30:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 7:50:31 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 11/12/2014 7:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Exactly. Let's abolish gender.

You can't abolish gender as a biological function obviously. You can abolish people clamoring for a gender label.

Indeed, 'male' and 'female' are biological terms, but I do not think that such superficial biological facts produce necessary properties of or normative principles about someone's personality.

This is what I'm talking about. You have a pathological need to label things.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:31:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

That's a simplification. Past cultures have created highly specific models coding man/man or woman/woman attraction into their overall sexual/ethical identities. Our contemporary situation is simply one among many.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

That's a tidy reading of a particularly dirty story. It wasn't a simple curiosity for science's sake that people began studying sexuality (at the very least "abnormal" sexuality). It sprung from a concern over regulation and control of non-identifiable "deviants". The seventeenth/eighteenth century preoccupation with birth rates and population control, the regulation of child sexuality (masturbation in particular), the ever-deeper search into anatomical deviations and their relationship to traditional gender divisions and attractions, etc. are what lead to the scientific labeling of sexual identities in our current era. The concern with identification was inextricably linked to problems of control and regulation.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

(1) The so-called explosion in gender/sexual identities didn't spring from binary identification, but in reaction to it. We know now that man/woman, gay/straight, etc. (binary labels) are unable to account for subtle differentiation, deviation, and "abnormalities". Even if one were to take a strictly scientific viewpoint here it's been obvious since at least the eighteenth century that these binaries don't account for everything.
(2) What exactly is the social chaos that yer speaking of here? The fact that you can't glance at someone and properly assume the way they identify themselves? Or the fact that it's causing people (especially young people) to find more comfortability in their identity?
(3) This is just a repeating of my previous point. The historical placement of binary identities (and deviating anomalies) wasn't as straightforwardly neutral as springing from mere observation but sprang from a desire to control for difference with an oppressive social telos as it's foundation. It's not that it used to be good but it got worse. It's always been bad and we're just now sorta kinda making it a little less bad.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

(1) People with identities which are oppressed are more likely to let those identities define themselves more. Straight people don't define themselves in the same way as gays, blacks, women, etc. because they don't need to. Their identity isn't threatened from the outset. (2) As a gay man I have issues with some parts of the (broadly defined) gay community. The all-encompassing identity is one of those but not for the reasons you've stated. It's specifically because it doesn't allow for differentiation and expansion. It provides a narrow definition of traits which cis gay males must abide by and it reduces the ability to experiment and become.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

True but it goes both ways. Binary gender labels also put people in boxes. Except these boxes are propped up with threats of violence against deviations. Trans women are being murdered all across the country to preserve those boxes. And yer problem is the mere possibility that people want to break them down.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

Oppression is oppression. Doesn't matter how you dress it up.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

Yer a straight, cis white guy. You don't see the need for labels because there's no reason for you to be tied to them. Yer not oppressed. No one would kill you for being straight or identifying with yer birth assignment. Doesn't go for everybody. Some of us cling to our identities because other people make them into issues.

P.s. still haven't seen where the social chaos is coming from. Are pansexuals and trans women shooting machine guns in the streets or are they just trying to cling to some sense of identity which matches their feelings?
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:42:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:30:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 11/12/2014 7:50:31 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 11/12/2014 7:41:24 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Exactly. Let's abolish gender.

You can't abolish gender as a biological function obviously. You can abolish people clamoring for a gender label.

Indeed, 'male' and 'female' are biological terms, but I do not think that such superficial biological facts produce necessary properties of or normative principles about someone's personality.

This is what I'm talking about. You have a pathological need to label things.

