This is the primary reason why 'thou shalt not critically discuss Jews/gays/minorities' anywhere on the internet. Some among them quickly make it into a personal war, stifling thought and shutting down discussion.
The Gay "Germ" Hypothesis
- Thread starter H-KQGE
- Start date
This is the primary reason why 'thou shalt not critically discuss Jews/gays/minorities' anywhere on the internet. Some among them quickly make it into a personal war, stifling thought and shutting down discussion.
Sexual related programs should run on a "high level", because though we have very large DNA, it is not big enough to encode such complex and abstract behavior patterns as sexual preferences. The same is true for many programmed reactions like aversions. These programs are likely to be stored in the information field, and our DNA only makes us tune into this information. Probably nobody can prove or disprove it now, it's just an intuition from the perspective of a software engineer.
So, "Gay Germ" can be anything that hijacks our "protected" antenna settings which are intended to be set in stone from the very first days of our biological lives. And chances are those "germs" can work in synergy with different final effects. Take an electric meter as a real life example. You can put a magnet on it to run slower or even in reverse, you can physically alter it in some way, or you can hack it (in case of smart meters) to behave the way you want. If I was a CEO of 4D STS "Gender Bender" department, I'd surely employ all the tricks available to maximize my KPI.
So, "Gay Germ" can be anything that hijacks our "protected" antenna settings which are intended to be set in stone from the very first days of our biological lives. And chances are those "germs" can work in synergy with different final effects. Take an electric meter as a real life example. You can put a magnet on it to run slower or even in reverse, you can physically alter it in some way, or you can hack it (in case of smart meters) to behave the way you want. If I was a CEO of 4D STS "Gender Bender" department, I'd surely employ all the tricks available to maximize my KPI.
PhoenixToEmber
Jedi Council Member
I wrote a lot of thoughts out on this subject, more than once - writing, deleting, writing, deleting - trying to figure out how to do so without identifying at all. That’s much “easier said than done” for the majority of people participating in this discussion, because it’s a lot more difficult to do than you really understand because you’ve simply never had the same experiences, a direct knowledge, of the subject you’re weighing in on. And that’s fine - I’m not saying that’s necessary for someone to participate in a discussion, and I would never tell them they can’t. Joe’s right, many gay men do have chips on our shoulders (for good reason, too) and it’s not easy for us to knock it off. But maybe, just maybe, people here are also justifying their own forms of mechanical behavior.
Human beings who begin to awaken and realize they don’t have to be subject to their carnal nature and biological programming choose to struggle to behave differently than what instincts dictate, right? Just because we’re inclined to have lots of sex does not mean that we necessarily should, because we have the possibility to be something other than just animalistic - to be fully human - and I can see how anal sex is more carnal than not (compared to heterosexual sex). Yet that same logic can be applied to the idea of a natural, biological aversion and repulsion to homosexuality, couldn’t it? Meaning just because most people might have such an aversion built-in, that does not mean they should necessarily follow or accept that aversion (even if there may be a logical reason for its existence) or try to justify it to themselves. It does appear some of you really just want to stop feeling bad about finding us disgusting, and you resent the current culture that promotes the idea that you shouldn’t feel that way, so you’re looking for explanations as to why you do, because you yourself don’t think you’re a homophobe even though you are repelled by us. But I would think combating that aversion in oneself is what’s actually more aligned with the Work for the simple fact that such an aversion, biological and natural as it may be, is still a mechanical thing in people and therefore also a program. If you can’t stop yourself from reacting with disgust at something gay (or sexual in general) that you see in the world, that’s mechanical, because you’re letting it affect you so much instead of being striving to be impartial. It doesn’t mean you have to like it, just that you don’t let it get to you.
It’s also hard to get past some of the patronizing tones on here, that it’s glaringly obvious the bulk of this talk is a bunch of people dictating the nature of sexual experiences they’ve never even had to a minority of people here who have had them (“it’s ONLY this, objectively - and NEVER that!”), based purely on your book knowledge. Then when one of us tries to give our perspective as actual gay men, we’re told it’s “too much information”. And maybe it was - yet as a gay member of the forum, for a long time now, I’ve felt rather confused sometimes about how much I can actally share in here about my life and how much I can really turn to you for help.
Cyre does make a valid point, though: How do you talk about a subject like this and not have to eventually get into details? And how much detail is too much detail when analyzing something like sexuality from a “scientific” point of view? And if you don’t like seeing it, or hearing about it, then where do gay members truly stand on a forum like this? Can we even “do the Work” as a couple or should we be celibate? Personally, I think it’s impossible to understand the Work and not address sexual practices. How much can we discuss our own experiences, our own lives and what we’ve been through or are going through, or seek help, perhaps, for “gay-related” things, when we’re made to feel we shouldn’t ever talk about it? If even little phrases like “butt sex” offend people too much when coming from an actual gay man sharing their point of view on a thread about homosexuality? Cyre gets chewed out, yet Joe somehow managed to conjure waaaaay more descriptive imagery (in my opinion as a writer) with simple comments like this when responding to other members, which could easily be seen as highly inappropriate: “If you really want to stretch it to its most extreme” Joe: “Pun intended?
