Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Andreas on June 30, 2005, 05:50:44 pm

Title: Frustrated
Post by: Andreas on June 30, 2005, 05:50:44 pm
This will propably sound very confusing and strange, but please, bear with me.

I hate categorising people into "homosexuals" and "heterosexuals". To me, I find it quite natural that two good male friends could kiss and perhaps do even more than that without it being specifically "gay". They could still be married, and have children, for example.

I mean, isn't real and good friendship one of the best things in life? Isn't a good friendship between two men a perfect definition and basis for real love? At least, that's how I view it.

So, why should it exclude all those things that are usually attributed to be "normal" only between men and women? Why can't they have a little bit of fun, without being labeled as "homosexuals" or "gays"?

This whole [insert name here]sexuality is just another stupid way by the politicians and the church to label people. We always must have an enemy, don't we? Commies, witches, homosexuals, what's the difference? :doubt: As long as they have someone to blame. The world is just so full of ****. :no: Why can't we just be at peace for a while with ourselves?

Again, sorry if I sounded childish and confusing, but I'm very frustrated and tired right now.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Bobboau on June 30, 2005, 05:54:37 pm
homosexual
heterosexual

look at the names, they have nothing to do with love, it's entierly a definition of your preference of phisical pleasure. I'd hardly even classify it as being on an emotional level
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Taristin on June 30, 2005, 05:56:44 pm
I'm... confused by your post. You don't think two men or two women sharing a mutual attraction is homosexual? The term wasn't created for political oppression, it's a scientific term, really.......


Right?

Edit: I mean to say, I understand your point. And I don't like being labelled either, since labels more often than not cause preconceptions. And preconceptions are hard to remove.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Bobboau on June 30, 2005, 05:58:55 pm
yeah, if you are physicaly atracted to a person of the smae sex you are by definition a homosexual (or bisxual if you are also atracted to the opposet) adding any further meaning to the words by anyone is simply incorect.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: aldo_14 on June 30, 2005, 06:00:31 pm
There is the category of 'bisexual', you know.

I think...sex and, in turn physical attraction, defines sexuality.  Love has a very specific meaning, in non-related people, that goes beyond the tenets of friendship and into the set of hormonal/mental/etc processes that govern - for lack of a better term - sexual instinct.

So I don't see a problem with categorisation based on actions; people use these categorisations in a ****ty way to excuse their bias, yes, but they're not invalid characterisations as a result.  They're just as binary as, say xx, xy, xxy etc chromosomes are used to define gender.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Taristin on June 30, 2005, 06:02:29 pm
I think the main problem is the label. As soon as someone is labelled as gay, they become treated differently. I know that for a fact. And it's... not only frustrating, but depressing, and demoralizing.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Col. Fishguts on June 30, 2005, 06:03:45 pm
Quote
look at the names, they have nothing to do with love, it's entierly a definition of your preference of phisical pleasure. I'd hardly even classify it as being on an emotional level


Yup, (platonic) friendship and sexuality technicaly have nothing to do with each other.
So, if one is hetero-/homo-/bisexual depends only on which gender(s) one is sexually attracted.


OT: Where the hell is everybody today ?
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Hippo on June 30, 2005, 06:08:57 pm
being drowned by ads.gamespy.com :p
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Bobboau on June 30, 2005, 06:13:14 pm
if there haveing problems they should disable the adds.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: aldo_14 on June 30, 2005, 06:13:25 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Raa
I think the main problem is the label. As soon as someone is labelled as gay, they become treated differently. I know that for a fact. And it's... not only frustrating, but depressing, and demoralizing.


Yup; it's not the label that's a problem, but the usage of it for discrimination.

I understand the arguement - that if we don't define people in terms of sexuality, or skin colour, or religion etc then we have no way to descriminate against these groups.  But the other hand is that by removing labels, we also remove a lot of the methods by which we can define ourselves.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Taristin on June 30, 2005, 06:15:09 pm
It is a double edged sword... But how does one change something like that?
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Bobboau on June 30, 2005, 06:19:01 pm
you don't, you live with it.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Andreas on June 30, 2005, 06:21:46 pm
I'm sorry that my post didn't make any sense, I just had to let that out. What I meant was, that to me, a very good friend and a lover are almost the same thing. I guess I'm confusing as hell, sorry.

I hate labeling and stereotypes, yes, that was my point mainly. Because those labels bound us. Does every homosexual act like in the "Queer eye for a straight guy"? I hardly think so. But that's how the media and politicians want to portray a certain group of people, force them into somesort of mold, so they can be easily controlled.

I apologise that I can't reply in a couple of hours, I really need to get some sleep (2am here...).
Title: Frustrated
Post by: aldo_14 on June 30, 2005, 06:22:46 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Raa
It is a double edged sword... But how does one change something like that?


