Discussions on Homophobia and Heterosexism

Here is a mapping of the conversations students had on the discussion board regarding homophobia and heterosexism.

     hate crimes - Gloria 14:48:36 3/06/99 (0)
         Re: hate crimes - cristina 14:26:37 3/19/99 (0)
     Matthew Shepard - Eric 18:40:39 3/06/99 (1)
          Re: Matthew Shepard - 11:55:42 3/07/99 (0)

Thursday's Lecture (3/4/99) - Colleen 23:52:50 3/07/99 (1)
Re: Thursday's Lecture (3/4/99) - Maria 19:54:43 3/12/99 (0)

    My Mother hasn't always been a saint - Elizabeth 20:01:04 3/11/99 (3)
          Re: My Mother hasn't always been a saint - Gloria 19:23:22 3/16/99 (0)
          Re: My Mother hasn't always been a saint - Emily 16:22:32 3/13/99 (1)
           Re: Re: My Mother hasn't always been a saint - Sara 16:11:22 3/15/99 (0)

    Is there any hope? - Emily Wu 17:47:26 3/10/99 (3)
          Re: Is there any hope? - Maria 15:02:25 3/16/99 (0)
          Re: Is there any hope? - Joshua 21:47:13 3/12/99 (0)
          Re: Is there any hope? - kazan 09:07:30 3/12/99 (0)

Homosexuality and the def. of a man - Elizabeth 12:01:09 3/13/99 (1)
Re: Homosexuality and the def. of a man - anon 19:22:06 3/17/99 (0)

    Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? - Vanessa 21:40:32 3/16/99 (5)
          Re: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? - Elizabeth 20:13:22 3/17/99 (0)
          Re: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? - M.J.G. 12:55:57 3/17/99 (0)
          i hope so - m.c. 03:03:52 3/17/99 (0)
          Re: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? - Monique. 01:01:05 3/17/99 (0)
          Re: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? - San 21:59:46 3/16/99 (0)

     I magine living in a Homosexist world - M.J.G. 13:07:42 3/17/99 (3)
          Re: I magine living in a Homosexist world - m.c. 19:11:22 3/18/99 (0)
          Re: I magine living in a Homosexist world - Ralph 12:25:45 3/18/99 (0)
          Re: Imagine living in a Homosexist world - Yuya 22:19:13 3/17/99 (0)

can sexuality ever be individual choice - Angel 18:16:28 3/18/99 (0)

Posted by Gloria on March 06, 1999 at 14:48:36:

I visited the Los Angeles Police Department and I found out that a task force has been assigned to decreasing and fighting hate crimes based on perceived race, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, disability or gender. I was informed that hate crimes are increasing and that the chance that the incidents will be reported has increased. When I was working in the LAPD during last summer I was surprised to see so many hate crimes committed. The bulk of which were based on sexual orientation. One of the Detectives informed me about undercover operations he was involved in several years ago that were designed to decrease hate crimes against homosexuals in public parks. I was really surprised about the high rate that this occurs and the violence involved. He stated that he had solved a hate crime that was really atrocious act in which a homosexual male was castrated. The suspect received 68 years for that crime and other robberies and violent crimes against homosexuals. I find it pretty sad that there is such intolerant, uneducated perceptions against homosexuals in general.

Posted by cristina on March 19, 1999 at 14:26:37:

In Reply to: hate crimes posted by Gloria on March 06, 1999 at 14:48:36:

I'm really glad that the police deparment has a hate crimes policy that includes sexuality. Currently at UCLA we have no legitimate hate
crimes policy. The generic UCLA non discrimination policy, taken directly from UCOP's policy, reads:

"It is the policy of the University not to engage in discrimination against or harassment of any person employed by or seeking
employment with the University of California on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, physical or mental disability,
medical condition (cancer-related), ancestry, marital status, age, sexual orientation, citizenship, or status as a Vietnam-era veteran or
special disabled veteran. This policy is intended to be consistent with the provisions of applicable State and Federal law and University
Policies."

