Are you taking part in any LGBTQ events for pride month?

fattymuatty

igCorcaigh wrote: »

I just don't want another kid to go through what I thought of my self back then.
And my parents were progressive. Gave all the talks about being whatever about your sexuality.

My first thought was how my teacher, who I liked a lot and I knew she liked me.
I just thought, I must let nobody know. What would Ms Daly think of me.


That **** should not happen.

Being a kid is hard enough.

I'm not sure it i happening anymore here? My kid is early teens and is bi, he is very open with this and not an eye has been batted. His best friend is a lesbian and again she has been open about this since 6th class and nobody seems to care. We live in small town west of Ireland so it's not like we live in some cosmopolitan place either.

My brother is 10 years younger than me(I'm mid 30s) and when he was in secondary school kids were openly gay and nobody cared, something that didn't happen when I was in secondary and this was really rural West of Ireland.

This is just my experience and perhaps if I was gay myself I would see it differently but as an outsider watching the younger ones talking about crushes and what not it doesn't seem like any of them care what the sex of the other ones crush is.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

why should we be tolerant of homophobia?

We shouldn't. We aren't.

I was responding to someone who dismissed someone due to their sexuality. I rephrased it back at him. It didn't sound nice. It made me sound intolerant although all I had done was hold up a mirror.

That's all m'dear.

sbsquarepants

fattymuatty wrote: »

This is just my experience and perhaps if I was gay myself I would see it differently but as an outsider watching the younger ones talking about crushes and what not it doesn't seem like any of them care what the sex of the other ones crush is.

This is pretty much what I see - nobody cares anymore.

There will always be slagging, bullying even, but 2 parades a day aren't going to stop that, it's just the human condition.

The whole acceptance thing is done and dusted, it's time to build a bridge and get over it!

Equality doesn't mean a constant reassuring of how fantastic you are and how much the world loves you, it means shut the fúck up and get on with things.

cgcsb

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Personally I think it's long over in Ireland,

Then again, not being gay, you haven't a notion what you're scuttering on about so. meh.

cgcsb

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

I don't understand why LGBT people accept being used as a moneymaking tool.

Corporations have a duty to do what makes their shareholders the most money, so they have calculated supporting LGBT makes them more money than not supporting LGBT.

I worked for a corp that put up their flag and talked about "inclusivity" while at the same time wouldn't allow permanent contractors access to the canteen or microwave facilities.

Probably the same reason that Diageo get a free ride on St Patrick's back, nobody actually cares.

cgcsb

cgcsb wrote: »

Then again, not being gay, you haven't a notion what you're scuttering on about so. meh.

I thnk you missed where he said "personally". You aren't him so you haven't a notion what you're scuttering on about.

You seem to think that there is this huge Gay Hive Mind. There isnt

cgcsb

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

So many attention seekers, just **** off nobody cares. Have your little party in the George and keep the streets clear instead of blocking traffic

Nah thanks, we'll excercise our right to freedom of assembly, but thanks for your opinion, it'll now be especially enjoyable knowing how annoyed it makes you. :pac:

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

You don't know what it's like to be straight and being wrongly accused of homophobia

Oh, diddums!!

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

I thnk you missed where he said "personally". You aren't him so you haven't a notion what you're scuttering on about.

You seem to think that there is this huge Gay Hive Mind. There isnt

I know that a straight person saying 'the struggle is over' with regard to acceptance of gay people in this country plainly hasn't a breeze what he's on about.

sbsquarepants

cgcsb wrote: »

Then again, not being gay, you haven't a notion what you're scuttering on about so. meh.

That's just closed minded, dismissive, idiotic bolloxology.

I'm not a dog, does that mean I can't possibly have a notion about animal welfare?

Fiftyfilthy

cgcsb wrote: »

Nah thanks, we'll excercise our right to freedom of assembly, but thanks for your opinion, it'll now be especially enjoyable knowing how annoyed it makes you. :pac:

You do that and I’ll be content knowing I’m not some attention seeking drama queen

Half of you lot are only that way for the attention

kunst nugget

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

You do that and I’ll be content knowing I’m not some attention seeking drama queen

Half of you lot are only that way for the attention

Seriously, wtf, lad...