I honestly don't know what you're talking about. I was teasing you, but I was also being sincere. If you oppose all these crazy new labels, you may as well oppose the traditional ones.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:48:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:31:22 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

That's a simplification. Past cultures have created highly specific models coding man/man or woman/woman attraction into their overall sexual/ethical identities. Our contemporary situation is simply one among many.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

That's a tidy reading of a particularly dirty story. It wasn't a simple curiosity for science's sake that people began studying sexuality (at the very least "abnormal" sexuality). It sprung from a concern over regulation and control of non-identifiable "deviants". The seventeenth/eighteenth century preoccupation with birth rates and population control, the regulation of child sexuality (masturbation in particular), the ever-deeper search into anatomical deviations and their relationship to traditional gender divisions and attractions, etc. are what lead to the scientific labeling of sexual identities in our current era. The concern with identification was inextricably linked to problems of control and regulation.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

(1) The so-called explosion in gender/sexual identities didn't spring from binary identification, but in reaction to it. We know now that man/woman, gay/straight, etc. (binary labels) are unable to account for subtle differentiation, deviation, and "abnormalities". Even if one were to take a strictly scientific viewpoint here it's been obvious since at least the eighteenth century that these binaries don't account for everything.
(2) What exactly is the social chaos that yer speaking of here? The fact that you can't glance at someone and properly assume the way they identify themselves? Or the fact that it's causing people (especially young people) to find more comfortability in their identity?
(3) This is just a repeating of my previous point. The historical placement of binary identities (and deviating anomalies) wasn't as straightforwardly neutral as springing from mere observation but sprang from a desire to control for difference with an oppressive social telos as it's foundation. It's not that it used to be good but it got worse. It's always been bad and we're just now sorta kinda making it a little less bad.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

(1) People with identities which are oppressed are more likely to let those identities define themselves more. Straight people don't define themselves in the same way as gays, blacks, women, etc. because they don't need to. Their identity isn't threatened from the outset. (2) As a gay man I have issues with some parts of the (broadly defined) gay community. The all-encompassing identity is one of those but not for the reasons you've stated. It's specifically because it doesn't allow for differentiation and expansion. It provides a narrow definition of traits which cis gay males must abide by and it reduces the ability to experiment and become.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

True but it goes both ways. Binary gender labels also put people in boxes. Except these boxes are propped up with threats of violence against deviations. Trans women are being murdered all across the country to preserve those boxes. And yer problem is the mere possibility that people want to break them down.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

Oppression is oppression. Doesn't matter how you dress it up.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

Yer a straight, cis white guy. You don't see the need for labels because there's no reason for you to be tied to them. Yer not oppressed. No one would kill you for being straight or identifying with yer birth assignment. Doesn't go for everybody. Some of us cling to our identities because other people make them into issues.

P.s. still haven't seen where the social chaos is coming from. Are pansexuals and trans women shooting machine guns in the streets or are they just trying to cling to some sense of identity which matches their feelings?

^ Chaos in that it's started this huge, confusing, loud clamour in the social realm. Not the physical realm.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:06:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:48:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:31:22 PM, socialpinko wrote:

P.s. still haven't seen where the social chaos is coming from. Are pansexuals and trans women shooting machine guns in the streets or are they just trying to cling to some sense of identity which matches their feelings?

^ Chaos in that it's started this huge, confusing, loud clamour in the social realm. Not the physical realm.

Thanks for literally not responding to anything else I wrote but I guess I'll work with this. So ugh, you do realize that the invocation of a metaphorical fall from grace (from the so-called good ol days when people knew what was what) is to ignore the violence which goes into perpetuating what you and people like you take to be the natural order of things? The medicalization of homosexuality and the concurrent forced hospitalization of gay men and women (into insane asylums and later mental hospitals), the murder of people who don't fit into traditional gender binaries (statistics regarding the life expectancy of trans women are horrifying), the forced sex changes/operations performed on people who literally don't have binary genitalia, the propagation of narratives and moralizing hype which has ostracized queer identities and led countless to suicide, etc. etc. Things weren't tidy and clean until those damn queersexuals decided to start making a ruckus and yer "how things used to be as natural" spiel ignores how unnatural and forced the order of things in times past actually was (and is).
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 12:55:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:06:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:48:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:31:22 PM, socialpinko wrote:

P.s. still haven't seen where the social chaos is coming from. Are pansexuals and trans women shooting machine guns in the streets or are they just trying to cling to some sense of identity which matches their feelings?

