Homosexuality and Culture

[Aboveland]

But you don't know this as true, because it isn't.

Oh it is. You can't separate a person from lived experience.
You earlier mentioned that you can study up on African warfare and write a story about that, despite not being a solider or being from Africa. And that's true.
That being said, your story will likely be influenced by your own experiences. What you think of warfare, your impressions of Africa, etc..., all of which are informed from an outsider (ie non-African) perspective.

I've written short stories that have had nothing at all to do with homosexuality in a heteronormative environment. Does this mean I haven't made art, because my homosexuality hasn't influenced it?

You misunderstand.
Of course people can, and do, create art that isn't based on lived experiences on a surface level. That being said? I would wager that the issues that face a homosexual person that lives in a heteronormative (and sometimes homophobic) society would seep into your work, often in ways you don't intend. It's a process of discovery I myself have seen with my own work.

And it's really not that shocking. You're more than your sexual orientation, your race, your religion, your gender, your nationality. Yet all of these things about you inform your world view. And while you may not set out to write a story from the perspective of your sexual orientation, race, etc...? Those ideas will likely subconsciously seep into the art. Even if the art isn't about that on a surface level.
I don't say this as a criticism either. Everyone on the face of the earth is influenced by lived experiences. And everyone who makes art makes art that's influenced by them.

Okay, I see your point.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

A culture is not lesser or lacking just because it doesn't make pretty pictures.

Here's a neat thought experiment: try to form a purely visual mental picture that might serve as an approximation, for instance, of the essential spirit of Revolutionary or Napoleonic France, without resorting to any known piece of art (be it a painting, a drawing, a sculpture, a monument or any sort of professional photography). Or Renaissance Italy. Or the American struggle for independence. Or pre-Meiji Japan.

More superficiality of art, further proving my point. The attitudes and beliefs of all those culture existed independently of the art; ergo the culture could exist without the art.

The Renaissance Italy also further process my point, since there was a lot more to it than art.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

So can we draw a parallel between sexual orientation and culture, and skin colour and culture?

[Liriena]

So can we draw a parallel between sexual orientation and culture, and skin colour and culture?

Not in terms of sexual orientation or skin tone inherently carrying a culture of their own. That is always historically constructed. If we accept that something like a singular white or black culture exists, that's not because a certain skin tone is naturally predisposed to forming a certain kind of culture, but because, over the course of history, we assigned further meaning to such categories, thus fostering the possibility of them becoming shared identities.

Here's a neat thought experiment: try to form a purely visual mental picture that might serve as an approximation, for instance, of the essential spirit of Revolutionary or Napoleonic France, without resorting to any known piece of art (be it a painting, a drawing, a sculpture, a monument or any sort of professional photography). Or Renaissance Italy. Or the American struggle for independence. Or pre-Meiji Japan.

More superficiality of art, further proving my point.

no. There's nothing "superficial" about the fact that art has a major role in shaping our collective memory. That was my point.

The idea we have of certain events is often primarily the product of art. The way in which we remember nazism today has a lot to do with the artistry of people like Riefenstahl.

Also, I love how you conveniently left out the rest of my post. No counter-argument to any of it?

The attitudes and beliefs of all those culture existed independently of the art; ergo the culture could exist without the art.

Could it, though? This is a big, bold claim you keep repeating, but you're not presenting any proof. Granted, you're engaging in some massive alternate history speculation, but a bit more meat on the bones of it would be nice. Can you actually prove that all those cultures could have existed the way they did and be remembered without any art?

As far as I'm concerned, art cannot be separated from culture any more than things like eating customs or sexual norms. They are all part of a massive, interconnected whole.

[Datlofff]

So can we draw a parallel between sexual orientation and culture, and skin colour and culture?

Not in terms of sexual orientation or skin tone inherently carrying a culture of their own. That is always historically constructed. If we accept that something like a singular white or black culture exists, that's not because a certain skin tone is naturally predisposed to forming a certain kind of culture, but because, over the course of history, we assigned further meaning to such categories, thus fostering the possibility of them becoming shared identities.

