ReindeerRoger
Raven
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
Posts: 119
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 1:29 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Man, I'm suddenly seeing how I'm missing the point entirely and people were only talking about finding things annoying anyways.
Well, so long as people assess whether they're rationally or irrationally annoyed by something, and if it's irrational learn to get past getting annoyed with it or at least not mean anything by it, then it's probably alright. I mean, so long as finding people annoying isn't resulting in people being treated badly or ostracized etc.
Judging people isn't harmless if people feel threatened by it or anything is meant by it, but privately thinking anything about whoever is part of living alongside others. People should also tread carefully in this domain to assure that they aren't just being another douchebag reinforcing oppressive attitudes. It's really preferable if people can be disliked for their character as absolutely separated from irrational prejudices and insecurities.
And this is all within the domain of healthy ways to get along with others. Thinking negatively of people is unhealthy, and should be expressed with tact and moderation. Being bigoted and oppressive is just off the charts, like absolutely unacceptable.
But anyway, with this as a basic code of behaviour, attempt to get along with Heitor here, the very fashionable Brasilian Emigre with a killer fashion sense and sharp witticisms delivered in a lispy voice with ample hand gestures. He likes to talk about stuff he does with his boyfriend Artemis occasionally, and bring up haunting injustices he remembers from the highly religious and repressive small town he grew up in.
Is getting along with this guy really so hard? What great homosexual injustices that are impossible to tolerate is anyone speaking of?
Last edited by ReindeerRoger on Tue Mar 06, 2012 2:09 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sweetleaf
Metalhead
Joined: Jan 07, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 14828
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ReindeerRoger wrote: | Man, I'm suddenly seeing how I'm missing the point entirely and people were only talking about finding things annoying anyways.
Well, so long as people assess whether they're rationally or irrationally annoyed by something, and if it's irrational learn to get past getting annoyed with it or at least not mean anything by it, then it's probably alright. I mean, so long as finding people annoying isn't resulting in people being treated badly or ostracized etc.
Judging people isn't harmless if people feel threatened by it or anything is meant by it, but privately thinking anything about whoever is part of living alongside others. People should also tread carefully in this domain to assure that they aren't just being another douchebag reinforcing oppressive attitudes. It's really preferable if people can be disliked for their character as absolutely separated from irrational prejudices and insecurities.
Well, this is all within the domain of healthy ways to get along with others. Thinking negatively of people is unhealthy, and should be expressed with tact and moderation. Being bigoted and oppressive is just off the charts, like absolutely unacceptable. |
I find friends and family members I can typically tolerate for long periods of time annoying at times, but I certainly don't hate people if I find something they do a bit irritating. I just had a lot of people give me crap for that sort of thing, because of the whole AS related special intrests thing..........so I tend to try not to bore people with too much of the same topic regardless of what it is. I also have an unhealthy problem with internalizing things.
_________________
It's like alice in wonderland except, my names not alice and this is the real world not a dream. |
|
| Back to top |
|
CoMF
Deinonychus
Joined: Feb 08, 2012
Posts: 328
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If, by "define their personality" you mean "wearing their sexuality on their sleeve," I find it somewhat irritating at times but view it entirely as a matter of personal preference. It does not, however, diminish my respect for them.
Speaking only for myself, my sexuality is not the entire sum of who I am as an individual, though it certainly plays a role in it. I also do not wear mine on my sleeve.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bun
Bunnymen
Joined: Jan 09, 2012
Posts: 3250
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2012 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I just had a thought - I think that sexuality defines people for a lot of reasons, and they express it in different ways... But when people say 'letting their sexuality define them', they're referencing the stereotype, which is something that should be examined (ie - person thinking that either doesn't know LGBT well, or has a misconception). |
|
| Back to top |
|
TheHouseholdCat
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 01, 2012
Posts: 667
Location: Berlin, Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
After many many years I have come to the conclusion that I do not believe in what "sexuality" and "sexual orientation" describe and I have noticed that it makes life much easier for me. I do not feel obliged to do anything anymore. I do not have to worry how I appear to others because I cannot fit myself into the narrow disctintions of sexuality.
I think it's generally difficult to stick to a particular stereotype because it means you have to put on an act.
_________________
EXPANDED CIRCLE OF FIFTHS
"It's how they see things. It's a way of bringing class to an environment, and I say that pejoratively because, obviously, good music is good music however it's created, however it's motivated." - Thomas Newman |
|
| Back to top |
|
Magdalena
Sea Gull
Joined: Feb 07, 2012
Posts: 205
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheHouseholdCat wrote: | After many many years I have come to the conclusion that I do not believe in what "sexuality" and "sexual orientation" describe and I have noticed that it makes life much easier for me. I do not feel obliged to do anything anymore. I do not have to worry how I appear to others because I cannot fit myself into the narrow disctintions of sexuality.