While this may sound fine and dandy to most people it is important to note that this applies only to persons who are employed or
seeking employment. This policy also only addresses discrimination, not hate crimes specifically. Student have approached the
administration about a UCLA specific hate crimes policy and the fact of the matter is that we do not have one. UCLA is the only UC
school that does not currently have a hate crimes policy. It is required by the federal government that all institutions of higher
education report incidents of hate crimes on their campuses. I wonder how UCLA does that
without such a policy. I encourage everyone to call Chancellor Carnesale at x52121 and inquire about our hate crimes policy.
Hopefully with enough calls they will eventually stop giving us the run around.

The current federal policy on hate crimes does not include hate crimes based on gender, sexual orientation and physical ability. There
is legislation right now that will add those categories to the federal policy. Please call your representatives in the House and Senate to
urge them to vote in favor of changing the federal hate crimes policy.

If anyone needs more specific information or would like to help us change the UCLA policy as well as the federal policy, please email
me. I have lot's of information.

Posted by Eric on March 06, 1999 at 18:40:39:

I don't understand why there is a debate about whether or not the defense attorney for Matthew Shepard's killers would argue that Matthew Shepard was in an unsound emotional state, and NOT "fresh of face and full of promise." It seems obvious to me that they would, in order to convince the jury that the crime wasn't as bad as previously thought. It should be true that whenever someone is killed they should be tried based only one the evidence of the crime, but that is not the case, as evidenced by the Dan White case as well as many others. It is a fact that in the United states you are 4 times as likely to get the death penalty for killing a white person then you are for killing someone who is black. The jury system leaves decisions up to the biases and emotions of the jurors, thus not allowing true justice to be served in many cases.

On the issue of the way the media portrayed Matthew Shepard's character and emotional state, I would say that it was both good and bad. As someone in lecture said, it was good because homosexuals are rarely seen in the media, and at least the issue of Matthew Shepard's death creates diolog on the subject of homosexuality. But I thought it was also bad, because, as Professor Rubenstien said, the media is dictating the degree in which one is considered a homophobe. The real issues that most homosexuals face every day are ignored by the publicization of this story, as it says that the people that hate gays are those that kill them, and if you don't kill gays, then don't worry about it, you're not homophobic and certainly don't perpetuate a social heirchy of any kind.
I don't know, these are just a few thoughts on our last lecture....

Follow Ups:
Re: Matthew Shepard 11:55:42 3/07/99 (0)

Posted by on March 07, 1999 at 11:55:42:

In Reply to: Matthew Shepard posted by Eric on March 06, 1999 at 18:40:39:

I have to agree with you here. I think that the killing of Matthew Shepard and the media's emphasis on his death had both positive and negative aspects. On the one hand, for the first time people were able to feel compassion for a young homosexual man. In addition, his mother made a point to stress the importance of accepting your children and telling them that you love them before it is to late. I'm sure that her message had profound consequnces for many American parents that have disowned their children because of their sexual perference. On the other hand, the media's story of Matthew's death presented a very narrow definition for the word homophobia. The media neglected to represent the many faces of racism, sexism, and homophobia. In my daily life, I encounter a lot of racism and sexism that although non-violent still manages to erode my sense of self-esteem. People judge me by the color of my skin and not by the content of my message. Overall, I think that if one family was able to accept their child depite their sexual preference than Matthew's story was worth telling.