More superficiality of art, further proving my point.

no. There's nothing "superficial" about the fact that art has a major role in shaping our collective memory. That was my point.

The idea we have of certain events is often primarily the product of art. The way in which we remember nazism today has a lot to do with the artistry of people like Riefenstahl.

Also, I love how you conveniently left out the rest of my post. No counter-argument to any of it?

The attitudes and beliefs of all those culture existed independently of the art; ergo the culture could exist without the art.

Could it, though? This is a big, bold claim you keep repeating, but you're not presenting any proof. Granted, you're engaging in some massive alternate history speculation, but a bit more meat on the bones of it would be nice. Can you actually prove that all those cultures could have existed the way they did and be remembered without any art?

As far as I'm concerned, art cannot be separated from culture any more than things like eating customs or sexual norms. They are all part of a massive, interconnected whole.

The way I remember nazi Germany is because a lot of my ancestors have "auschwitz" somewhere on their tombstones.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Not in terms of sexual orientation or skin tone inherently carrying a culture of their own. That is always historically constructed. If we accept that something like a singular white or black culture exists, that's not because a certain skin tone is naturally predisposed to forming a certain kind of culture, but because, over the course of history, we assigned further meaning to such categories, thus fostering the possibility of them becoming shared identities.


no. There's nothing "superficial" about the fact that art has a major role in shaping our collective memory. That was my point.

The idea we have of certain events is often primarily the product of art. The way in which we remember nazism today has a lot to do with the artistry of people like Riefenstahl.

Also, I love how you conveniently left out the rest of my post. No counter-argument to any of it?


Could it, though? This is a big, bold claim you keep repeating, but you're not presenting any proof. Granted, you're engaging in some massive alternate history speculation, but a bit more meat on the bones of it would be nice. Can you actually prove that all those cultures could have existed the way they did and be remembered without any art?

As far as I'm concerned, art cannot be separated from culture any more than things like eating customs or sexual norms. They are all part of a massive, interconnected whole.

The way I remember nazi Germany is because a lot of my ancestors have "auschwitz" somewhere on their tombstones.

That's pretty much the way a lot of people remember the Nazis: by their death count. I reckon 95% of people haven't even heard of Riefenstahl.

[Liriena]

So can we draw a parallel between sexual orientation and culture, and skin colour and culture?

Not in terms of sexual orientation or skin tone inherently carrying a culture of their own. That is always historically constructed. If we accept that something like a singular white or black culture exists, that's not because a certain skin tone is naturally predisposed to forming a certain kind of culture, but because, over the course of history, we assigned further meaning to such categories, thus fostering the possibility of them becoming shared identities.

Some people believe that there is such a thing as a white culture, and that's largely because some (white) people over the centuries went to great lengths to assign a singular, universal set of cultural elements to all people who they classified as white. This doesn't mean that such a classification was natural or perfectly logical, just an innocent self-evident and autonomous truth that merely had to be observed. In a sense, the category is its own self-fulfilling, socially constructed prophecy.

[Datlofff]

The way I remember nazi Germany is because a lot of my ancestors have "auschwitz" somewhere on their tombstones.

That's pretty much the way a lot of people remember the Nazis: by their death count. I reckon 95% of people haven't even heard of Riefenstahl.

You mean that chick to directed nazi propaganda films? Yah she made my favorite one, where Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sink HMS glorious

[Liriena]

I reckon 95% of people haven't even heard of Riefenstahl.

But I'd dare say most people in the western hemisphere have seen footage of her work for the nazis. And because nazi Germany was a totalitarian regime, to this day her work still has a near monopoly on the audiovisual record of life within nazi Germany.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

So can we draw a parallel between sexual orientation and culture, and skin colour and culture?