I think it's generally difficult to stick to a particular stereotype because it means you have to put on an act. |
That's just the thing. I notice that a lot of gay guys around where I live act quite "stereotypically" gay, and dress and present themselves in a way that is very similar to the way that gay guys are portrayed in popular culture. I find it irritating. It is completely possible to be gay without representing yourself by borrowing the "gay guy image" that pop culture assigns to us. Just be yourself.
_________________
Male-bodied pansexual and panromantic.
Your Aspie score: 130 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 90 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
EQ Score: 37/100 ("low empathy") |
|
| Back to top |
|
ReindeerRoger
Raven
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
Posts: 119
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Magdalena wrote: | | Just be yourself. |
Re: ‘Just be Yourself.’
1. I can be anyone I want to be. Why restrict myself to ‘being myself’?
2. What is ‘myself’? Wouldn’t I just be creating that anyways?
3. How can I be anything but myself?
You finding something annoying is your own problem, that you should come to terms with. People seem to all want gay people to make them an easily digestible version of gayness they don't have to work too hard to tolerate, likely because gayness has some negative associations people are still uncomfortable with and havn't gotten over.
I guess that an openly flamboyant personality is mutable, like normally gay people have their own reasons for either embracing it or not avoiding it. But it isn't irrational. There's no good reasons why they shouldn't, and therefore no-one has to spend much time justifying why they like the persona.
The pros for playing up the personality is a readily available social niche that comes with opportunities to date, be social, have friends, and a template for self-depreciating humour, a community, and political causes, as well as confidence, and a voice. Basically having gay associations next to your name makes people aware that you are unapologetic and will make a space for yourself, it allows you to demand and assure respect from those who are willing to hang around you.
The only cons are stigma, harassment, negative associations, discrimination etc. Those aren't really our problem, and they'd probably follow us around whether we were excessively flamboyant or not.
There are pros for being indifferent/averting the personality, but really what it comes down to is a personal choice. It's no-one else's place to tell us what to do then suggest it's because they want us to be some preferred version of 'ourself'. It's one of those scenarios where compassion is indiscernible from judgmentalism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Magdalena
Sea Gull
Joined: Feb 07, 2012
Posts: 205
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ReindeerRoger wrote: | | Magdalena wrote: | | Just be yourself. |
Re: ‘Just be Yourself.’
1. I can be anyone I want to be. Why restrict myself to ‘being myself’?
2. What is ‘myself’? Wouldn’t I just be creating that anyways?
3. How can I be anything but myself?
You finding something annoying is your own problem, that you should come to terms with. People seem to all want gay people to make them an easily digestible version of gayness they don't have to work too hard to tolerate, likely because gayness has some negative associations people are still uncomfortable with and havn't gotten over.
I guess that an openly flamboyant personality is mutable, like normally gay people have their own reasons for either embracing it or not avoiding it. But it isn't irrational. There's no good reasons why they shouldn't, and therefore no-one has to spend much time justifying why they like the persona.
The pros for playing up the personality is a readily available social niche that comes with opportunities to date, be social, have friends, and a template for self-depreciating humour, a community, and political causes, as well as confidence, and a voice. Basically having gay associations next to your name makes people aware that you are unapologetic and will make a space for yourself, it allows you to demand and assure respect from those who are willing to hang around you.
The only cons are stigma, harassment, negative associations, discrimination etc. Those aren't really our problem, and they'd probably follow us around whether we were excessively flamboyant or not.
There are pros for being indifferent/averting the personality, but really what it comes down to is a personal choice. It's no-one else's place to tell us what to do then suggest it's because they want us to be some preferred version of 'ourself'. It's one of those scenarios where compassion is indiscernible from judgmentalism. |
My criticism was directed at those who behaved in a given way (and not just when it comes to gays) because they felt as though they *had* to. Not because they genuinely wanted to. If someone wants to behave in a stereotypically gay way because they genuinely *want* to, then I totally welcome it! I am fully tolerant and accepting of such people, and I embrace them on a regular basis because they inspire me! I actually feel *cheerful* and encouraged when I encounter such people!
I understand that I did not articulate that idea in the post of mine to which you refer. My mistake. But I made the comment because I had noticed a very strong sense among many gay guys I've met (and again, many people other than gay people) who acted in ways and followed certain trends, etc. because they felt like they had to, as if they weren't acceptable among gay people (or "cool enough" or whatever) unless they acted and dressed in a certain way. The "flamboyant" dress and behavior in these people I met was not authentic, and I can tell by the stiffness they exhibit. In other people I've met who were flamboyant, the behavior seemed authentic, and I am not irritated at such people.