Posted by Colleen on March 07, 1999 at 23:52:50:

I thought that Professor Rubenstein gave an excellent lecture on Thursday. I am really glad that he came. I think his lecture was really helpful in thinking critically about Matthew Shepard's death and everything surrounding it. I had a hard time making sense of how gay communities handled his death, (for example, the display GALA put together in Royce Quad) and how the media handled it. I think one of Rubenstein's strongest points was that now people will think that being homophobic directly correlates with violence against gay men and lesbian women and people will fail to see and address the homophobia and heterosexism that exits but is not as blatant or obvious. One of the comments made during lecture about portraying Shepard as a golden boy being a good thing really made me think. I think that it is really dangerous to think that it is such a good think to have a golden boy image of a gay person as someone who represents gay people because this totally alienates people who do not fit the white all-american boy ideal. There really needs to be a more diverse and accurate represenation of who makes up queer communities that goes beyond people like Matthew Shepard and Ellen. Activists and writers who talk about different communities and movements constantly refer to the mistake which is often made in that all people are not represented and therefore divisions occur and there is no action to include everyone. I think it is about time groups start to listen to what many experienced people are saying around inclusion and representation that is real and not a form of tokenism. Also, with regards to the argument that the Matthew Shepard case is a place to start when we need to start somewhere, I partly agree, except that if there are people at one end of the spectrum and people at the opposite end who start working from the middle perspective, the results will probably end up more in the more conservative groups favor. Therefore, the other far end needs to hold their ground and make the other group come closer to their end in addressing the issues. I hope that makes sense to someone. Oh, and I was asked who I would choose to speak on dateline and I thought about it. If Audre Lorde was still alive, I would choose her. She spoke her mind, challenged people, held true to her beliefs.

Follow Ups:
Re: Thursday's Lecture (3/4/99) Maria 19:54:43 3/12/99 (0)

Posted by Maria on March 12, 1999 at 19:54:43:

In Reply to: Thursday's Lecture (3/4/99) posted by Colleen on March 07, 1999 at 23:52:50:

I agree with Colleen, Professor Rubenstein's lecture was excellent. I had not thought about the points he brought up. And to be perfectly honest I had never really thought about the implications that Matthew Sheppard's death had. I mean I saw his death as a tragedy for himself and for his family, it was more of an individual tragedy rather than a communal one. After taking this course and listening to Professor Rubenstein's lecture, I realized the repercussions that this horrible hate crime had on the community at large. Professor Rubenstien argued that the media coverage had negative consequences and I agree with him. There were positive effects such as bringing hatecrimes against homosexuals to the front pages of newspapers. When people look at the men who murdered Matthew Shepphard, they may think that they are not homophobic in comparison to them. In explaining this point of view to my mother I used the example: "I don't drag African American men to their death with my truck, so I am not a racist. But my daughter is not permitted to date one." In using this example I realized that Professor Rubenstein's theory is also applicable to other minorities, but that's just what I think.

Posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

People may laugh at the subject, but it is really something that is bothering me. How can I, as a straight male, get rid of my homophobia? I have friends who are gay, but still find myself using the word "fag" or "gay" in a negative connotation. When I'm with my straight friends I still laugh when they impersonate someone who is gay, is that wrong? I've been brought up to think like this, and I'm constantly battling with it. How can I permanently rid myself of this plague?

Posted by Yuya on March 17, 1999 at 01:18:43:

In Reply to: How can I not be homophobic? posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

Like the others have said, kudos to you for acknowledging the fact that you might be homophobic. At least you've admitted that much. There are so many others out there that would never even consider the possibility of trying to change their homophobia. And you've already got a head start, because you have gay friends and you've taken this class. I'm in the same boat you are, because I think I might be, no scratch that, I know that I am a bit homophobic, too. I find myself cringing when I see a man that's a little too feminine (with the whole hand gesture flip action), but then again when women do that it kind of bothers me, too. I don't "cringe" with lesbians who are "butch" or gay men who do seem "regular." I don't have any gay friends to help me out with that, but I'm open to the idea of having them. I do believe that homosexuals should have rights. I initially took this class not "to learn about homosexuality" because I thought it might change the way i thought about it, but because I thought the class would just be interesting. I didn't think I really needed to learn anything that would change my views about it, because I was pretty pc about it anyway. But I did come away with something. I did learn more about their experiences. And I felt for them. I was grateful that I didn't have to go through any of that myself and I wouldn't want wish that on anybody else either. But that's the problem right there, homosexuals do have to live with it and experience it everyday. I don't think I would be able to fully understand that unless I had a close friend or family member that had to go through that, and that would allow me to see it up close and personal. Because we grew up thinking this way, it would almost be impossible to change your views unless something directly happened to you that would reinforce the idea of being homosexually open-minded. But if you don't already think that way, what are the chances of that?