” and not a single member here calls him out on that one but defends it as lightening the mood (when I saw Cyre's use of language to be the same: in his case, lightening the tension in a charged subject he identifies with). I respect Joe a lot, and found his comments here to be among the most insightful actually, but isn’t it rather unfair and hypocritical to shoot down someone else’s humor/language after having made such a comment? I don’t think it’s apples and oranges, either - the image such a joke is meant to provoke are obvious. It feels like a double standard to call out Cyre and not to address that “pun” Joe is referring to which involves “stretching” (quite a descriptive word, in my opinion).
As one of the most “prudish” homosexual men you’ll ever meet in your life (ask anyone who really knows me well; I never talk about my sex life, and have had very few sexual partners in my life; I only ever brought it onto the forum in the past because I thought I could get help here and learned my lesson) I personally didn’t find Cyre’s language to be a big deal - that he was bringing a little levity into a heavy topic for us. Again, for obvious reasons, I have a bias here: yet, I’ve also been his biggest critic regarding his nonchalant attitude toward sex over the past four years. So I agree that some people here perhaps should lighten up a bit, get off their high horses, and maybe think about whether or not they’re totally having external consideration (in the way you seem to think you are) for gay members of the forum. It's obvious why in the way some of these claims are being worded, and if you look at how Yozilla’s comment went largely unaddressed, despite its concerning tone. Laura’s not infallible. Joe’s not infallible. None of you are, actually, including myself.
Earlier someone mentioned encountering gay men who seemed to be disgusted by or had an aversion to descriptions of the female anatomy or of heterosex. I know a gay man like this, and there could be a multitude of reasons for it - that’s not how Cyre and I think of women or heterosexual people - we don’t “reject them” out of revulsion…. Look, I agree there are A LOT of toxic elements to LGBT culture (promiscuity isn’t the worst of it, as we all know) which is why I never identified with it and never participated in it, and why Cyre and I (more him than I) are actively pushing back, because we’re sick of being associated with certain elements of the so-called "culture" and of seeing those things becoming trendy. Many of those elements exist in straight society as well - and perhaps there’s a correlation of one exacerbating the other now (LGBT "values" making straight society looser - but what about the women’s liberation movement and other factors?).
We also see the danger of a blowback against us. We appreciate that perhaps, in that sense, you’re looking out for us. So now really hear me now when I say this: you need to recognize how theories like this “gay germ” and “natural aversion theory” could easily play into that blowback you’re warning may rise against us, and that such theories and how we go about discussing and investigating them can be a slippery slope. And that, perhaps, when we try and find ways to point that out, we’re being told that we’re just being emotional even for merely stating that fact, and for stating the fact that, objectively (you guys love that word in how you describe what you think our sexual practices must be like) most of you have no idea what intimacy between two men is like. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Yet speak with such authority on how “objectively brutal” all of it is to you based on some of the extremely loud and proud flaunters in the spotlight. Can you at least sit there and think about that for a second, regardless if it disgusts you? You literally don’t know what the experiences you’re trying to tell us about are like - right now you're just trying to find a scientific explanation for your feelings. Those of you that are straight should at least acknowledge that you’re a little in the dark here and do have a bias of your own from a hetrosexual perspective when discussing this kind of subject? Wouldn't a natural revulsion toward us qualify as such? Because that’s what I do when I discuss race with my black friends, or someone being raised a certain religion, or whatever thing that colors their story experientially that I have never truly experienced even if I’ve studied a lot of material on those subjects (not unless we consider past lives, theoretically). Not because I want to be PC, but out of respect. You let them speak and you listen. I think the chip on my shoulder was why I found a lot of comradery in aspects of African culture and music that spoke to me while growing up, and the frustration many of them feel.
Your reaction to the LGBT toxic elements might be a little too old fashioned considering what you’re trying to achieve here, but as someone raised on modest values through my grandmother, I actually do understand it. But there’s such a thing as pushing a little too far, and it might only make things worse in the political climate - I’m speaking from my own experiences of what many LGBT people are like. There’s a lot of trauma you’re dealing with, and the current trend is a mix of mainstream straight guilt combined with feelings of rebellion on the part of those who are LGBT for all the years of living in fear; I agree that this won’t lead anywhere good. But still, there’s nothing more frustrating than when a bunch of people who’ve never been through what you’ve been through gather together and tell you what it’s all about, what you should do about it, and then keep picking apart everything you say when you try to weigh in as someone who’s actually going through it. In that sense, it makes me understand what raped or battered women feel like when men try and tell them what they went through, how they should feel, etc., or when white people try to tell black people what they go through and what they’re experiences must be like “objectively”. It will only shut down dialogue, not facilitate it, which is ironically what you're accusing Cyre of doing. I know this forum is different than an everyday social setting or social media, and the way things are done around here is different for specific reasons - but I think if you don’t step back and think about how the way we respond to the minorities we’re talking about when they try to speak for themselves in the conversation is most certainly a factor that has created PC culture to begin with, you will only give more fuel to the fire.
