Gay Games in Limerick

KDII

gara wrote: »

If you have a point to make, please do so but without the needless passive aggression

I don't have a point I want to make, I have a girlfriend I would like to marry. Cryptic comments such as yours are unnecessary and irritating.

My stance on LGBT events is clear if you bother to read the thread. You don't really care about that though do you?

Implying any gay person who wants marriage equality "only cares about their own rights" or whatever you are suggesting is ridiculous and misinformed.

fasttalkerchat

mango salsa wrote: »

Second paragraph not at all. Gay games are an occasion for lgbt people and friends and allies to participate in sport that's all. I have no idea what makes you think this undermines lgbt rights.

I've missed half the argument but I do see a point here. It would be like wanting to create a government for women arround the time they got the right to vote.
Openly gay men can compete fairly freely in all sports and having a separate Olympics damages this because it creates an us and them scenario when, in fact, sexuality and sport have no correlation and it is just as ludicrous to have a gay Olympics as it is to have homophobia in the traditional Olympics.

OutOfStep

It would be great if Limerick could get it. I competed in the football tournament in this a few years ago and it was such a positive, inclusive experience (and yes there was straight participants!)

OP it would be great if there didn't have to be such an exclusive event but until the day when vile hatred towards gay people is eradicated there will continue to be a need for gay people to gather and identify together. Since coming out I've realised that a lot of the hatred and homophobia is just insecurity and peer pressure anyway.

Annasopra

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I've missed half the argument but I do see a point here. It would be like wanting to create a government for women arround the time they got the right to vote.
Openly gay men can compete fairly freely in all sports and having a separate Olympics damages this because it creates an us and them scenario when, in fact, sexuality and sport have no correlation and it is just as ludicrous to have a gay Olympics as it is to have homophobia in the traditional Olympics.

Maybe read the thread in full.

El Weirdo

mango salsa wrote: »

Maybe read the thread in full.

Actually, reading the whole thread isn't even necessary. As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, the FAQ on the website answers pretty much every question that has been asked in this thread.

gara

KDII wrote: »

I don't have a point I want to make, I have a girlfriend I would like to marry. Cryptic comments such as yours are unnecessary and irritating.

My stance on LGBT events is clear if you bother to read the thread. You don't really care about that though do you?

Implying any gay person who wants marriage equality "only cares about their own rights" or whatever you are suggesting is ridiculous and misinformed.

Seriously, are you on something? Firstly, what on earth makes you think my post was directed at you? Secondly, where on earth did I mention anything about marriage?! My point is about 'Gay Games' -you know, in tandem with the thread title? And my problem is this: Don't bang on about wanting to be in everyone else's club if you're not going to let them in yours.

Honestly, there's far too much irrational defensiveness in your post to even try to reason with.

efb

gara wrote: »

Seriously, are you on something? Firstly, what on earth makes you think my post was directed at you? Secondly, where on earth did I mention anything about marriage?! My point is about 'Gay Games' -you know, in tandem with the thread title? And my problem is this: Don't bang on about wanting to be in everyone else's club if you're not going to let them in yours.

Honestly, there's far too much irrational defensiveness in your post to even try to reason with.

who's excluding anyone?

gara

efb wrote: »

who's excluding anyone?

Nobody apparently but does that mean we can't discuss the implications if they were?

efb

gara wrote: »

Nobody apparently but does that mean we can't discuss the implications if they were?

any use that as a stick to beat them with????

IvySlayer

efb wrote: »

any use that as a stick to beat them with????

omg I can so pervert that sentence :pac:

I generally object anything based on race, gender, colour, orientation but this is a gay organisation hosting an event whereby ANYONE can enter.

KDII

gara wrote: »

Secondly, where on earth did I mention anything about marriage?! My point is about 'Gay Games' -you know, in tandem with the thread title? And my problem is this: Don't bang on about wanting to be in everyone else's club if you're not going to let them in yours.

Apologies, I jumped to that conclusion myself. You mentioned shouting from the rooftops about rights and that's what I assumed you were talking about. It was in keeping with the most recent part of the thread I had read.

I amn't on anything and how was your post not directed at anyone that had already entered into this discussion?

I may come across as tetchy but for you to insinuate this kind of event (a harmless, inclusive, benign day out) is the opposite of what the entire gay movement has been about is ridiculous.


When it comes down to it, some gay people are different to some heterosexual people. We are seen differently in the eyes of the state, perhaps in the eyes of the people we come out to and often in how they view themselves as a result of the conditioning received from society our entire lives.