Fiftyfilthy

kunst nugget wrote: »

Seriously, wtf, lad...

In reference to the pride march

cgcsb

cgcsb wrote:

I know that a straight person saying 'the struggle is over' with regard to acceptance of gay people in this country plainly hasn't a breeze what he's on about.

I think most people are tolerant of gay people who want to go about their lives. I'd wager that some "homophobia" that certain people experience is nothing to do with the fact that they are gay, but because they are annoying arseholes who happen to be gay.

For example, if hypothetically, I very much disliked you because of the way you portray yourself especially when talking about gay issues, I would not be homophobic, I'd just think you were a knob. If you were straight and spouted the same, I'd feel the same.

Hypothetically of course.

cgcsb

sbsquarepants wrote: »

That's just closed minded, dismissive, idiotic bolloxology.

I'm not a dog, does that mean I can't possibly have a notion about animal welfare?

You forget that this dog can speak for himself and can tell you exactly what he thinks and doesn't need you to declare his struggles as 'over'.

castletownman

My one takeaway from this thread is that from now on I won't harbour an opinion about something unless I am within the circle.

Manchester United aren't in great shakes at the moment. Too bad I can't voice my opinion as I haven't lined out in Old Trafford.

The damn waiting list in the HSE is scandalous. May keep schtum though as I'm not a medical professional nor health minister.

Christ sake.

cgcsb

Deleted User wrote: »

I think most people are tolerant of gay people who want to go about their lives. I'd wager that some "homophobia" that certain people experience is nothing to do with the fact that they are gay, but because they are annoying arseholes who happen to be gay.

For example, if hypothetically, I very much disliked you because of the way you portray yourself especially when talking about gay issues, I would not be homophobic, I'd just think you were a knob. If you were straight and spouted the same, I'd feel the same.

Hypothetically of course.

Honestly sweetheart, it's not all about you. I don't care if you self-exhonerate yourself from homophobia, every homophobe in the world can do that.

cgcsb

castletownman wrote: »

My one takeaway from this thread is that from now on I won't harbour an opinion about something unless I am within the circle.

Manchester United aren't in great shakes at the moment. Too bad I can't voice my opinion as I haven't lined out in Old Trafford.

The damn waiting list in the HSE is scandalous. May keep schtum though as I'm not a medical professional nor health minister.

Christ sake.

I think making accurate comparisons would be a better resolution for you.

sbsquarepants

cgcsb wrote: »

I know that a straight person saying 'the struggle is over' with regard to acceptance of gay people in this country plainly hasn't a breeze what he's on about.

You live in a country with an openly gay leader, gay cabinet ministers, countless openly gay celebrities, where we recently overwhelmingly voted for marriage equality - the first country in the world to do such a thing. We had a fúcking drag queen doing telly bingo on state run TV ffs.

If you think there is a problem with the acceptance of gay people in this country, it is you who plainly hasn't a breeze what you're on about!

nozzferrahhtoo

castletownman wrote: »

My one takeaway from this thread is that from now on I won't harbour an opinion about something unless I am within the circle.

Some people think that is the case but thankfully only very few. Some months ago for example I had a user go..... pretty ape at me...... for merely suggesting I could empathise with the plight of homeless people.

Apparently unless you have been homeless yourself you can not in anyway know what it is like. I think the most insidious and problematic aspect of "Identity Politics" in general is this notion that if you are not X you can not know what it is like to be X, comment on being X, or have any empathy whatsoever for people who suffer related to X.

I think we need aspects of Identity Politics in our discourse. I do not write it off with a sweeping brush like some. But THAT particular aspect we need to kill off and kill off quickly.

cgcsb

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You live in a country with an openly gay leader, gay cabinet ministers, countless openly gay celebrities, where we recently overwhelmingly voted for marriage equality - the first country in the world to do such a thing. We had a fúcking drag queen doing telly bingo on state run TV ffs.

And despite all that, YOU still do not know what life is like from a gay persons perspective. Yet you still tell us in technicolour detail that all our worries are over. We'll decide that for ourselves, thanks.

cgcsb

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Some people think that is the case but thankfully only very few. Some months ago for example I had a user go..... pretty ape at me...... for merely suggesting I could empathise with the plight of homeless people.