Finally, if I’m being completely honest, some of you got what you seem to want: An environment where I don’t really feel comfortable sharing anything about this part of my life, my own journey and struggles with “gayness” - at least not on this forum anymore, which is why I deleted my original post (it was way more personal and perhaps too off-topic than the thread has already gotten) and wrote this one instead, to try and be more detached, make my points, say what's on my mind. Someone also mentioned being “gay” as being seen as “hip” in some places now, and people will go out of their way to please you when they find out that you are - that’s actually one of the reasons I still keep it close to the sleeve even after coming out. At school. At work. You don’t want people to treat you differently in a favoritism or pitying kind of way - that you earned what you worked for - just as much as you don’t want them to hate or fear you. I never, EVER bring it up in casual conversation unless someone asks me or I get to know them better over time. Yet here was once a place I felt comfortable talking about my experiences and I don't anymore.
I actually feel like my complete perspective as a gay man is somewhat unwelcome on the forum, even on a thread about homosexuality. I also don’t think that’s ALL in my head or identifying too much - I think the way some respond to this subject indicates that it's only accepted here to a point. And that’s fine, I guess.... It just means that maybe this isn’t really the place for a homosexual man struggling on an esoteric path to seek help or guidance about such things, in understanding sex and its role in the Work - my own set of lessons as a homosexual - without judgment or misunderstanding from people who just don’t… well... don’t really get it, but seem convinced they do... And I’ll tell you, I am struggling. I’m not there yet - I AM a machine - but I’m trying.
I deleted everything I initially wrote because I knew my emotions got ahead of me (yet it was therapeutic to have written it, regardless) - I didn't want to divert too much from what's already been mentioned in the thread. But I felt I had to at least say something before I retreat back to holding my tongue and just spectating, which is what I’m going to continue doing, so I wrote this long thing. I know I’m still identifying, sure - haven’t totally figured out how to separate my emotions from this subject yet for obvious reasons, sorry.
I hope that I at least provided a smidgen of some insight into another point of view to that may be different than others by expressing this honestly. Thanks for reading.
Human beings who begin to awaken and realize they don’t have to be subject to their carnal nature and biological programming choose to struggle to behave differently than what instincts dictate, right? Just because we’re inclined to have lots of sex does not mean that we necessarily should, because we have the possibility to be something other than just animalistic - to be fully human - and I can see how anal sex is more carnal than not (compared to heterosexual sex). Yet that same logic can be applied to the idea of a natural, biological aversion and repulsion to homosexuality, couldn’t it? Meaning just because most people might have such an aversion built-in, that does not mean they should necessarily follow or accept that aversion (even if there may be a logical reason for its existence) or try to justify it to themselves. It does appear some of you really just want to stop feeling bad about finding us disgusting, and you resent the current culture that promotes the idea that you shouldn’t feel that way, so you’re looking for explanations as to why you do, because you yourself don’t think you’re a homophobe even though you are repelled by us. But I would think combating that aversion in oneself is what’s actually more aligned with the Work for the simple fact that such an aversion, biological and natural as it may be, is still a mechanical thing in people and therefore also a program. If you can’t stop yourself from reacting with disgust at something gay (or sexual in general) that you see in the world, that’s mechanical, because you’re letting it affect you so much instead of being striving to be impartial. It doesn’t mean you have to like it, just that you don’t let it get to you.
It’s also hard to get past some of the patronizing tones on here, that it’s glaringly obvious the bulk of this talk is a bunch of people dictating the nature of sexual experiences they’ve never even had to a minority of people here who have had them (“it’s ONLY this, objectively - and NEVER that!”), based purely on your book knowledge. Then when one of us tries to give our perspective as actual gay men, we’re told it’s “too much information”. And maybe it was - yet as a gay member of the forum, for a long time now, I’ve felt rather confused sometimes about how much I can actally share in here about my life and how much I can really turn to you for help.
Cyre does make a valid point, though: How do you talk about a subject like this and not have to eventually get into details? And how much detail is too much detail when analyzing something like sexuality from a “scientific” point of view? And if you don’t like seeing it, or hearing about it, then where do gay members truly stand on a forum like this? Can we even “do the Work” as a couple or should we be celibate? Personally, I think it’s impossible to understand the Work and not address sexual practices. How much can we discuss our own experiences, our own lives and what we’ve been through or are going through, or seek help, perhaps, for “gay-related” things, when we’re made to feel we shouldn’t ever talk about it? If even little phrases like “butt sex” offend people too much when coming from an actual gay man sharing their point of view on a thread about homosexuality? Cyre gets chewed out, yet Joe somehow managed to conjure waaaaay more descriptive imagery (in my opinion as a writer) with simple comments like this when responding to other members, which could easily be seen as highly inappropriate: “If you really want to stretch it to its most extreme” Joe: “Pun intended?