I am not irritated at people acting the way they want to (for example, flamboyantly gay), but rather, at people doing things because they feel like they *have* to do them when they don't! And I think that many people would be in strong agreement! How many times do you hear people express irritation at "following the crowd?" That's where my irritation is directed- at people following the crowd out of fear- NOT at unconventional behaviors and notions that, say, right-wing-minded people would find uncomfortable.
Again, my irritation is directed at the lack of authenticity in behaviors and actions. Not the genuine embrace of, to use the example mentioned previously, flamboyant homosexuality. That's what "be yourself" means. Doing things because you want to, not because you feel like you have to.
_________________
Male-bodied pansexual and panromantic.
Your Aspie score: 130 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 90 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
EQ Score: 37/100 ("low empathy")
Last edited by Magdalena on Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:14 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Adam917
Raven
Joined: Feb 01, 2009
Age: 27
Posts: 100
Location: North America
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ReindeerRoger wrote: | | Quote: | | Do I care about the details of everyone elses' personal lives, politics, mental health diagnoses, etc? No, no I do not. I love it when people are able to have an identity seperate from these things, and that is why I return the favor by limiting the amount of information that I share about myself. |
Who are you apart from your personal life, politics, or mental state? Do you talk about anything at all?
My guess is that you spend alot of time defining yourself against other people -- what you are not -- and see this 'non-identity', 'non-politics' etc. as outside of identity and politics. But the end effect is of enforcing a certain standard of 'normalcy' in these areas that affects others. Other people have to work harder to exist as themselves amongst others . . . queerness in a nutshell.
Also, for straight people, 'personal lives' means a limited number of highly sexual or un-professional passtimes. For gay people, their entire life in respect to relationships or things related to gayness they might do are classified as 'personal'. The personal life/private life distinction, though thought of as like, 'common sense', and 'harmless', is actually fairly repressive and inequal. So I don't give many shits for that either. |
I think this last paragraph hit it perfectly once again. LGBT people are often fighting for equal rights not just in the legal department but in everyday life, and IMHO they have every right to keep on trucking with the fight till they can discuss the same amount of things straight cisgender people often do already. I see it as a problem that a gay or lesbian person can't casually bring up their husband/wife/partner in everyday conversation to just anyone & have to be very careful & selective with who they mention to, unlike straight people who don't have to think of this at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AstroGeek
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Age: 19
Posts: 1477
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adam917 wrote: | | ReindeerRoger wrote: | | Quote: | | Do I care about the details of everyone elses' personal lives, politics, mental health diagnoses, etc? No, no I do not. I love it when people are able to have an identity seperate from these things, and that is why I return the favor by limiting the amount of information that I share about myself. |
Who are you apart from your personal life, politics, or mental state? Do you talk about anything at all?
My guess is that you spend alot of time defining yourself against other people -- what you are not -- and see this 'non-identity', 'non-politics' etc. as outside of identity and politics. But the end effect is of enforcing a certain standard of 'normalcy' in these areas that affects others. Other people have to work harder to exist as themselves amongst others . . . queerness in a nutshell.
Also, for straight people, 'personal lives' means a limited number of highly sexual or un-professional passtimes. For gay people, their entire life in respect to relationships or things related to gayness they might do are classified as 'personal'. The personal life/private life distinction, though thought of as like, 'common sense', and 'harmless', is actually fairly repressive and inequal. So I don't give many shits for that either. |
I think this last paragraph hit it perfectly once again. LGBT people are often fighting for equal rights not just in the legal department but in everyday life, and IMHO they have every right to keep on trucking with the fight till they can discuss the same amount of things straight cisgender people often do already. I see it as a problem that a gay or lesbian person can't casually bring up their husband/wife/partner in everyday conversation to just anyone & have to be very careful & selective with who they mention to, unlike straight people who don't have to think of this at all. |
I will not believe that gays and lesbians have equal rights until there area few same-sex couples at every high school prom. At that point we'll have made true progress. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Adam917
Raven
Joined: Feb 01, 2009
Age: 27
Posts: 100
Location: North America
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AstroGeek wrote: | | I will not believe that gays and lesbians have equal rights until there area few same-sex couples at every high school prom. At that point we'll have made true progress. |
I agree. I wonder if any other countries outside the USA are further ahead on this or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AstroGeek
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Age: 19
Posts: 1477
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adam917 wrote: | | AstroGeek wrote: | | I will not believe that gays and lesbians have equal rights until there are a few same-sex couples at every high school prom. At that point we'll have made true progress. |
I agree. I wonder if any other countries outside the USA are further ahead on this or not. |
Well, it doesn't take much to be ahead of the USA. I think that public acceptance of LGBT people is pretty good in Scandinavia, although I don't know exactly how good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Billybones
Snowy Owl
Joined: Jan 28, 2012
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adam917 wrote: | | I agree. I wonder if any other countries outside the USA are further ahead on this or not. |
In the U.S. we've had the misfortune in that the rise of the LGBT equality movement has coincided the rise of the evangelical/fundamentalist religious right, with its morbid focus on personal sexuality. The result is that it's been basically like trench warfare - after a mighty struggle a few steps forward, followed by a few steps back. Undoubtedly there has been much progress in the more liberal areas, but outside of that we don't have much to show for all the years of activism. To this day we still don't have the protection of anti-discrimination laws - basically I can be fired from my job, denied service at a restaurant, denied an apartment rental - for no other reason than my sexuality. Even those who live in the 8 states that have legalized same-sex marriage, there is no such recognition from the federal government, & the "Defense of Marriage Act" is still the law of the land.