^ Chaos in that it's started this huge, confusing, loud clamour in the social realm. Not the physical realm.

Thanks for literally not responding to anything else I wrote but I guess I'll work with this. So ugh, you do realize that the invocation of a metaphorical fall from grace (from the so-called good ol days when people knew what was what) is to ignore the violence which goes into perpetuating what you and people like you take to be the natural order of things? The medicalization of homosexuality and the concurrent forced hospitalization of gay men and women (into insane asylums and later mental hospitals), the murder of people who don't fit into traditional gender binaries (statistics regarding the life expectancy of trans women are horrifying), the forced sex changes/operations performed on people who literally don't have binary genitalia, the propagation of narratives and moralizing hype which has ostracized queer identities and led countless to suicide, etc. etc. Things weren't tidy and clean until those damn queersexuals decided to start making a ruckus and yer "how things used to be as natural" spiel ignores how unnatural and forced the order of things in times past actually was (and is).

Sources? And I didn't have time to reply to your mega post at the time. Still don't Kind of tired. Will get around to it.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 7:27:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

So, that which you're saying is it was better for people like you when gay people knew their place, the closet. In that way, you could be a bigot and no one would know, any better.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 9:28:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/13/2014 7:27:07 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

So, that which you're saying is it was better for people like you when gay people knew their place, the closet. In that way, you could be a bigot and no one would know, any better.

Um nope... Never said that at all actually. I said it would be better if people had preferences and were treated like people instead of slapping labels to themselves and inviting stereotypes and groupthink mentality. I'm of the mind that no one should know anyone is straight or gay really unless they're pigs and talk about it all the time or are in bed with you.

But people like you are always looking for the scary boogy-bigot in the shadows so you can call them out and give yourself a deep moral stroke on your justice dick.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,927
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 9:56:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:31:22 PM, socialpinko wrote:


Yer a straight, cis white guy. You don't see the need for labels because there's no reason for you to be tied to them. Yer not oppressed. No one would kill you for being straight or identifying with yer birth assignment. Doesn't go for everybody. Some of us cling to our identities because other people make them into issues.


This. I read this and replaced "gay" with "black" and then cringed. If one can't see why people would make a big deal out of (say) Barack Obama being the first black persident (regardless of his politics) I really don't even know what to say. You're simply blind and tone deaf to how race works in this society. This whole post strikes me as one long exercise is "straight privilege".

If people had were beaten and killed and excluded for social, political and economic instutions for because of their preference for McDonalds then, yea. Assuming I liked mcdonalds, I'd be a proud mcdonaldite then. And plus that presupposes that someone "chooses" to be gay.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 10:28:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/13/2014 12:55:48 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 11/12/2014 9:06:18 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:48:16 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:31:22 PM, socialpinko wrote:

P.s. still haven't seen where the social chaos is coming from. Are pansexuals and trans women shooting machine guns in the streets or are they just trying to cling to some sense of identity which matches their feelings?

^ Chaos in that it's started this huge, confusing, loud clamour in the social realm. Not the physical realm.

Thanks for literally not responding to anything else I wrote but I guess I'll work with this. So ugh, you do realize that the invocation of a metaphorical fall from grace (from the so-called good ol days when people knew what was what) is to ignore the violence which goes into perpetuating what you and people like you take to be the natural order of things? The medicalization of homosexuality and the concurrent forced hospitalization of gay men and women (into insane asylums and later mental hospitals), the murder of people who don't fit into traditional gender binaries (statistics regarding the life expectancy of trans women are horrifying), the forced sex changes/operations performed on people who literally don't have binary genitalia, the propagation of narratives and moralizing hype which has ostracized queer identities and led countless to suicide, etc. etc. Things weren't tidy and clean until those damn queersexuals decided to start making a ruckus and yer "how things used to be as natural" spiel ignores how unnatural and forced the order of things in times past actually was (and is).

Sources? And I didn't have time to reply to your mega post at the time. Still don't Kind of tired. Will get around to it.