As one of the most “prudish” homosexual men you’ll ever meet in your life (ask anyone who really knows me well; I never talk about my sex life, and have had very few sexual partners in my life; I only ever brought it onto the forum in the past because I thought I could get help here and learned my lesson) I personally didn’t find Cyre’s language to be a big deal - that he was bringing a little levity into a heavy topic for us. Again, for obvious reasons, I have a bias here: yet, I’ve also been his biggest critic regarding his nonchalant attitude toward sex over the past four years. So I agree that some people here perhaps should lighten up a bit, get off their high horses, and maybe think about whether or not they’re totally having external consideration (in the way you seem to think you are) for gay members of the forum. It's obvious why in the way some of these claims are being worded, and if you look at how Yozilla’s comment went largely unaddressed, despite its concerning tone. Laura’s not infallible. Joe’s not infallible. None of you are, actually, including myself.
Earlier someone mentioned encountering gay men who seemed to be disgusted by or had an aversion to descriptions of the female anatomy or of heterosex. I know a gay man like this, and there could be a multitude of reasons for it - that’s not how Cyre and I think of women or heterosexual people - we don’t “reject them” out of revulsion…. Look, I agree there are A LOT of toxic elements to LGBT culture (promiscuity isn’t the worst of it, as we all know) which is why I never identified with it and never participated in it, and why Cyre and I (more him than I) are actively pushing back, because we’re sick of being associated with certain elements of the so-called "culture" and of seeing those things becoming trendy. Many of those elements exist in straight society as well - and perhaps there’s a correlation of one exacerbating the other now (LGBT "values" making straight society looser - but what about the women’s liberation movement and other factors?).
We also see the danger of a blowback against us. We appreciate that perhaps, in that sense, you’re looking out for us. So now really hear me now when I say this: you need to recognize how theories like this “gay germ” and “natural aversion theory” could easily play into that blowback you’re warning may rise against us, and that such theories and how we go about discussing and investigating them can be a slippery slope. And that, perhaps, when we try and find ways to point that out, we’re being told that we’re just being emotional even for merely stating that fact, and for stating the fact that, objectively (you guys love that word in how you describe what you think our sexual practices must be like) most of you have no idea what intimacy between two men is like. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Yet speak with such authority on how “objectively brutal” all of it is to you based on some of the extremely loud and proud flaunters in the spotlight. Can you at least sit there and think about that for a second, regardless if it disgusts you? You literally don’t know what the experiences you’re trying to tell us about are like - right now you're just trying to find a scientific explanation for your feelings. Those of you that are straight should at least acknowledge that you’re a little in the dark here and do have a bias of your own from a hetrosexual perspective when discussing this kind of subject? Wouldn't a natural revulsion toward us qualify as such? Because that’s what I do when I discuss race with my black friends, or someone being raised a certain religion, or whatever thing that colors their story experientially that I have never truly experienced even if I’ve studied a lot of material on those subjects (not unless we consider past lives, theoretically). Not because I want to be PC, but out of respect. You let them speak and you listen. I think the chip on my shoulder was why I found a lot of comradery in aspects of African culture and music that spoke to me while growing up, and the frustration many of them feel.
Your reaction to the LGBT toxic elements might be a little too old fashioned considering what you’re trying to achieve here, but as someone raised on modest values through my grandmother, I actually do understand it. But there’s such a thing as pushing a little too far, and it might only make things worse in the political climate - I’m speaking from my own experiences of what many LGBT people are like. There’s a lot of trauma you’re dealing with, and the current trend is a mix of mainstream straight guilt combined with feelings of rebellion on the part of those who are LGBT for all the years of living in fear; I agree that this won’t lead anywhere good. But still, there’s nothing more frustrating than when a bunch of people who’ve never been through what you’ve been through gather together and tell you what it’s all about, what you should do about it, and then keep picking apart everything you say when you try to weigh in as someone who’s actually going through it. In that sense, it makes me understand what raped or battered women feel like when men try and tell them what they went through, how they should feel, etc., or when white people try to tell black people what they go through and what they’re experiences must be like “objectively”. It will only shut down dialogue, not facilitate it, which is ironically what you're accusing Cyre of doing. I know this forum is different than an everyday social setting or social media, and the way things are done around here is different for specific reasons - but I think if you don’t step back and think about how the way we respond to the minorities we’re talking about when they try to speak for themselves in the conversation is most certainly a factor that has created PC culture to begin with, you will only give more fuel to the fire.