Posted by Mitchell on March 15, 1999 at 03:31:10:

In Reply to: How can I not be homophobic? posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

Dearest fellow homophobic classmate,
There are lots of ways you can stop being homophobic. Even though you have gay friends doesn't mean that you are not homophobic. Don't worry, it is not your fault...We were all brought up at a very young age to hate gay people. The movies that we see portray gay people as "silly", "demented", or "crazy" people doing absurb or stupid things that normal straight people wouldn't normally do. For example, us gay people are sexual deviants. We all enjoy beastiality (not that it's wromg or anything). My favorite of course is group sex....just playing. Anyways, I recently came out to my friend from high school who is taking this class with me, who is still bothered by my newfound sense of femininity and my female mannerisms. He is still going through that process, I think of accepting his gay friend. I think it takes time to fully accepting that homosexuality is normal be it caused by nature or society. Since most of us are so brought up in a religious home, it is kind of hard to not view homosexuality in a negative light. I think you should surround yourself more with gay people, not just have a few token gay friends. Go with your gay friends to gay clubs and social functions to educate yourself (don't feel like you need to). I think most gay people are tired of trying to explain "being gay" to their straight friends who sincerely want to not be homophobic. Lord knows, gay people don't have to be educated on what it means to be straight. But whatever...I'm not bitter. I think that when you surround yourself with a type of people, you begin to see how much in common you really have with them. You begin to realize that they are really human beings....and you see how much wrong people have been treating gay people all along.

Posted by Francisco on March 14, 1999 at 14:46:57:

In Reply to: How can I not be homophobic? posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

The fact that our society connotes homosexuality to deviancy and perversion reinforces the negative feelings you might have towards homosexuals. However, this class is educating you on the reality of the homosexual lifestyle and experience. Homosexuals are just like anybody else. They are a group that is severly oppressed. It is devistating when one cannot be accepted for who they truely are. When homosexuals discover their sexuality, it is a challenge for them. In fear of rejection, they may choose to stay silent. The silence eats away their souls and robs them of their ture identity. Put yourself in their shoes for a moment and try to feel their pain. Maybe this will allow you to become sensitive towards homophobia. When you hear others refering to homosexuals in a negative matter you should stop them, educate them. Not many people know the facts. They relie on stereotypes when making judgement.This leads to negative perceptions. Even for me as a homosexual male, it is difficult to accept my sexuality. I have internalized homophobia. This class is helping me deal with it and gain pride in who I am. It is a long process, but little by little I am losing the shame I have been taught to feel about my sexualiy. You should really think about how much homosexuals suffer because of homophobic people. Hopefully it will give you a different perspective toward homosexuality.

Posted by Nicole on March 13, 1999 at 12:44:12:

In Reply to: How can I not be homophobic? posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

I think it is going to be very difficult for you to change your beliefs since you have had these beliefs instilled in you for twenty something years. At the same time, I think that taking this class is a big step on your part to educate yourself about homosexuality. I think that if you were extremely homophobic, and not open to change, you wouldn't be in this class in the first place. Acknowledging that you want to change is a good first step. You already realize that you shouldn't be laughing at jokes, or use negative terms about homosexuals. Just try to remember what you have learned this quarter the next time you hear a joke or are tempted to say something homophobic.