Recognizing these differences isn't the opposite of equality, it is a huge leap in the right direction.

No one is being excluded, everyone is welcome.

fasttalkerchat

mango salsa wrote: »

Maybe read the thread in full.

I'd prefer not to wade through 200 posts from people who read less on the subject than I did myself, thanks. Anyway, I have no problem with the games since everyone is welcome, but the name The Gay Olympics does the gay equality movement no favours.

efb

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I'd prefer not to wade through 200 posts from people who read less on the subject than I did myself, thanks. Anyway, I have no problem with the games since everyone is welcome, but the name The Gay Olympics does the gay equality movement no favours.

Fine! The LGBTQS Games it is!!!

fasttalkerchat

efb wrote: »

Fine! The LGBTQS Games it is!!!

Eh, I think that has been done.

gara

efb wrote: »

any use that as a stick to beat them with????

Nobody's using a stick to beat anybody and to perfectly honest I am seriously sick of this sensationalist crap being used the minute anybody dares to disagree with anything associated with LGBT.

I have lots of gay friends and family all of whom I love dearly but it doesn't give them a monopoly on being right nor does disagreeing with anything they say mean they're suffering some sort of injustice, so let's clarify that right now.

My point is that preaching inclusion and practicing exclusivity is not something anyone should do and I could just imagine the furore if a 'Straight Games' was marketed, regardless of who was welcome to enter.

jill_valentine

gara wrote: »

My point is that preaching inclusion and practicing exclusivity is not something anyone should do and I could just imagine the furore if a 'Straight Games' was marketed, regardless of who was welcome to enter.

Only 1 in 10 people are gay. And the fraction of openly gay athletes is much smaller than that. So the Olympic Games are, effectively, straight games, just as a regular pub is, effectively, a "straight" pub. They don't need to be marketed that way, because that's how things shake out purely on the numbers.

It baffles me that people can't wrap their heads around this very simple concept. Think of it like ducking into an Irish pub when you're abroad - everybody's welcome, it's just tuned to a specific frequency, to bring together a particular flavour of people looking for a particular flavour of crowd and entertainment. Nobody's excluded by the existence of an Irish pub, but there is a distinct difference between one of those and a British or Spanish themed one.

drunkmonkey

Where are you getting 1 in 10 out of?

gara

jill_valentine wrote: »

It baffles me that people can't wrap their heads around this very simple concept. Think of it like ducking into an Irish pub when you're abroad - everybody's welcome, it's just tuned to a specific frequency, to bring together a particular flavour of people looking for a particular flavour of crowd and entertainment. Nobody's excluded by the existence of an Irish pub, but there is a distinct difference between one of those and a British or Spanish themed one.

I understand your simple concept perfectly thank you. What I don't understand is why some gay people don't afford straight people the same tolerance of difference they expect in return. I'm all for equality but it needs to be from all angles

Cienciano

gara wrote: »

Nobody's using a stick to beat anybody and to perfectly honest I am seriously sick of this sensationalist crap being used the minute anybody dares to disagree with anything associated with LGBT.

I have lots of gay friends and family all of whom I love dearly but it doesn't give them a monopoly on being right nor does disagreeing with anything they say mean they're suffering some sort of injustice, so let's clarify that right now.

My point is that preaching inclusion and practicing exclusivity is not something anyone should do and I could just imagine the furore if a 'Straight Games' was marketed, regardless of who was welcome to enter.

So, you acknowledge that anyone can join, but you have a problem with the name "Gay Games" :rolleyes:? You're trying soooo hard to be "offended". Love the way anyone has anything negative to say about gay people then mention that they have gay friends, as if it's a get out of jail free card for talking shite.
Presumably you have a problem with gay pubs, gay pride, black pride? The point has been made better by starbelgrade:

starbelgrade wrote: »

Like the many Women's Rights Movements around the world, or the African-American Civil Rights Movement or the Chicano Civil Rights Movement?

Yeah, I hate that too - the way people who have something in common & who suffer social or political discrimination, get together and form groups with their own agendas in order to try and gain the same rights as everyone else.

It's a feckin disgrace, so it is.

efb

gara wrote: »

I understand your simple concept perfectly thank you. What I don't understand is why some gay people don't afford straight people the same tolerance of difference they expect in return. I'm all for equality but it needs to be from all angles

tolerance for what exactly? other than intolerance I assume?

who are these "some gay people" btw, not your friends I assume?

Madam_X

El Weirdo wrote: »

Actually, reading the whole thread isn't even necessary. As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, the FAQ on the website answers pretty much every question that has been asked in this thread.