Finally, if I’m being completely honest, some of you got what you seem to want: An environment where I don’t really feel comfortable sharing anything about this part of my life, my own journey and struggles with “gayness” - at least not on this forum anymore, which is why I deleted my original post (it was way more personal and perhaps too off-topic than the thread has already gotten) and wrote this one instead, to try and be more detached, make my points, say what's on my mind. Someone also mentioned being “gay” as being seen as “hip” in some places now, and people will go out of their way to please you when they find out that you are - that’s actually one of the reasons I still keep it close to the sleeve even after coming out. At school. At work. You don’t want people to treat you differently in a favoritism or pitying kind of way - that you earned what you worked for - just as much as you don’t want them to hate or fear you. I never, EVER bring it up in casual conversation unless someone asks me or I get to know them better over time. Yet here was once a place I felt comfortable talking about my experiences and I don't anymore.
I actually feel like my complete perspective as a gay man is somewhat unwelcome on the forum, even on a thread about homosexuality. I also don’t think that’s ALL in my head or identifying too much - I think the way some respond to this subject indicates that it's only accepted here to a point. And that’s fine, I guess.... It just means that maybe this isn’t really the place for a homosexual man struggling on an esoteric path to seek help or guidance about such things, in understanding sex and its role in the Work - my own set of lessons as a homosexual - without judgment or misunderstanding from people who just don’t… well... don’t really get it, but seem convinced they do... And I’ll tell you, I am struggling. I’m not there yet - I AM a machine - but I’m trying.
I deleted everything I initially wrote because I knew my emotions got ahead of me (yet it was therapeutic to have written it, regardless) - I didn't want to divert too much from what's already been mentioned in the thread. But I felt I had to at least say something before I retreat back to holding my tongue and just spectating, which is what I’m going to continue doing, so I wrote this long thing. I know I’m still identifying, sure - haven’t totally figured out how to separate my emotions from this subject yet for obvious reasons, sorry.
I hope that I at least provided a smidgen of some insight into another point of view to that may be different than others by expressing this honestly. Thanks for reading.
bianca etezete
Dagobah Resident
All the generalization, the condemnations and assumptions that I read there aside: THAT (I refer to the bolded part of your quote) is what I seriously call a try on shutting down a discussion, that wasn't originally about homosexuals as individuals but about a hypothesis that engages in the possibilities in outcome of germ infestation. The discussion wasn't about whether gays or lesbians are likeable, rejectable or whatever. Cyre himself MADE it that way in my opinion, and you seem to be triggered, too. Ask yourself why. And rest asured that at least me and most probably all others joining the discussion aswell is far from hating homosexuals or rejecting them.I wrote a lot of thoughts out on this subject, more than once - writing, deleting, writing, deleting - trying to figure out how to do so without identifying at all. That’s much “easier said than done” for the majority of people participating in this discussion, because it’s a lot more difficult to do than you really understand because you’ve simply never had the same experiences, a direct knowledge, of the subject you’re weighing in on. And that’s fine - I’m not saying that’s necessary for someone to participate in a discussion, and I would never tell them they can’t. Joe’s right, many gay men do have chips on our shoulders (for good reason, too) and it’s not easy for us to knock it off. But maybe, just maybe, people here are also justifying their own forms of mechanical behavior.
Human beings who begin to awaken and realize they don’t have to be subject to their carnal nature and biological programming choose to struggle to behave differently than what instincts dictate, right? Just because we’re inclined to have lots of sex does not mean that we necessarily should, because we have the possibility to be something other than just animalistic - to be fully human - and I can see how anal sex is more carnal than not (compared to heterosexual sex). Yet that same logic can be applied to the idea of a natural, biological aversion and repulsion to homosexuality, couldn’t it? Meaning just because most people might have such an aversion built-in, that does not mean they should necessarily follow or accept that aversion (even if there may be a logical reason for its existence) or try to justify it to themselves. It does appear some of you really just want to stop feeling bad about finding us disgusting, and you resent the current culture that promotes the idea that you shouldn’t feel that way, so you’re looking for explanations as to why you do, because you yourself don’t think you’re a homophobe even though you are repelled by us. But I would think combating that aversion in oneself is what’s actually more aligned with the Work for the simple fact that such an aversion, biological and natural as it may be, is still a mechanical thing in people and therefore also a program. If you can’t stop yourself from reacting with disgust at something gay (or sexual in general) that you see in the world, that’s mechanical, because you’re letting it affect you so much instead of being striving to be impartial. It doesn’t mean you have to like it, just that you don’t let it get to you.
It’s also hard to get past some of the patronizing tones on here, that it’s glaringly obvious the bulk of this talk is a bunch of people dictating the nature of sexual experiences they’ve never even had to a minority of people here who have had them (“it’s ONLY this, objectively - and NEVER that!”), based purely on your book knowledge. Then when one of us tries to give our perspective as actual gay men, we’re told it’s “too much information”. And maybe it was - yet as a gay member of the forum, for a long time now, I’ve felt rather confused sometimes about how much I can actally share in here about my life and how much I can really turn to you for help.