Not in terms of sexual orientation or skin tone inherently carrying a culture of their own. That is always historically constructed. If we accept that something like a singular white or black culture exists, that's not because a certain skin tone is naturally predisposed to forming a certain kind of culture, but because, over the course of history, we assigned further meaning to such categories, thus fostering the possibility of them becoming shared identities.

More superficiality of art, further proving my point.

no. There's nothing "superficial" about the fact that art has a major role in shaping our collective memory. That was my point.

The idea we have of certain events is often primarily the product of art. The way in which we remember nazism today has a lot to do with the artistry of people like Riefenstahl.

The way we remember Nazism has 90% to do with what they actually did, not their art which is only a reflection of their worldview, not their worldview itself.

Also, I love how you conveniently left out the rest of my post. No counter-argument to any of it?

The rest of it is as meaningful as the part of your post I left in, so I only addressed the first part.

The attitudes and beliefs of all those culture existed independently of the art; ergo the culture could exist without the art.

Could it, though? This is a big, bold claim you keep repeating, but you're not presenting any proof.

I have presented aspects of culture that can exist without art. They exist.

Granted, you're engaging in some massive alternate history speculation,

I'm doing no such thing.

Can you actually prove that all those cultures could have existed the way they did and be remembered without any art?

How they're remembered is pretty irrelevant to how they viewed their own culture tbh.

As far as I'm concerned, art cannot be separated from culture any more than things like eating customs or sexual norms. They are all part of a massive, interconnected whole.

Sure it can. After all, art comes only after a culture develops in response to that culture.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

I reckon 95% of people haven't even heard of Riefenstahl.

But I'd dare say most people in the western hemisphere have seen footage of her work for the nazis. And because nazi Germany was a totalitarian regime, to this day her work still has a near monopoly on the audiovisual record of life within nazi Germany.

They've also seen their death count, which does more to tell us about their culture than art.

[Liriena]

The attitudes and beliefs of all those culture existed independently of the art; ergo the culture could exist without the art.

Could it, though? This is a big, bold claim you keep repeating, but you're not presenting any proof.

I have presented aspects of culture that can exist without art. They exist.[/quote]
The existence of non-artistic elements of culture doesn't make culture meaningless any more than the existence of non-religious aspects of culture makes religion meaningless.

Granted, you're engaging in some massive alternate history speculation,

I'm doing no such thing.

Can you actually prove that all those cultures could have existed the way they did and be remembered without any art?

How they're remembered is pretty irrelevant to how they viewed their own culture tbh.

Not really. Again, historically, a lot of what we know about our own cultures we learned through art. For countless generations, art was the primary form of educating people on morals, customs, history and religion, because the vast majority of people were illiterate. And even now, when illiteracy has ceased to be a major problem for many societies, art continues to be treated as a way understand ourselves with value that trascends mere aesthetics. Again, people still quote Orwell in serious, non-fictional political discussions. We haven't forsaken his work simply because we could read non-fictional history and philosophy. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms still got used to learn political and military strategy from in the middle of the 20th century.

As far as I'm concerned, art cannot be separated from culture any more than things like eating customs or sexual norms. They are all part of a massive, interconnected whole.

Sure it can. After all, art comes only after a culture develops in response to that culture.

Art has existed since pre-historic times, dude. You treating it as nothing more than a quaint afterthought is pure ignorance laced with arrogance, not a serious intellectual position.

[Liriena]

But I'd dare say most people in the western hemisphere have seen footage of her work for the nazis. And because nazi Germany was a totalitarian regime, to this day her work still has a near monopoly on the audiovisual record of life within nazi Germany.

They've also seen their death count, which does more to tell us about their culture than art.

That doesn't make the art meaningless, though. It gives it another level of importance. It doesn't make it automatically disposable.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

They've also seen their death count, which does more to tell us about their culture than art.

That doesn't make the art meaningless, though. It gives it another level of importance. It doesn't make it automatically disposable.

Compared to the parts of culture that actually matter, it is.