Apparently unless you have been homeless yourself you can not in anyway know what it is like. I think the most insidious and problematic aspect of "Identity Politics" in general is this notion that if you are not X you can not know what it is like to be X, comment on being X, or have any empathy whatsoever for people who suffer related to X.

I think we need aspects of Identity Politics in our discourse. I do not write it off with a sweeping brush like some. But THAT particular aspect we need to kill off and kill off quickly.

In this case though, the phobes aren't trying to empathise with gay people, they are trying to silence gay people.

dudara

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You live in a country with an openly gay leader, gay cabinet ministers, countless openly gay celebrities, where we recently overwhelmingly voted for marriage equality - the first country in the world to do such a thing. We had a fúcking drag queen doing telly bingo on state run TV ffs.

If you think there is a problem with the acceptance of gay people in this country, it is you who plainly hasn't a breeze what you're on about!

And yet, people are still harassed, attacked for exactly that. We are a more tolerant country than before, but there’s still a way to go. And that is the reason why I support the Pride network in my workplace and if I can (currently on crutches), I will try to make it to the parade on our float.

nozzferrahhtoo

cgcsb wrote: »

In this case though, the phobes aren't trying to empathise with gay people, they are trying to silence gay people.

I will leave you to take that personal falling out up with them, I am making more of a general point. I am certainly glad that the massive amount of work I did in the recent referendums where we won wonderfully did not require me to be gay, a pregnant woman, or married. Nor does the empathy I have for homeless people at all require I be homeless. Nor does the charity work I do at the moment for Syrian Refugees require I be Syrian, or a refugee. Though on that one I am, at least, an economic migrant from Ireland to here in Germany.

I think the moment anyone, on nearly any side of nearly any issue, suggests you can not understand.... empathise..... make a comment..... or be part of the discussion because you are NOT part of the group..... then that someone has lost the debate and lost bad and should be politely asked to leave to allow the grown ups keep talking.

sbsquarepants

cgcsb wrote: »

And despite all that, YOU still do not know what life is like from a gay persons perspective. Yet you still tell us in technicolour detail that all our worries are over. We'll decide that for ourselves, thanks.

Or a womans, or an immigrants, or an alcoholics, or a fat person, or an electricians, or...... you know what this is going to be a long list, let's just agree it's a pretty useless metric and move on from there.

Do you think us breeders live worry free lives or something?

You seriously need to do something about that chip on your shoulder pal, it's doing you no favours!

sbsquarepants

dudara wrote: »

And yet, people are still harassed, attacked for exactly that. We are a more tolerant country than before, but there’s still a way to go. And that is the reason why I support the Pride network in my workplace and if I can (currently on crutches), I will try to make it to the parade on our float.

How many parades do you think it will take to rid the country of assholes?

Some people (gay, straight, black, white, whatever) are just dickheads - they will cause trouble just for the sake of causing trouble.

I would say actual homophobes are very few and far between, the rest are just common or garden ****!

jimgoose

cgcsb wrote: »

Honestly sweetheart...

This kind of Dick Emery-ism is at best archaic, and at worst makes people uncomfortable. It is, at any rate, neither appropriate nor necessary. Hun-Buns.

Ten of Swords

Anyone planning to attend the newly announced winter pride which starts on November 27th?

Ye can go link hunting yourselves but now you have a whole other event to, ahem, discuss

SirGerryAdams

dudara wrote: »

And yet, people are still harassed, attacked for exactly that. We are a more tolerant country than before, but there’s still a way to go. And that is the reason why I support the Pride network in my workplace and if I can (currently on crutches), I will try to make it to the parade on our float.

People are attacked for all kinds of reasons. They don't need parades though seemingly?

Should all foreigners be fearful in Dublin because one got attacked?

sbsquarepants

Ten of Swords wrote: »

Anyone planning to attend the newly announced winter pride which starts on November 27th?

Ye can go link hunting yourselves but now you have a whole other event to, ahem, discuss

I would.....but unfortunately I'm not a snowman so I'm not allowed an opinion:D

cgcsb

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I will leave you to take that personal falling out up with them, I am making more of a general point. I am certainly glad that the massive amount of work I did in the recent referendums where we won wonderfully did not require me to be gay, a pregnant woman, or married. Nor does the empathy I have for homeless people at all require I be homeless. Nor does the charity work I do at the moment for Syrian Refugees require I be Syrian, or a refugee. Though on that one I am, at least, an economic migrant from Ireland to here in Germany.