Posted by Joshua on March 12, 1999 at 21:36:10:

In Reply to: How can I not be homophobic? posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

Obviously, if you grew up in an environment where making fun of homosexuals was the "proper" thing to do, of course it is hard not to do so!! The fact though, that you have gay friends is a positive "light" in the situation. As a straight male there's going to be some "unconscious" tendencies on your part to degrade homosexuals when you are around your straight friends. But I don't know, are your straight friends homophobic? Do they have gay friends? Do they know you have gay friends? If the first answer is yes, and the second and third are know, you may be afraid to see how they react to you if they find out you have gay friends, thus, possibly risking them to turn on you. But in any case, as long as you don't start beating up on "homosexuals" just to prove to your straight that you are in fact straight, there's no problem. Also, your taking a class that deals with homosexuality, if you were really homophobic you would have dropped the class in a heartbeat a long time ago. We are guilty of homophobia, I'm gay, and I'm a bit homophobic myself!

Posted by Monique on March 11, 1999 at 19:43:43:

In Reply to: How can I not be homophobic? posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

Eric,
I believe that the best way for you to rid yourself of your homophobia is to educate yourself about homosexual issues. Homophobia means fear of homosexuals. Most fears are developped out of ignorance. People tend to fear the unknown. So, if you learn more about what homosexuality means then you may be able to come to grips with your fear. When you hear a negative joke or say "fag", you have to think about how that affects the person who is being made fun of or referred to in a negative fashion. I admit there are some funny homosexual jokes as well as jokes about black people (I am black) but I choose not to laugh at them because I have to think about the intentions behind them. What are the real consequences? It can have a dominoe effect. Laugh at the joke today, tomorrow, pretty soon they are no longer jokes, but reality. You don't want to perpetuate stereotypes or condone negative behavior. Basically, you have to be conscious of your actions and the overall effect they can have.

Posted by laura & sophia on March 11, 1999 at 16:58:25:

In Reply to: How can I not be homophobic? posted by Eric on March 10, 1999 at 17:00:59:

okay.. in response to eric's concerns.. we don't want to sound mean or anything.. but we understand your genuine concerns. we believe that that it's true.. homophobia has been so instilled in us that it IS hard to rid oneself of all 'homophobic' behavior. it's a constant battle that we all have. knowing that homophobia is wrong and discriminates against a particular labeled group is the first step. realizing it. and realizing how we all in some way perpetuate it is a start. recognizing this is not the end of the battle.. we must consciously make the effort to stop perpetuating heterosexism. we wouldn't say that people who laugh at homosexual jokes are homophobic.. but people who laugh perpetuate heterosexism. and there's a difference. homophobia is an irrational fear of homosexuals. it's a individual, psychological phenonmenon. heterosexism is the perpetuation of a heterosexist world in which non-heterosexuals are categorized and oppressed.. it's not at the individual level. it's more about institutionalized means that promote heterosexism and maintain the status quo. so.. we all need to be aware and consciously stop ourselves from perpetuating a heterosexist world because this leads to individuals feeling safe in being homophobic.

Follow Ups:
Re: Re: Thanks Eric 00:44:06 3/15/99 (1)
Re: Re: Re: Thanks Sara 15:59:15 3/15/99 (0)

Posted by Eric on March 15, 1999 at 00:44:06:

In Reply to: Re: How can I not be homophobic? posted by laura & sophia on March 11, 1999 at 16:58:25:

I'd like to thank everyone who responded to my question for their advise. I believe people are constantly changing, and I myself am an example of that. I hope that someday I will be able to say that I am not homophobic whatsoever. I hope that someday we all will be able to say that.

Follow Ups:
Re: Re: Re: Thanks Sara 15:59:15 3/15/99 (0)

Posted by Sara on March 15, 1999 at 15:59:15:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Thanks posted by Eric on March 15, 1999 at 00:44:06:

Eric,

Thanks for being brave enough to post your comment. I think part of the problem today is that everyone wants to be cool enough to not have certain thoughts or fears, so they push them away, rather than confront them. It is so important that people work to change, instead of pretending that they don't have any harmful presuppositions or prejudices. If only most of the world could confront their misunderstanding like you did, fear and hate would have a lot harder time thriving.