Cyre does make a valid point, though: How do you talk about a subject like this and not have to eventually get into details? And how much detail is too much detail when analyzing something like sexuality from a “scientific” point of view? And if you don’t like seeing it, or hearing about it, then where do gay members truly stand on a forum like this? Can we even “do the Work” as a couple or should we be celibate? Personally, I think it’s impossible to understand the Work and not address sexual practices. How much can we discuss our own experiences, our own lives and what we’ve been through or are going through, or seek help, perhaps, for “gay-related” things, when we’re made to feel we shouldn’t ever talk about it? If even little phrases like “butt sex” offend people too much when coming from an actual gay man sharing their point of view on a thread about homosexuality? Cyre gets chewed out, yet Joe somehow managed to conjure waaaaay more descriptive imagery (in my opinion as a writer) with simple comments like this when responding to other members, which could easily be seen as highly inappropriate: “If you really want to stretch it to its most extreme” Joe: “Pun intended?” and not a single member here calls him out on that one but defends it as lightening the mood (when I saw Cyre's use of language to be the same: in his case, lightening the tension in a charged subject he identifies with). I respect Joe a lot, and found his comments here to be among the most insightful actually, but isn’t it rather unfair and hypocritical to shoot down someone else’s humor/language after having made such a comment? I don’t think it’s apples and oranges, either - the image such a joke is meant to provoke are obvious. It feels like a double standard to call out Cyre and not to address that “pun” Joe is referring to which involves “stretching” (quite a descriptive word, in my opinion).
As one of the most “prudish” homosexual men you’ll ever meet in your life (ask anyone who really knows me well; I never talk about my sex life, and have had very few sexual partners in my life; I only ever brought it onto the forum in the past because I thought I could get help here and learned my lesson) I personally didn’t find Cyre’s language to be a big deal - that he was bringing a little levity into a heavy topic for us. Again, for obvious reasons, I have a bias here: yet, I’ve also been his biggest critic regarding his nonchalant attitude toward sex over the past four years. So I agree that some people here perhaps should lighten up a bit, get off their high horses, and maybe think about whether or not they’re totally having external consideration (in the way you seem to think you are) for gay members of the forum. It's obvious why in the way some of these claims are being worded, and if you look at how Yozilla’s comment went largely unaddressed, despite its concerning tone. Laura’s not infallible. Joe’s not infallible. None of you are, actually, including myself.
Earlier someone mentioned encountering gay men who seemed to be disgusted by or had an aversion to descriptions of the female anatomy or of heterosex. I know a gay man like this, and there could be a multitude of reasons for it - that’s not how Cyre and I think of women or heterosexual people - we don’t “reject them” out of revulsion…. Look, I agree there are A LOT of toxic elements to LGBT culture (promiscuity isn’t the worst of it, as we all know) which is why I never identified with it and never participated in it, and why Cyre and I (more him than I) are actively pushing back, because we’re sick of being associated with certain elements of the so-called "culture" and of seeing those things becoming trendy. Many of those elements exist in straight society as well - and perhaps there’s a correlation of one exacerbating the other now (LGBT "values" making straight society looser - but what about the women’s liberation movement and other factors?).
We also see the danger of a blowback against us. We appreciate that perhaps, in that sense, you’re looking out for us. So now really hear me now when I say this: you need to recognize how theories like this “gay germ” and “natural aversion theory” could easily play into that blowback you’re warning may rise against us, and that such theories and how we go about discussing and investigating them can be a slippery slope. And that, perhaps, when we try and find ways to point that out, we’re being told that we’re just being emotional even for merely stating that fact, and for stating the fact that, objectively (you guys love that word in how you describe what you think our sexual practices must be like) most of you have no idea what intimacy between two men is like. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Yet speak with such authority on how “objectively brutal” all of it is to you based on some of the extremely loud and proud flaunters in the spotlight. Can you at least sit there and think about that for a second, regardless if it disgusts you? You literally don’t know what the experiences you’re trying to tell us about are like - right now you're just trying to find a scientific explanation for your feelings. Those of you that are straight should at least acknowledge that you’re a little in the dark here and do have a bias of your own from a hetrosexual perspective when discussing this kind of subject? Wouldn't a natural revulsion toward us qualify as such? Because that’s what I do when I discuss race with my black friends, or someone being raised a certain religion, or whatever thing that colors their story experientially that I have never truly experienced even if I’ve studied a lot of material on those subjects (not unless we consider past lives, theoretically). Not because I want to be PC, but out of respect. You let them speak and you listen. I think the chip on my shoulder was why I found a lot of comradery in aspects of African culture and music that spoke to me while growing up, and the frustration many of them feel.