I think the moment anyone, on nearly any side of nearly any issue, suggests you can not understand.... empathise..... make a comment..... or be part of the discussion because you are NOT part of the group..... then that someone has lost the debate and lost bad and should be politely asked to leave to allow the grown ups keep talking.

Apples and oranges, you're comparing doing something nice for X group of people to phobes telling the gays to get back in their box because their struggle is 'over' apparently.

cgcsb

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Do you think us breeders live worry free lives or something?

I don't use that word. And no, you having troubles in your life, does put you in a position where you can say definitively that the struggles of gay people against homophobia are over. You don't know our struggles, so you can't dismiss them.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You seriously need to do something about that chip on your shoulder pal, it's doing you no favours!

No chip here.

nozzferrahhtoo

cgcsb wrote: »

Apples and oranges, you're comparing doing something nice for X group of people to phobes telling the gays to get back in their box because their struggle is 'over' apparently.

Not a comparison or inference I recall making anywhere, no. I think you invented that one on my behalf for yourself. In fact the latter half of your sentence is not only something I did not compare anything to..... but have not even once mentioned in any way at all. I would certainly not be in the group thinking the progress we have made on that issue is in any way "over". I am very much in the "Work still to be done" camp there.

sbsquarepants

cgcsb wrote: »

No chip here.

It's a whole Borza ffs!

cgcsb

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Not a comparison or inference I recall making anywhere, no. I think you invented that one on my behalf for yourself. In fact the latter half of your sentence is not only something I did not compare anything to..... but have not even once mentioned in any way at all.

So then why mention it, if it has nothing to do with the discussion? :rolleyes:

cgcsb

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's a whole Borza ffs!

If you say so

nozzferrahhtoo

cgcsb wrote: »

So then why mention it, if it has nothing to do with the discussion? :rolleyes:

Ehhhh I didn't mention it, that was my point. YOU did. And then suggested I made a comparison to the thing only you out of the two of us mentioned. Which is, at best, odd.

ohnonotgmail

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I will leave you to take that personal falling out up with them, I am making more of a general point. I am certainly glad that the massive amount of work I did in the recent referendums where we won wonderfully did not require me to be gay, a pregnant woman, or married. Nor does the empathy I have for homeless people at all require I be homeless. Nor does the charity work I do at the moment for Syrian Refugees require I be Syrian, or a refugee. Though on that one I am, at least, an economic migrant from Ireland to here in Germany.

I think the moment anyone, on nearly any side of nearly any issue, suggests you can not understand.... empathise..... make a comment..... or be part of the discussion because you are NOT part of the group..... then that someone has lost the debate and lost bad and should be politely asked to leave to allow the grown ups keep talking.

Ignoring the condescending conclusion to your post the issue we have is a straight person telling us that our troubles are over and that there is no need for Pride or any similar. can you not see the issue with that?

Wibbs

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It's a whole Borza ffs!

I am so effin stealing that.

nozzferrahhtoo

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Ignoring the condescending conclusion to your post

Hard to ignore something that is not even there in the first place. There is nothing condescending about it. I think for useful and informative discourse to occur on any issue that is a minimum standard we should be working with.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the issue we have is a straight person telling us that our troubles are over and that there is no need for Pride or any similar.

That is AN issue you have here, and not one I had been commenting on at all. I am certainly in the camp of agreeing with those who think such struggles are NOT over. That was not at all the focus of my commentary however.

The sole focus on my commentary was more general and was focused on the practice of suggesting someone no in a given group is not qualified to speak about it. Which is, of all aspects of Identity Politics, the worst and most insidious to me.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

can you not see the issue with that?

See above. After all was it not only this week that gay people were likened to "infected zombies" in front of a congregation of people?

ohnonotgmail

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Hard to ignore something that is not even there in the first place. There is nothing condescending about it. I think for useful and informative discourse to occur on any issue that is a minimum standard we should be working with.
.

then that someone has lost the debate and lost bad and should be politely asked to leave to allow the grown ups keep talking.

