That is correct.
Advertisement

by United Russian Soviet States » Tue Feb 24, 2015 5:43 pm

by Tahar Joblis » Tue Feb 24, 2015 10:34 pm
Mavorpen wrote:Enatai wrote:
To quote the article:
That seemed to imply, to me, that she wants her child to choose to be gay. Maybe she didn't, and she's just not very good at getting her point across.
Or, maybe you're just selectively reading.The idea that no one would choose to be gay is widely held — even in the gay rights movement. In the early ’90s, partly as a response to the destructive notion that gay people could be changed, activists pressed the idea of sexuality as a fixed, innate state. Scientists even tried to prove that there’s a “gay gene.” These concepts about sexual orientation helped justify the case for legal protections. The idea that folks are “born gay” became not only the theme of a Lady Gaga song, but the implicit rationale for gay rights.
You do know what the word "destructive" means, correct?Enatai wrote:I'm giving background for people who might be bewildered at the idea that some people who are gay also happen to think that it's a choice that they made, whether or not that's true. It's the background context in which I read it and, I assumed (perhaps incorrectly, please correct me), she wrote it.
Yeah, no. She very clearly and explicitly states that the concept that gay people could be changed is "destructive" and hence she doesn't agree with it. What she is ACTUALLY saying is that she feels like the the insistence that gay people are born that way is also bad. She feels that we don't place enough emphasis on the fact that even IF gay people chose to be gay, it wouldn't matter a damn. She's saying that the insistence that people are born gay implicitly supports the idea that being gay is bad, but that it's not their fault because they're just born that way. She's saying that she disagrees with the ways the average person supports gay people, not that gay people choose to be gay.

by Desperate Measures » Wed Feb 25, 2015 5:50 am

by Hanchu » Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:28 am
Caribica wrote:I believe this is wrong, the child can be what sexual orientation she wants, lesbian or straight, and it's clear she's chosen straight.

by Ifreann » Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:34 am
Desperate Measures wrote:You're just making stuff up now from nothing.

by Desperate Measures » Wed Feb 25, 2015 7:09 am


by Ifreann » Wed Feb 25, 2015 7:15 am
Desperate Measures wrote:Ifreann wrote:You're only saying that because you want an army of gay-flying-monkey-children to do your bidding, you wicked witch.
Meant to tell you - Progress! It's just the flying bit that's gone a little wonky. I've tried jetpacks but that just helps them over the containment walls.

by Desperate Measures » Wed Feb 25, 2015 7:29 am

by Gauthier » Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:07 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Alcala-Cordel, Arval Va, Bovad, Gran Cordoba, New Temecula, Norse Inuit Union, Ottomahn Empire, Senkaku, South Northville, The Deutsches Kaiserreich, The Grand Fifth Imperium, The Jamesian Republic, Thermodolia, Tinhampton, Umeria, Washington Resistance Army
Advertisement