[Liriena]

That doesn't make the art meaningless, though. It gives it another level of importance. It doesn't make it automatically disposable.

Compared to the parts of culture that actually matter, it is.

"Actually matter"

There you go again with the big, bold, stupid claims based on what seems to be nothing but make-believe logic.

We've been through this. Art actually matters. It has always actually mattered. I've repeatedly explained this and you continue to play dumb about it.

Not really. Again, historically, a lot of what we know about our own cultures we learned through art. For countless generations, art was the primary form of educating people on morals, customs, history and religion, because the vast majority of people were illiterate. And even now, when illiteracy has ceased to be a major problem for many societies, art continues to be treated as a way understand ourselves with value that trascends mere aesthetics. Again, people still quote Orwell in serious, non-fictional political discussions. We haven't forsaken his work simply because we could read non-fictional history and philosophy. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms still got used to learn political and military strategy from in the middle of the 20th century.

New thought experiment: name one art-less culture, off the top of your head. A culture that has no storytelling, no music, no painting, no drawing, no sculpting... nothing. If art is so culturally meaningless and disposable, there should be at least a few societies that made do without it, no?

[Bizmillah]

Imagine being so far up your ass that you think "Ah, people are making me feel bad for being rude and abusive--sometimes even homicidal--towards certain people for being different. It can't possibly be my fault, it must be society's fault for making me feel bad for the horrible shit I continue to say and do. I'm not the problem, not in the least."

You act as if being gay is the same as being goth or a hippie -- a "lifestyle", instead of something that is just a part of them like having blue eyes or a lot of back hair. What if I told you that "gay culture" has largely developed because they were forced to keep their sexuality a secret.

Gay people have always existed, they've just hidden themselves for fear of retaliation, OR they have done their thing off the beaten path (gay bars, bath houses, lodges, certain clubs, etc.).

[Mardla]

I continue to grow increasingly bored of people who are -this- concerned with what other consenting adults choose to do in their private time which is not hurting anyone. If a culture is harmed by the people within it being free and equal, than that culture deserves to be harmed.

For my part, I continue to grow increasingly bored of the notion of equality as something necessary or even desirable. Equality is nothing but a hatred of what is beautiful, grand, magnificent, ancient. Equality hates all disparity in these. No culture is possible or created by equality, period. There is also nothing meaningful or desirable about universal freedom. Freedom is authority, authority is freedom. Freedom starts with authority over oneself, moral restraint, dignity. People who engage in cocksucker-pride or slut-pride parades have no freedom, and it cannot be conferred on them by their betters.

[San Lumen]

I continue to grow increasingly bored of people who are -this- concerned with what other consenting adults choose to do in their private time which is not hurting anyone. If a culture is harmed by the people within it being free and equal, than that culture deserves to be harmed.

For my part, I continue to grow increasingly bored of the notion of equality as something necessary or even desirable. Equality is nothing but a hatred of what is beautiful, grand, magnificent, ancient. Equality hates all disparity in these. No culture is possible or created by equality, period. There is also nothing meaningful or desirable about universal freedom. Freedom is authority, authority is freedom. Freedom starts with authority over oneself, moral restraint, dignity. People who engage in penis-pride or slut-pride parades have no freedom, and it cannot be conferred on them by their betters.

You also never answered my question of why my college friend should have been denied a loving home from two men.

[Vassenor]

I continue to grow increasingly bored of people who are -this- concerned with what other consenting adults choose to do in their private time which is not hurting anyone. If a culture is harmed by the people within it being free and equal, than that culture deserves to be harmed.

For my part, I continue to grow increasingly bored of the notion of equality as something necessary or even desirable. Equality is nothing but a hatred of what is beautiful, grand, magnificent, ancient. Equality hates all disparity in these. No culture is possible or created by equality, period. There is also nothing meaningful or desirable about universal freedom. Freedom is authority, authority is freedom. Freedom starts with authority over oneself, moral restraint, dignity. People who engage in cocksucker-pride or slut-pride parades have no freedom, and it cannot be conferred on them by their betters.