As for countries that are further ahead than us, I can think of a few - Argentina, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, U.K., Spain, Portugal, Germany, South Africa. |
|
| Back to top |
|
TheHouseholdCat
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 01, 2012
Posts: 667
Location: Berlin, Germany
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Magdalena wrote: | | TheHouseholdCat wrote: | After many many years I have come to the conclusion that I do not believe in what "sexuality" and "sexual orientation" describe and I have noticed that it makes life much easier for me. I do not feel obliged to do anything anymore. I do not have to worry how I appear to others because I cannot fit myself into the narrow disctintions of sexuality.
I think it's generally difficult to stick to a particular stereotype because it means you have to put on an act. |
That's just the thing. I notice that a lot of gay guys around where I live act quite "stereotypically" gay, and dress and present themselves in a way that is very similar to the way that gay guys are portrayed in popular culture. I find it irritating. It is completely possible to be gay without representing yourself by borrowing the "gay guy image" that pop culture assigns to us. Just be yourself. |
I think the main problem is that many people feel the need to "belong". Otherwise they'd be comfortable just being themselves. I never wanted to be part of a specific group, which is why I never tried to fit in. Groups are exclusive, which is something I never liked.
| Magdalena wrote: |
My criticism was directed at those who behaved in a given way (and not just when it comes to gays) because they felt as though they *had* to. Not because they genuinely wanted to. If someone wants to behave in a stereotypically gay way because they genuinely *want* to, then I totally welcome it! I am fully tolerant and accepting of such people, and I embrace them on a regular basis because they inspire me! I actually feel *cheerful* and encouraged when I encounter such people!
I understand that I did not articulate that idea in the post of mine to which you refer. My mistake. But I made the comment because I had noticed a very strong sense among many gay guys I've met (and again, many people other than gay people) who acted in ways and followed certain trends, etc. because they felt like they had to, as if they weren't acceptable among gay people (or "cool enough" or whatever) unless they acted and dressed in a certain way. The "flamboyant" dress and behavior in these people I met was not authentic, and I can tell by the stiffness they exhibit. In other people I've met who were flamboyant, the behavior seemed authentic, and I am not irritated at such people.
I am not irritated at people acting the way they want to (for example, flamboyantly gay), but rather, at people doing things because they feel like they *have* to do them when they don't! And I think that many people would be in strong agreement! How many times do you hear people express irritation at "following the crowd?" That's where my irritation is directed- at people following the crowd out of fear- NOT at unconventional behaviors and notions that, say, right-wing-minded people would find uncomfortable.
Again, my irritation is directed at the lack of authenticity in behaviors and actions. Not the genuine embrace of, to use the example mentioned previously, flamboyant homosexuality. That's what "be yourself" means. Doing things because you want to, not because you feel like you have to. |
I didn't interpret your post as you being against "flamboyant behaviour" in general, but yeah, that many people may feel obliged to behave that way. It's certainly interesting to see it as an alternative to what men are expected to behave, but if it becomes a must, it's not good.
I often feel that if I want to behave in a certain way, I am not "allowed" to do so because it does not fit into most people's view of how I am supposed to behave. If you identify as heterosexual or homosexual, often it is expected of you to behave a certain way, so people know "where to put you". I don't think people should be put in boxes. It's just not what life is about for me... This strict distinction is one of the reasons why identities that neither belong to the heterosexual nor the homosexual spectrum do not get the attention they should.
_________________
EXPANDED CIRCLE OF FIFTHS
"It's how they see things. It's a way of bringing class to an environment, and I say that pejoratively because, obviously, good music is good music however it's created, however it's motivated." - Thomas Newman |
|
| Back to top |
|
CrazyCatLord
Phoenix
Joined: Oct 25, 2011
Posts: 2177
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adam917 wrote: | | AstroGeek wrote: | | I will not believe that gays and lesbians have equal rights until there area few same-sex couples at every high school prom. At that point we'll have made true progress. |
I agree. I wonder if any other countries outside the USA are further ahead on this or not. |
We don't have anything like a prom in Germany. I find this tradition a bit weird, to be honest. Schools should educate students, not pressure them into dating and slow dancing or try to reinforce traditional gender roles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