Quiet you with your "facts"! You're ruining a minority of people's opportunities to post that genius nugget: "There's no straight games or straight pride!" :mad:

Cienciano

Madam_X wrote: »

Quiet you with your "facts"! You're ruining a minority of people's opportunities to post that genius nugget: "There's no straight games or straight pride!" :mad:

That bit from the FAQs should be edited into the thread title.

gara

Madam_X wrote: »

Quiet you with your "facts"! You're ruining a minority of people's opportunities to post that genius nugget: "There's no straight games or straight pride!" :mad:

You know someone's not worth listening to when they make it their business to sarcastically belittle other people's points without offering anything substantial themselves.

Nice try in attempting to reduce a complex argument to your simple little soundbite though.

Good night all

fasttalkerchat

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Where are you getting 1 in 10 out of?

Should be 2-6% depending on what you class as gay. Anyway, not really relevant here...

OutOfStep

gara wrote: »

What I don't understand is why some gay people don't afford straight people the same tolerance of difference they expect in return.

Who is not tolerating your difference? I've never seen straight-bashings in town, straights taunted in school playgrounds, straights afraid to divulge their sexuality for fear of losing their job, friends, family etc.... In fact I have never once in my entire life heard anybody say anything disparaging about someone being sexually attracted to a member of the opposite sex. In contrast being gay you are exposed to anti-gay sentiment fairly often and from a variety of sources and quite often from those you love too. This corrodes an individual's self-esteem and prompts them to find organisations and events where they feel safe to be themselves, hence the need for gay games etc...

OutOfStep

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Should be 2-6% depending on what you class as gay. Anyway, not really relevant here...

I think it is impossible to put a figure on it as a large proportion of gay people are too afraid to ever come out and therefore live a lie by pretending to be straight for fear of rejection from their friends and families, thus ruining their own and their partner's lives.

Cienciano

gara wrote: »

You know someone's not worth listening to when they make it their business to sarcastically belittle other people's points without offering anything substantial themselves.

Nice try in attempting to reduce a complex argument to your simple little soundbite though.

Good night all

There's nothing complex about it.

drunkmonkey

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Should be 2-6% depending on what you class as gay. Anyway, not really relevant here...

Jill put the amount of Irish Gays at close to half a million, now your saying there's possibly somewhere between 200,000 to 600,000 depending on what I class gay as.

What are the different levels of gay, this I can't wait to hear.

jill_valentine

The percentages quoted varies between 2% and 15% depending on what study you look at, but the figures I've seen and heard most commonly are around 7 or 8%. There's a lot of variation because for a start participants are required to self identify and second of all, it depends on what the study defines as "gay" to start with.

It doesn't matter anyway, it's not hugely relevant to my point other than "There aren't many gay people, so to hang out with other gay people they have to put "gay" in the name of things".

MaroonAndGreen

gay games ewwww

MaroonAndGreen

jk didnt know there was such a thing :P

drunkmonkey

If your claiming up to 15% of the population is gay it's pretty relevant as it's going to be a pretty big event.

1ZRed

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Jill put the amount of Irish Gays at close to half a million, now your saying there's possibly somewhere between 200,000 to 600,000 depending on what I class gay as.

What are the different levels of gay, this I can't wait to hear.

Being gay, bisexual, bicurious or having some degree of attraction to the same sex. It's a big and fluid spectrum.

It applies to the straight side as well, with some men having varying degrees of attraction to other men but still identifying as straight. I think it's very rare for any person to be completely and exclusively gay or straight.
Everyone is curious for the most part.

OutOfStep

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If your claiming up to 15% of the population is gay it's pretty relevant as it's going to be a pretty big event.

I don't think anybody claimed that in fairness. You seem to have a fairly large problem with others sexuality, why not just focus on your own and let others get on with their own lives.

MaroonAndGreen

1ZRed wrote: »

Being gay, bisexual, bicurious or having some degree of attraction to the same sex. It's a big and fluid spectrum.

It applies to the straight side as well, with some men having varying degrees of attraction to other men but still identifying as straight. I think it's very rare for any person to be completely and exclusively gay or straight.
Everyone is curious for the most part.

ehhh, there are lots of people completely and exclusively straight I'll have you know...

jill_valentine

I think the 8% figure - usually rounded out to around 1 in 10 - is roughly accurate. Certainly not more than 10%. Bisexuals, I have no idea because that's a whole world of complicated. But I don't mean to bog this thread down in a semantic argument like that because those numbers are going to be disputed for decades to come.