Gonna need sources for those claims.

[Mardla]

For my part, I continue to grow increasingly bored of the notion of equality as something necessary or even desirable. Equality is nothing but a hatred of what is beautiful, grand, magnificent, ancient. Equality hates all disparity in these. No culture is possible or created by equality, period. There is also nothing meaningful or desirable about universal freedom. Freedom is authority, authority is freedom. Freedom starts with authority over oneself, moral restraint, dignity. People who engage in cocksucker-pride or slut-pride parades have no freedom, and it cannot be conferred on them by their betters.

Gonna need sources for those claims.

I can no more explain than to you than I could to a squirrel.

[Vassenor]

Gonna need sources for those claims.

I can no more explain than to you than I could to a squirrel.

So you're talking out of your rectum then. Got it.

[Datlofff]

For my part, I continue to grow increasingly bored of the notion of equality as something necessary or even desirable. Equality is nothing but a hatred of what is beautiful, grand, magnificent, ancient. Equality hates all disparity in these. No culture is possible or created by equality, period. There is also nothing meaningful or desirable about universal freedom. Freedom is authority, authority is freedom. Freedom starts with authority over oneself, moral restraint, dignity. People who engage in cocksucker-pride or slut-pride parades have no freedom, and it cannot be conferred on them by their betters.

Gonna need sources for those claims.

If all people were equal we wouldn't have jazz, or the blues. thats legit the first thing I could think of to validate his claims.

[Platypus Bureaucracy]

I continue to grow increasingly bored of people who are -this- concerned with what other consenting adults choose to do in their private time which is not hurting anyone. If a culture is harmed by the people within it being free and equal, than that culture deserves to be harmed.

For my part, I continue to grow increasingly bored of the notion of equality as something necessary or even desirable. Equality is nothing but a hatred of what is beautiful, grand, magnificent, ancient. Equality hates all disparity in these. No culture is possible or created by equality, period. There is also nothing meaningful or desirable about universal freedom. Freedom is authority, authority is freedom. Freedom starts with authority over oneself, moral restraint, dignity. People who engage in cocksucker-pride or slut-pride parades have no freedom, and it cannot be conferred on them by their betters.

Good God. The edge.

[Aboveland]

I continue to grow increasingly bored of people who are -this- concerned with what other consenting adults choose to do in their private time which is not hurting anyone. If a culture is harmed by the people within it being free and equal, than that culture deserves to be harmed.

For my part, I continue to grow increasingly bored of the notion of equality as something necessary or even desirable. Equality is nothing but a hatred of what is beautiful, grand, magnificent, ancient. Equality hates all disparity in these. No culture is possible or created by equality, period. There is also nothing meaningful or desirable about universal freedom. Freedom is authority, authority is freedom. Freedom starts with authority over oneself, moral restraint, dignity. People who engage in cocksucker-pride or slut-pride parades have no freedom, and it cannot be conferred on them by their betters.

You use oxymorons to make yourself look smart when in reality you're just a bigoted, self absorbed, egotistical shit stick.

I can't for a moment understand how you genuinely believe freedom or equality isn't something desirable or how you actually think that gay people are inferior to the rest of society. I hope someday you can clear the crud from your eyes to know better than to dismiss pride, a manifestation of the freedom of expression that LGBT people have and use to unite themselves with the people they can trust and live the same experiences, as an event for "cocksuckers".

If you really think that a world where nobody is equal, where a demographic or group of people is superior to another based off of unchangeable characteristics, where the idea of everyone being free to do as they choose within the same restrictions of the same laws that everybody else follows makes your skin crawl, then I pity you and your sad, lowly excuse that you have for your dignity as a human being

[The Holy Therns]

Gonna need sources for those claims.

I can no more explain than to you than I could to a squirrel.

Then you might need to work on your communication.