Set an example, I think, and hope that other people will respect that and understand it.  It's probably the best you can do; some people get very vocal about stuff, but that carries a risk of alienating people at the same time.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Bobboau on June 30, 2005, 06:26:41 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Andreas
But that's how the media and politicians want to portray a certain group of people, force them into somesort of mold, so they can be easily controlled.


actualy it's more human nature the polititians (ect...) just take advantage of it.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Kosh on June 30, 2005, 06:54:38 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Raa
I think the main problem is the label. As soon as someone is labelled as gay, they become treated differently. I know that for a fact. And it's... not only frustrating, but depressing, and demoralizing.




The problem isn't the label itself, it is how people react to it.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: vyper on June 30, 2005, 08:33:56 pm
Interesting, I'm off to get laid...
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Ford Prefect on June 30, 2005, 09:49:51 pm
It's a valid point. Sexuality is much more complex than most people realize, and it's long been proposed that it's more of a continuum than a categorical system.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Taristin on June 30, 2005, 10:11:38 pm
Quote
Originally posted by vyper
Interesting, I'm off to get laid...


On the internet, no one believes you.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Scuddie on July 01, 2005, 12:39:22 am
In Soviet Russia, lay gets YOU!

Forgive my being blunt, but there is a big difference between being homosexual and being a *** (or dyke).  You do not need to be one to be the other.  One is a chemistry trait, the other is a personality trait.  It is disturbing how many people don't believe this is true.  While it may be true that chemistry can contribute to personality, it is essentially attitude that will determine personality.  I hate those guys on Queer Eye, but not because of their sexual preference, but because they make themselves look like idiots.  Being more sensitive is one thing, making a big deal out of it is another.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Taristin on July 01, 2005, 12:43:13 am
I agree 100% with you, Scuddie.

And it's that stereotype, that they are perpetuating, that hurts the gay community. I've said it 100 times before, and I'll say it 100 times more.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: icespeed on July 01, 2005, 12:58:54 am
from a christian point of view (yes i know i'm setting myself up to get flamed, but i'm not trying to put anyone down here) homosexuality is about on level with kleptomania or sadism or whatever; everyone's born with _something_ wrong with them. so people really have no right to point at other people and say 'he's gay!' because at every point you judge other people, you yourself will be judged (paraphrase from somewhere... book of romans? can't remember)

to me personally, homosexuality is just another thing to hack. doesn't make the person any worse or better than me, or anyone else. so i fully sympathise, andreas, why can't we just _love_ people instead of hating? where is the love?
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Ford Prefect on July 01, 2005, 01:34:52 am
Now would be a time at which I say, "In my pants."
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Andreas on July 01, 2005, 02:44:34 am
Quote
Originally posted by Ford Prefect
It's a valid point. Sexuality is much more complex than most people realize, and it's long been proposed that it's more of a continuum than a categorical system.

Yes, that's what I meant. :nod: It just feels crude to categorise people into this and that, aren't things more complicated than that?

Again, I'm sorry that I've made this such a big deal. I just needed to get something off my chest. Thanks for all of your replies. I can be confusing as hell sometimes, even to myself, but I hope you understanded at least something out of my ranting. :o

Completely un-related: why the hell was HLP so slow for a couple of days? It took me almost a half a minute to load every page. Was it just me? Well, now it's back to normal, fortunately. :D

Quote
Originally posted by Ford Prefect
Now would be a time at which I say, "In my pants."

:lol:
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Kosh on July 01, 2005, 03:20:59 am
Quote
from a christian point of view (yes i know i'm setting myself up to get flamed, but i'm not trying to put anyone down here) homosexuality is about on level with kleptomania or sadism or whatever;



Since when did people actually follow that religion 100%? Most people who claim to believe in it only follow the "convient" rules and ignore everything else. The point is, since so many people break the other rules, what does it matter if some people break this rule?
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Carl on July 01, 2005, 03:38:48 am
I guess it shouldn't matter to those people who don't care about their own religion.

It's impossible to be 100% perfect, but if you just plain don't care then you couldn't really believe in it.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: phatosealpha on July 01, 2005, 03:46:25 am
Yeah, but when the clause used to show homosexuality is wrong is in the same chapter as the guidelines on animal sacrifice, the no-mixed fabrics clause, and the women who have extend mestraution have to burn a bird eight days after they stop clause, one really has to wonder why this one is being followed.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Kosh on July 01, 2005, 03:50:31 am
It might not be possible, but the fact is a great many people truely don't care about their alledged religion enough to even try to follow the rules.

Here is one of the best examples that I heard on the BBC Worldservice:

"40% of americans claim that they go to church every sunday, but when we do an actual headcount that number is halfed."
Title: Frustrated
Post by: DeepSpace9er on July 01, 2005, 06:30:08 am
Simple point, if something is right and you know in your gut that it is right, why do you feel you have to justify yourself to the everyone else? And if you know that it is wrong in your gut, why do you not resist it?

Make of this what you may, but its meanings are pretty limited in this context.
Title: Frustrated
Post by: Ford Prefect on July 01, 2005, 11:53:29 am
Quote
Completely un-related: why the hell was HLP so slow for a couple of days? It took me almost a half a minute to load every page. Was it just me? Well, now it's back to normal, fortunately.

Yeah I noticed the same thing. It was driving me nuts.