Your reaction to the LGBT toxic elements might be a little too old fashioned considering what you’re trying to achieve here, but as someone raised on modest values through my grandmother, I actually do understand it. But there’s such a thing as pushing a little too far, and it might only make things worse in the political climate - I’m speaking from my own experiences of what many LGBT people are like. There’s a lot of trauma you’re dealing with, and the current trend is a mix of mainstream straight guilt combined with feelings of rebellion on the part of those who are LGBT for all the years of living in fear; I agree that this won’t lead anywhere good. But still, there’s nothing more frustrating than when a bunch of people who’ve never been through what you’ve been through gather together and tell you what it’s all about, what you should do about it, and then keep picking apart everything you say when you try to weigh in as someone who’s actually going through it. In that sense, it makes me understand what raped or battered women feel like when men try and tell them what they went through, how they should feel, etc., or when white people try to tell black people what they go through and what they’re experiences must be like “objectively”. It will only shut down dialogue, not facilitate it, which is ironically what you're accusing Cyre of doing. I know this forum is different than an everyday social setting or social media, and the way things are done around here is different for specific reasons - but I think if you don’t step back and think about how the way we respond to the minorities we’re talking about when they try to speak for themselves in the conversation is most certainly a factor that has created PC culture to begin with, you will only give more fuel to the fire.
Finally, if I’m being completely honest, some of you got what you seem to want: An environment where I don’t really feel comfortable sharing anything about this part of my life, my own journey and struggles with “gayness” - at least not on this forum anymore, which is why I deleted my original post (it was way more personal and perhaps too off-topic than the thread has already gotten) and wrote this one instead, to try and be more detached, make my points, say what's on my mind. Someone also mentioned being “gay” as being seen as “hip” in some places now, and people will go out of their way to please you when they find out that you are - that’s actually one of the reasons I still keep it close to the sleeve even after coming out. At school. At work. You don’t want people to treat you differently in a favoritism or pitying kind of way - that you earned what you worked for - just as much as you don’t want them to hate or fear you. I never, EVER bring it up in casual conversation unless someone asks me or I get to know them better over time. Yet here was once a place I felt comfortable talking about my experiences and I don't anymore.
I actually feel like my complete perspective as a gay man is somewhat unwelcome on the forum, even on a thread about homosexuality. I also don’t think that’s ALL in my head or identifying too much - I think the way some respond to this subject indicates that it's only accepted here to a point. And that’s fine, I guess.... It just means that maybe this isn’t really the place for a homosexual man struggling on an esoteric path to seek help or guidance about such things, in understanding sex and its role in the Work - my own set of lessons as a homosexual - without judgment or misunderstanding from people who just don’t… well... don’t really get it, but seem convinced they do... And I’ll tell you, I am struggling. I’m not there yet - I AM a machine - but I’m trying.
I deleted everything I initially wrote because I knew my emotions got ahead of me (yet it was therapeutic to have written it, regardless) - I didn't want to divert too much from what's already been mentioned in the thread. But I felt I had to at least say something before I retreat back to holding my tongue and just spectating, which is what I’m going to continue doing, so I wrote this long thing. I know I’m still identifying, sure - haven’t totally figured out how to separate my emotions from this subject yet for obvious reasons, sorry.
I hope that I at least provided a smidgen of some insight into another point of view to that may be different than others by expressing this honestly. Thanks for reading.
Indeed you did. I can definitely relate to many things you wrote. Thank you for sharing.
Well to be fair discussion went that way long before Cyre joined in.
PhoenixToEmber
Jedi Council Member
That wasn't my intention at all, sorry. If that's what you want to read into my intentions, then sure.... I spoke my mind and tried to be honest.
People are asking you to act with external consideration. It's not about how you feel. It's how you make others feel.
Same external consideration. Now that gay people know that majority have a built in aversion, external consideration is even more necessary.
The lesson that any minority of any kind needs to remember, is that you are a minority, and so there's extra need to act with external consideration when it comes to your minority status.
The challenge is to figure out how to achieve your goals while simultaneously acting with external consideration.
bianca etezete
Dagobah Resident
...long before... hmmm, yes there was other distraction, no, that is to harsh, it was more like the discussion kinda losing focus on the topic, but in my eyes Cyre was able to distract it completely. Only my opinion.
My main point was the shutting off thing. With that argument you simply can cease talking about anything. Period.
PhoenixToEmber
Jedi Council Member
I agree. I suppose I'm questioning whether everyone else is really doing that toward us here, on the forum. Not out there, in the world. I don't expect it out there and don't hope for it or seek it out. I don't expect that just because I'm externally considerate to people who aren't gay they will be to me. I accept that I'm a minority.
Hi PhoenixToEmber,
Many sense this aversion. The majority of people in Russia do not want children to be exposed to gay propaganda - it's against traditional family values. Would you suggest a different approach?
Here's what Putin said:
I understand you've had it difficult, and I don't see why you can't network about those things here. For you, I think it's also important to try to understand why people react in certain ways, and to try to behave in such a way as to make situations comfortable for them and you. Even if that means refraining from holding hands in some areas (to name an example). It's easy to be a victim, but more difficult to take responsibility in any given situation, and to take action to make your life and the lives of others easier and more peaceful.