Sources for what? Are you actually saying that you don't think that (a) gay men and women have been subject to forced hospitalization and abusive treatment for being homosexual before, (b) trans women are killed for being trans women at an alarming rate (especially in the U.S.), (c) the medical establishment has a long history of arbitrarily assigning sex/gender in infants where their birth genitals are either ambiguous or non-binary, or (d) that anti-gay narratives/actions have driven gay people to suicide? Like seriously tell me which ones yer doubting.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 10:32:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/13/2014 9:56:49 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:31:22 PM, socialpinko wrote:


Yer a straight, cis white guy. You don't see the need for labels because there's no reason for you to be tied to them. Yer not oppressed. No one would kill you for being straight or identifying with yer birth assignment. Doesn't go for everybody. Some of us cling to our identities because other people make them into issues.


This. I read this and replaced "gay" with "black" and then cringed. If one can't see why people would make a big deal out of (say) Barack Obama being the first black persident (regardless of his politics) I really don't even know what to say. You're simply blind and tone deaf to how race works in this society. This whole post strikes me as one long exercise is "straight privilege".

If people had were beaten and killed and excluded for social, political and economic instutions for because of their preference for McDonalds then, yea. Assuming I liked mcdonalds, I'd be a proud mcdonaldite then. And plus that presupposes that someone "chooses" to be gay.

It's a sh'tty thing to consider but imo people without some intersection with marginalized identities are usually blowing smoke out of their arses when they talk about things like this.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 11:23:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/13/2014 9:28:41 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 11/13/2014 7:27:07 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
It has come to my attention that this phenomenal obsession with sexuality and gender is a distinctly modern affair stemming from a simple label.

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with somone was not immidiately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

One may find an example of this not holding true in seldom cases but for the most part this was true. However, this mentatlity changed completely (for the worse) in the early 20th century with the simple creation of a label.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

This has bled over into areas such as gender as well. Throughout history there have been men who preferred to dress as women and women who preferred to don armor and arms than skirts and they were seen as oddities but nothing more than that. Now that has a label too. So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

So, that which you're saying is it was better for people like you when gay people knew their place, the closet. In that way, you could be a bigot and no one would know, any better.

Um nope... Never said that at all actually. I said it would be better if people had preferences and were treated like people instead of slapping labels to themselves and inviting stereotypes and groupthink mentality. I'm of the mind that no one should know anyone is straight or gay really unless they're pigs and talk about it all the time or are in bed with you.

If stereotype and groupthink mentality were not preexistent, there would have been no public backlash over the coming out of gay men and women.

How is someone suppose to get in bed with you if he, or she, doesn't know if you're gay or straight?


But people like you are always looking for the scary boogy-bigot in the shadows so you can call them out and give yourself a deep moral stroke on your justice dick.

There's no searching about it, and the bigot is not hiding in the shadows. Last I checked, bigots were in your face.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 4:21:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label.

So does this mean that you plan on changing your username?
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2014 8:01:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/13/2014 4:21:29 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label.

So does this mean that you plan on changing your username?

That's a good one. He doesn't like labels but before he even opens his mouth you already know which side of the political aisle he stands on.
blackkid
Posts: 29
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2014 3:18:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
While you are correct this is a step in the correct direction. Learning about humans, human behavior, and being able to compartmentalize and standardize an identity is progressive no different than any other term such as "tall" or "short" or "kind" or "mean". These are realities and observed behaviors producing these terms and the more terms we have the wiser we can be about where we put our concepts.
Eav
Posts: 5
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2014 3:51:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now. A man in the past who perhaps enjoyed the company of men to women was not labelled in anyway it was just simply a fact of preference that stemmed from certain actions. A man who engaged in homosexual relations with someone was not immediately classified afterwards as gay and such an action did not go on to define their entire person.

Well this is a lovely thought but it's wrong to think that people did not "label" gay people before the "label term" itself was created.

Different cultures had different ways to imply that (for example) a man was preferring men over women. I mean the Vikings had already terms for being gay and that was around 800 AD. Though the word "gay" is young. The, what you call, "label" isn't nor are the stereotypes evolving around gay people.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/14/2014 4:49:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Spoken as if you really understand the issue. Nice.

At 11/12/2014 12:13:19 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

In the past, before such labels as gay, straight, transgender etc. were part of speech people were not defined by their tastes and actions the way they are now.

People have always been labeled by their being and actions. Blacks were given racist labels, women sexist labels, and those who engaged in homosexual activity were labeled perverts and mentally ill.

Psychologists got together to study human sexuality and came across something they thought was strange, some people preferred sex with their own gender. In the course of their observations they, for sake of ease, quite logically labelled those who like sex with the opposite gender heterosexuals and those who like sex with their own gender homosexuals.

What they did not know was that they had opened pandora's box.

By the simple fact of labeling these things in a binary way now suddenly everyone wants a label. Every single person who feels something strange in their heart or in their dick wants a label and its causing social chaos. Worst of all these labels have gone far beyond labeling people for the sake of observation as was first started. Now people have allowed this label to completely consume their lives in unhealthy ways.

You do realize that homosexuality was labeled as a mental disorder by psychologists right? It wasn't the simple act of labeling, it was the meaning behind the label. Gay people were made out as "the other" because they had sex with each other. Their humanity was reduced to their sexuality and thus they were easy targets for discrimination and hate crimes.

Suddenly men are not men they're gay men. Everything they do is now connected to a stupid label. They're a gay student. The first gay this. Gay that. Gay gay gay. Why? In the past there were no labels for such tastes that were so prevelent in the public diction and people were just fine. Gay is no longer a sexual preference its an entire identity that defines people which is utterly wrong in my opinion.

Suddenly? Maybe from your point of view. But the existence of homosexuals is not sudden. Do you know why gay people group up and form a common identity? The same reason other minority groups do. Because they wanted to escape an environment where they do not fit in. If they did not form a community and help each other out no one else would and they would be at the mercy of a bigoted majority. Because if gay people weren't allowed to define themselves others would define them as perverts.

So many labels. Labels put people into boxes, force them to behave in certain ways. It's wrong.

Real cute. This coming from the guy who adheres to the labels "conservative" "Christian" "white" "male" and "student" oh man so many labels! Get out of that box!

Such things have bled over into unintended areas as well. Today Christians are labeled as homophobic, anti-gay, etc. People think Christians are against people because many homosexuals have allowed this label to completely be infused with their person so that their personhood is not removable from their sexual preferences. Which if you really think about it is absurd.

Gay people would love to be seen as more than their sexuality. But it's people who have a problem with homosexuality (the historical majority) who can't look past it, who have infused the act to the person. It is within this paradigm that homosexuals learned how different they are from the rest of the population.

Christians do not hate gay PEOPLE as much as they hate gay actions. Just as the law in ancient Christian societies did not punish persons but actions. You were not punished for being a gay person but rather for committing a sinful act.

"sin" is a label. A label that homosexuals to not give value to. So when you say that gay sex is a sin you are saying nothing of value. Further more you say ancient christian society punished the sinful act of sodomy (gay sex). Yet in the OP you say there was no label for homosexuality, people just freely loved each other w/o labels. So when did homosexual acts become a problem? It seems like it was Christians who placed the label of "sin" upon sodomy. And what do you know, those who practiced sodomy were homosexuals. So you're saying Christians don't hate gay people, they just happen to hate people who do gay stuff. Who does gay stuff? Gay People.

These labels are quite ridiculous. Everyone wants one and worst off everyone NEEDS one it seems. They've been infused into people's persons in ways they think is admirable but is really quite foolish. I think it'd be better to back off of the labels. If you prefer one thing to another why does that require a label. I like Coke more than Pepsi. Am I a Cokeist? A Cocasexual? I like McDonalds more than Burger King? Am I a McDonaldite? Preferences do not require labels. Gender and sexual are no different.

So then, if we abolish these silly labels then can 2 people of age get married and raise a family without labels?