Nope, definitely not condescending at all.

nozzferrahhtoo

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Nope, definitely not condescending at all.

Nope, not in the slightest. Glad we now agree.

I think when we have important discourse on important topics in any fora of import, like our halls of power for example, we need to ensure people reach a minimum standard in that discussion.

And I see nothing condescending about suggesting that if people are taking the approach that you can not discuss some group, or empathise with them, unless you yourself are of that group..... then that speaker has not shown the minimum standard of maturity to be in the discussion.

Alas I see it often. Across a wide range of topics. Most often in discussions around the police in the US in relation to people of colour for example. But that is only the most common of a range of examples I see it in. It is quite prevalent in gender issues too.

cgcsb

cgcsb wrote: »

And despite all that, YOU still do not know what life is like from a gay persons perspective. Yet you still tell us in technicolour detail that all our worries are over. We'll decide that for ourselves, thanks.

And YOU can only speak for yourself. You don't know what life is like from another gay persons perspective. "We"?? You aren't spokesman, sorry, spokesperson, for all things gay. You might have an issue with your sexuality and feel punished, but thankfully, most don't.

Sort your own issues out.

ohnonotgmail

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Nope, not in the slightest. Glad we now agree.

I think when we have important discourse on important topics in any fora of import, like our halls of power for example, we need to ensure people reach a minimum standard in that discussion.

And I see nothing condescending about suggesting that if people are taking the approach that you can not discuss some group, or empathise with them, unless you yourself are of that group..... then that speaker has not shown the minimum standard of maturity to be in the discussion.

Alas I see it often. Across a wide range of topics. Most often in discussions around the police in the US in relation to people of colour for example. But that is only the most common of a range of examples I see it in. It is quite prevalent in gender issues too.

the only person who mentioned empathise was you. You are arguing against something that was never said. So much for a minimum standard.

nozzferrahhtoo

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the only person who mentioned empathise was you. You are arguing against something that was never said. So much for a minimum standard.

So we are to go to the level of mere linguistic pedantry in responding to me now are we?

As I said I made a general point about things that WERE said and I further generalised it by mentioning other things like empathy which are very much related. If the locus of your disagreement has now moved away from what I said, to single words I used while saying it, then you might wanna be sure the pedals do not come off when used in reverse.

My initial response was to the user who said "My one takeaway from this thread is that from now on I won't harbour an opinion about something unless I am within the circle." and the ability to empathise is a large aspect of doing exactly that.

No issues of failing to meet standards linguistically here therefore. On my side at least.

ohnonotgmail

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

So we are to go to the level of mere linguistic pedantry in responding to me now are we?

As I said I made a general point about things that WERE said and I further generalised it by mentioning other things like empathy which are very much related. If the locus of your disagreement has now moved away from what I said, to single words I used while saying it, then you might wanna be sure the pedals do not come off when used in reverse.

My initial response was to the user who said "My one takeaway from this thread is that from now on I won't harbour an opinion about something unless I am within the circle." and the ability to empathise is a large aspect of doing exactly that.

No issues of failing to meet standards linguistically here therefore. On my side at least.

You're not really one to talk about linguistic pedantry. You mentioned empathise first and then claimed you were not allowed to empathise with gay. This is patently false and nobody has suggested you can't. No linguistic pedantry required.

nozzferrahhtoo

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You're not really one to talk about linguistic pedantry.

In that I do not use it as a get out card of desperation, sure. But I can empathise with why you might.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You mentioned empathise first and then claimed you were not allowed to empathise with gay.

I never made any such claim. Anywhere. You just made that up and shoved it in my mouth.

ohnonotgmail

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

In that I do not use it as a get out card of desperation, sure. But I can empathise with why you might.



I never made any such claim. Anywhere. You just made that up and shoved it in my mouth.

if you're going to just blanket deny saying it i'll leave it there.

nozzferrahhtoo

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if you're going to just blanket deny saying it i'll leave it there.

Or the more honest approach might be to QUOTE me saying it, or admit you can't when you fail to.

I however, in case I said something by error, or typed something wrong, just read over ALL The posts I just made today on the thread to check. It ain't there. Sorry for ya.

This is it

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if you're going to just blanket deny saying it i'll leave it there.

If you both could that'd be great