Regarding the gay parades (which IMO are over the top and unnecessary since the first one), I personally think they are not in favor of gay people. If they want to do something, why not go for a walk together, find some sponsors for the walk and collect money for the community (village/neighborhood/city), for those in need? Simple things like that. That could result in respect. Much better than a party on the streets, exposed to children's eyes - which in my opinion is no different than the drag queen who read a book to children. FWIW.
Many sense this aversion. The majority of people in Russia do not want children to be exposed to gay propaganda - it's against traditional family values. Would you suggest a different approach?
Here's what Putin said:
I understand you've had it difficult, and I don't see why you can't network about those things here. For you, I think it's also important to try to understand why people react in certain ways, and to try to behave in such a way as to make situations comfortable for them and you. Even if that means refraining from holding hands in some areas (to name an example). It's easy to be a victim, but more difficult to take responsibility in any given situation, and to take action to make your life and the lives of others easier and more peaceful.
Regarding the gay parades (which IMO are over the top and unnecessary since the first one), I personally think they are not in favor of gay people. If they want to do something, why not go for a walk together, find some sponsors for the walk and collect money for the community (village/neighborhood/city), for those in need? Simple things like that. That could result in respect. Much better than a party on the streets, exposed to children's eyes - which in my opinion is no different than the drag queen who read a book to children. FWIW.
bianca etezete
Dagobah Resident
It is not what I "want to read into [your] intentions", it is what you have written that caused my comment.
I appreciate that you didn't intend ... in what exactly? shutting down the discussion? making assumptions? or what do you mean by not your intention?
PhoenixToEmber
Jedi Council Member
Shutting down the discussion. I had no intention of attempting that at all.
If others on the forum are not acting with external consideration towards you, that is a problem and they will need to try to change.
These exchanges point to why Covey says to all of us, that first we need to seek to understand other people, before trying to get them to understand us.
Being externally considerate is something we advocate, but it takes 2nd place to the truth of any given situation. In case everyone has forgotten, there is really one a couple of points that have been made here, that I believe most people accepted, and yet despite that, some people have managed to get their knickers in a twist and become offended and offensive. The couple of points are:
1) Heterosexual people have fairly strong inbuilt aversion to the sight or image of homosexual sex, especially male. That's just 'what is'. Most heterosexuals are aware of that and keep it under wraps. What is asked, in return, is that homosexuals keep their tendency to 'shove it in people's faces' under wraps. Again, everyone seems to agree this is a good idea.
2) That homosexuality has been promoted in an unhealthy way that today seeks to 'shove it in people's faces' (because of past oppression etc.) and force heterosexuals to accept crass public manifestations of homosexuality as 'normal'. Those that have been socially-shamed or otherwise manipulated to accept this excluded, most people do not accept such displays as normal, and it seems reasonable to suggest that that kind of provocation may, in the not to distant future, provoke a 'moralistic backlash' that is not good for anyone, particularly homosexuals.
A third minor discussion about whether or not common or garden variety homosexuality is 'normal' didn't really get anywhere, mainly I think because there is no universal standard that can be applied to ALL human beings and to which all adhere. The closest we can get to an idea of 'normal' is what the majority of people adhere to. In terms of sexuality, that is heterosexuality, and therefore in this sense, homosexuality is not 'normal'.
Now there are plenty of things that are 'minority interests' that have nothing to do with sexuality, but they are, for the most part, in no way offensive to the majority. The problem with homosexuality is that, in it's crass 'in your face' form, it IS offensive to the majority. So we come back to the idea of keeping such things 'under wraps'. It's really not rocket science, although it does seem to be very difficult for many homosexuals to REALLY understand and accept the need to take that approach, probably because many if not most members of the homosexual community have, in recent decades, been encouraged to do exactly the opposite, i.e. 'shove it people's faces'.
A minority 'interest' or activity could, for example, be an interest in dressing up as a werewolf (or something of that nature) and running around at night. Most people with such an interest would realize that they should not do that publicly, or if they didn't, they would quickly come to that understanding as a result of public feedback (which could be painful). There are loads of other examples of minority interests that we could think of (and that exist today) that would fall somewhere along the spectrum of more or less offensive to the majority. The more offensive, the more adherents should keep it under wraps. And has already been said a few times in this thread, it would be unwise for homosexuals, especially members of this forum, to believe that simply because there is a lot of support for 'gay pride' these days, that they are free to be as loud and proud and crass as they like.
As has also been said, let's all stop identifying so much with our goddamn sexuality. Aren't we meant to be working towards getting a handle on that very programmed aspect of our natures? Why would anyone with that understanding argue for their limitations in that way?
So anyway, what aspects, if any, of the two points above does anyone disagree with, particularly the gay members of our forum?
Last edited:
