I have just read that the US Senate has concurred with the US House of Reps and passed the expanded hate crimes legislation - ready for executive assent without dissent, in the interest of political correctness.
Obama keeps his word on hate crimes bill, Sodom and Gomorrah? No, hardly! I think that the bill may not have gone far enough.
Now that some so bent will no longer be able to say 'stinking fagot', '"effing" Nigger', 'dirty cripple', and other unimaginably crass and insular human verbal creations, what about those living with AIDS and other terminal or debilitating ailments?
It appears now that sticks and stones, as well as words, may be used to hurt somebody - making nonsense of that old social phrasing normally attributed to the wise and brave peacemakers of youth.
Who can argue with the majority? Anyway, I have detailed below some of my heartfelt positions in the past on the modern matter of gayness - not necessarily meaning only happiness any longer.
Let the chips fall where they may - and, oh, I am also receptive to both impassioned and intelligent contributions.
By the way, as the moderator of the discussion, my humble sobriquet was 'Bronx' in all the conversations below.
Please be warned that some of the contributors are quite frankly very explicit, with all the relevant expletives often included wholesale.
Poll: how do you rate gay people?
Bronx posted on Oct 30, 2007 | views: 841 | Tags: gay men, Lesbians, Homosexuality, discrimination, attitudes, gays
On a scale of 1 to 10 - ten being most favorably perceived. Don't be alarmed. I just want to know which group you view more favorably: gay men or lesbians.
Personally, lesbians appear more acceptable to me. Some how, I had always felt that their act was kind of a turn on and instinctively generally felt like joining in a threesome of some kind with two women. Ha-ha.
What about you? Are you appalled by homosexuality? Many people seem to think like me:
[...Gay men working in management and traditional blue-collar, male-dominated jobs make less than straight men because they are discriminated against by their employers, according to new research released today by the University of New Hampshire Whittemore School of Business and Economics. Lesbians, however, do not experience similar discrimination in the labor market....
“Employers may disapprove of gay lifestyles and act on this bias in making hiring decisions,” the authors said. Employers also may discriminate against gay men in response to the desires of the majority of employees. If employers consider mixing heterosexual and homosexual employees distracting and detrimental to productivity, the authors said the employers may consider it profitable to discriminate.
Gay men also may experience labor market discrimination because customers may not want to interact with them, thus influencing hiring practices. “If customers prefer to interact with heterosexual employees, the owner will act on the customer’s taste for discrimination,” the authors said.
Finally, discrimination may occur as a result of anti-gay attitudes associated with AIDS and misunderstanding as to how HIV is transmitted. Previous research shows that people with HIV/AIDS have higher rates of absenteeism from work. The authors theorize that biased employers may be reluctant to hire gay men because they are concerned about a loss of productivity if a worker becomes infected with HIV/AIDS.........while negative attitudes toward lesbians could affect them, lesbians may benefit from the perception that they are more career-focused and less likely to leave the labor market to raise children than heterosexual women. According to their study, 18.1% of lesbians have children, compared with 49.4% of straight women....
Comments
-
uniquely-ironic said on Oct 30, 2007....
The whole thing is crap. Homosexuality is a personal issue, not related to work skills at all, so I find it frustrating that people persist in treating them differently.
I would imagine the general public finds lesbianism more acceptable. I'm not sure why. Perhaps because most societies are still more male oriented and find gay men threatening.
Eilan said on Oct 30, 2007....
I live on the fringes of the bible belt, where neither gays nor lesbians are acceptable. Based on my somewhat limited experience, I'd have to say, though, that lesbians are more tolerated.
A few years ago, before I started teaching, I worked in a medical facility, in a department that was probably 90% female. Shortly before I left, my supervisor hired an openly gay man to serve as an evening shift supervisor. I never had any contact with him, but he seemed to be a perfectly nice person.
Before he'd even started on the job, however, word had gotten out that a *gasp* gay person had been hired in our department. One of the few males in the department said, "If I catch him checking out my ass, I'll beat the fuck out of him."
I pretty much shut him up when I said, "He's gay. That doesn't mean he doesn't have standards."
silverwhisper said on Oct 31, 2007....
i think that the reason gay men are perceived differently is b/c the sexual act we associate with them involves penetration. i think that's at the heart of it.
i don't "rate" gay people any differently than i do straights. which is to say, i don't.
eilan, that line was beautiful. :>
ed
Bronx said on Oct 31, 2007....
U-I: hi. You may have a good point there.
Eilan: ha-ha...yep, some people are worth checking out more than others, irrespective of the direction of their sexual swing.
sw: I agree with you about the location in which penetration is achieved being the core issue against gay men.
Fallyn said on Nov 15, 2007....
i agree with ed, eilan...that was pretty awesome.
as for myself...and how i view gays.....well....the only thing i have to say is i find them a bit less boring over all....compared to other people......but that may just be that the only place i tend to meet them openly gay is in art circles....where i find people to be less boring as a whole in general. so...*shrug*
that and the fact that i'm probably around a 2 or more on the Kinsey scale.
as to what's more acceptable to the general public? i really couldn't say.
Bronx said on Nov 15, 2007....
Fallyn: hi, it is true that art finds a kaleidoscope of admirers and practitioners.
Fallyn said on Nov 15, 2007....
bronx.....kaleidoscope....couldn't be a better word for it than that. *GRIN*
Bronx said on Nov 17, 2007....
Fallyn: you're too kind.....;O>
Fallyn said on Nov 17, 2007....
kaleidoscopes are fun.
crybabylu said on Nov 17, 2007....
I agree with uniquely-ironic: The entire thing is piece of crap. Not homosexuality, but discrimation against it. People need to grow up, and realize not everyone thinks the same.
As far as your rating system...I give "gays" or either sex a 10.
Bronx said on Nov 18, 2007....
Fallyn; yes, they are.
cry: hi....yes, it is a subjective issue.
one_wired_kitty said on May 26, 2009....
I have no probs w/ gay people ... it's when they go circus-parade all fucked up strange that I have a problem ...
UPDATE - Tuesday, November 03, 2009:
By the way, this blog post has continued to make an impact with words alone.
A day or two after this post was published, a cable news item on CNN had it that the USA will be unbanning its policy against admitting People Living With HIV/AIDS by January 2010! Hurray - especially for those of them seeking better medical attention available over there!
Now, if only writers, like me, who only want to get away temporarily from the relative darkness-due-to-poor-electric-power-supply and similarly frustrating SNAFUs over here, could be granted a special US visa that would authorize us to spend up to half of the year writing and publishing in peace and comfort - as well as making it easy to pay the relevant taxes and all other privileged pseudo-citizen status entitlements.
That would be something very nice, too, wouldn't it?
Stumble It!
Seed Newsvine
0 comments:
Post a Comment