Regardless, it's not going to be a huge event. You've got gay people, then you've got the percentage that know or admit they're gay, and then you've got the ones that know and admit they're gay and are competition level athletes, and then the ones that know and admit they're gay and are competition level athletes who are willing and able to travel to Limerick. I don't think there are going to be traffic issues, like.

OutOfStep

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

gay games ewwww

Aren't school holidays over yet?

Madam_X

gara wrote: »

You know someone's not worth listening to when they make it their business to sarcastically belittle other people's points without offering anything substantial themselves.

Nice try in attempting to reduce a complex argument to your simple little soundbite though.

Good night all

The numerous counterpoints have already been made by others ad nauseum. No point in me repeating them - plus, it doesn't seem likely you'd take them on board. Jill Valentine and OutOfStep have explained the reasons for this event beautifully.

Good night.

MaroonAndGreen

OutOfStep wrote: »

Aren't school holidays over yet?

oh very smart from you

just because I made a joke about gay games doesnt mean I still go to school :eek:

OutOfStep

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

oh very smart from you

just because I made a joke about gay games doesnt mean I still go to school :eek:

No maybe you're not 16 just an extremely immature and insecure adult

MaroonAndGreen

OutOfStep wrote: »

No maybe you're not 16 just an extremely immature and insecure adult

maybe you cant take a joke?

just because gays are a smallish group doesnt mean they are immune from a joke!

OutOfStep

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

maybe you cant take a joke?

just because gays are a smallish group doesnt mean they are immune from a joke!

Oh it's a joke now Maybe you should mind your own business on what other people do in their private lives and get on with your own life? Just a thought....

drunkmonkey

OutOfStep wrote: »

No maybe you're not 16 just an extremely immature and insecure adult

You've fairly got the hang of boards in your first few posts. Massaging the numbers again by the looks of it. Not really a great way to start by having a pop at other members.

MaroonAndGreen

OutOfStep wrote: »

Oh it's a joke now Maybe you should mind your own business on what other people do in their private lives and get on with your own life? Just a thought....

Since when wasnt it a joke? My next post 30 secnds later actually said it was joke. Maybe you should look a little closer before having a go at people.

And who said anything about anyone's private life?

You are the one who is acting like a 16 year old, starting an argument for fcuk all reason.

1ZRed

MaroonAndGreen wrote: »

ehhh, there are lots of people completely and exclusively straight I'll have you know...

Ah, yeah I know that but I'm saying by going by the Kinsey scale, there are degrees of sexuality on either side gay or straight.

desertcircus

gara wrote: »

I understand your simple concept perfectly thank you. What I don't understand is why some gay people don't afford straight people the same tolerance of difference they expect in return. I'm all for equality but it needs to be from all angles

What does this even mean? I'd assume you mean that the denial of the right to marry and to start a family to gay people in this country is balanced out by the fact that there's a sporting event for the LGBT community at which straight athletes are entirely welcome, but that'd just be a jawdroppingly stupid argument to make, so you must have meant something else.

On another note: anyone who says they've no problems with gay people as long as they don't rub it in people's faces definitely has a problem with gay people. I behave in an incredibly blatantly straight way - I flirt with women I find attractive, I hold my girlfriend's hand, I do all sorts of stereotypical straight-man things. I play drums in a rock band, I drink beer and whisky, I play rugby. Literally never in my life has a person asked me why I'm rubbing my straightness in their faces, despite the fact that I resemble the most crass stereotype of a straight male you could think of. So why is it different for an out gay man or woman? It's different because people still have a voice in their brain muttering "yuck" when they see two gay people kissing, and they haven't realised that voice should be ignored until it disappears. Instead they rationalise its existence by reference to the idea of gay people being grand as long as they have the decency to bloody well be quiet about it.

FlowerBunny123

I know I will get slated for saying this but I really hate the way gays try and force their unethical ways down everyones throats.

You would think that they wouldn't have so much confidence.

MaroonAndGreen

Nazi123 wrote: »

I know I will get slated for saying this but I really hate the way gays try and force their unethical ways down everyones throats.

You would think that they wouldn't have so much confidence.

Yes, you will be very lucky to avoid a slating :P

Deserved or not is another story!

desertcircus

Nazi123 wrote: »

I know I will get slated for saying this but I really hate the way gays try and force their unethical ways down everyones throats.

You would think that they wouldn't have so much confidence.

Unethical...right, I suspect you don't actually know what that word means.

FlowerBunny123

desertcircus wrote: »

Unethical...right, I suspect you don't actually know what that word means.

Against my ethics?
I am not sure.