Posted by omar on March 16, 1999 at 19:12:43:

In Reply to: Re: How can I not be homophobic? posted by laura & sophia on March 11, 1999 at 16:58:25:

Dear Eric,
There are many ways for a person not to be homophobic. I know it is difficult since we live in a very homophobic society. It is
difficult to rid homophobia in the united states because homophobia is engrained in our culture. I don't know how many times I heard people use to word "fag", "homo" or "dyke". The reason that people use these words is because they are ignorant and don't how else to respond. As a Gay teenager, I often times distanced myself from homosexuals because I was socially conditioned to think they(homosexuals)were bad people. I learned this at home, school and up until high school from friends. Being Gay in America will always be challenged when people in our society are ingnorant about homosexuals. In my opinion, Eric you have come a long way by not being homophobic. For one, you are in this course. This lets you and people know that you are willing to be educated on Gay and Lesbian peoples. When one is educated on a group of people, one will also find it harder to make fun or put down that group. I believe the reason you are still homophobic around your str8 friends is because you are afraid of what they will say when you tell them that the word "fag" is not cool. You are worried to be labeled as a homosexual and therefore deviant to your circle of friends. The best way to tell your friends that homophobia is wrong, is to put your friends in the homosexuals shoes. For example, if your friend is Italian, how would he like being called a "Guido" or "mobster" all the time. How would he like people to think that Italians are deviant, uneducated or morally wrong. When you put your friends in this situation it might make them better understand how it feels like to be discrimanted against or made fun of and nobody likes to be made fun of. In conclusion, I think that you are well on your way of ridding yourself of you homophobic tendencies. Just by admitting that you have a problem(homophobic tendencies) leaves the door open to a solution(education.

Posted by Nicole on March 16, 1999 at 23:46:00:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Thanks posted by Eric on March 15, 1999 at 00:44:06:

Hey Eric. I just wanted to say that I think it was very brave for you to admit your feelings. We live in a scoiety where people are so concerned about being politically correct that many don't admit to the feelings that you expressed in your message. Like I mentioned in my previous post, I think that by taking this class you are already opening yourself up to learning about contested sexualities, and accepting them. I think that a lot of people have the same beliefs that you do, however they are just too afraid to express them because they don't want to be labeled as homophobic. However people shouldn't feel bad about not knowing a lot about certain groups. Many people grow up without really learning what experiences other people go through (whether it be someone of a different race, gender, social class, sexual orientation, etc). I know I learned a lot in this class, and I am sure you did too =)

Posted by Elizabeth on March 11, 1999 at 20:01:04:

My mother hasn't always been a "saint." She did not go to church on a regular basis, read her horoscope religiously, spoke about others behind their backs, ate without saying grace, etc. Yet one day, a friend of hers showed her the right path to take. She took my mother to a charismatic church group. Ever since then, my mother has altered he perceptions of the world. The bible now dictates her life. She will not listen to the "music of the world." She will only listen to music, which praises her God. She becomes extremely upset if she does not arrive at the church at least a half-hour before mass even begins. My mother feels she is a "saint" because she is living the way God wants all of his children to live. With this in mind, I decided to ask foe her opinion in regards to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered people. She expressed that those people have malos espiritos, bad spirits. Those people are not born this way. God does not make mistakes. These people have been "over-powered" by these so-called bad spirits. I tried to have her open her mind by counter-pointing her arguments but she would not hear of it. In her eyes, I doubted my Catholic faith by questioning the words of the bible. This issue is not the only issue I have tried to help her see outside of her "biblical" ideology. So, how does one even begin to change the minds of those who believe that homosexuality is immoral if they do not even want to hear a counter-point?

Follow Ups:
Re: My Mother hasn't always been a saint Emily 16:22:32 3/13/99 (1)
Re: Re: My Mother hasn't always been a saint Sara 16:11:22 3/15/99 (0)

Posted by Emily on March 13, 1999 at 16:22:32:

In Reply to: My Mother hasn't always been a saint posted by Elizabeth on March 11, 1999 at 20:01:04:

Elizabeth--

I totally understand your situation and I know it must be hard to change your mother because my parents sometimes have extremely strong beliefs and no matter what I do or tell them, they stick with their beliefs. I think it is something that is extremely difficult to do. We can't always change how people think because that is how people have grown up. My parents are not going to always think the way that I do because they grew up in a different environment, culture and time period than me and the ideology when they grew up was a lot more conservative and not as accepting than the ideology that is present in our American society today that we all have been growing up with. I don't have a solution to your situation and I wish that we could do something to change how people think but the only thing that we can do is just to at least make them aware and educate them and maybe from there, they themselves can realize on their own.

I think we also should be educating the younger generations beneath us because people are more open when they are younger, so if we can start educating people at a younger age, then maybe when they grow up, they will be sensitive and tolerant of everyone. It's hard to change older people's thoughts because they have had those same beliefs for so many years. That is why I think we should focus our efforts on educating children when they are young before they start forming opinions and biases.

Posted by Sara on March 15, 1999 at 16:11:22:

In Reply to: Re: My Mother hasn't always been a saint posted by Emily on March 13, 1999 at 16:22:32:

I, too, think that older generations may be somewhat of a lost cause, just because parents and the like are so set in their ways. If my grandparents were alive, for example, I think they would have had a hard time with the fact that I am even taking this class. My mother as well, although not blatantly or openly homophobic, has her issues as well. Educating people from youth is the most important thing, because sometimes certain points are lost on people of different older generations.

In my opinion, children should not be taught that love can exist only between men and women, but between any caring people. Tolerance is also an important virtue that helps to eliminate all types of prejudice and discrimination. Most importantly, I think children should not be sheltered from the real world. They can take it... and the sooner they realize that there are all kinds of people in the world, the better it will be for them.

Posted by Gloria on March 16, 1999 at 19:23:22:

In Reply to: My Mother hasn't always been a saint posted by Elizabeth on March 11, 1999 at
20:01:04:

I would not argue and accept her attitude, since in time and with education she has to realize on her own that homosexuality is deviant because society dictates that it should be. I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion, as long as she does not expect to instill the same attitude in you, and respects that you have a different viewpoint.
I have the same problem with my father. As a Mexican he has a machista attitude about homosexuality. He is really bright and I admire him, but his attitude towards homosexuals bothers me. I do not try to change his attitude because he grew up in a different country, has traditional Catholic ideas and he grew up in a different period. I also follow some Catholic ideals, but I do not judge or oppose homosexuality because I grew up and developed my own views. I strongly oppose discrimination and oppression of any kind. I really do not know how my father could have such an attitude being part of the minorities that are oppressed by “traditional American” ideologies.

Posted by Elizabeth on March 13, 1999 at 12:01:09:

I wanted to start a discussion regarding Silverstein's article, ''The History of a Short Unsuccessful Academic Career.'' In the article, Silverstein repeatedly refers to himself as not being a man. He says, 'I did try to be a man,' 'I was just pretending to be a man,' and 'I could pass as a man.' When we had transgendered guest speakers in the class, it was made clear that Emelia felt as though she was really not a man, but rather a woman trapped within a man's body. However, most gay men are not transgendered, and by refering to himself as not being a man, isn't Silverstein somewhat denying biology? I understand that when you look at the social definition of what it means to be a man, it is difficult to place homosexuals in this category. For example, the ideal image of an American man consists of such characteristics as heterosexuality, married, having children, acting as a breadwinner, and being a dominant force in most relationships. Wouldn't it be better for Silverstein to challenge the present definition rather than simply surrendering to it and contenting himself with a genderless life?

Follow Ups:
Re: Homosexuality and the def. of a man anon 19:22:06 3/17/99 (0)

Posted by anon on March 17, 1999 at 19:22:06:

In Reply to: Homosexuality and the def. of a man posted by Elizabeth on March 13, 1999 at 12:01:09:

i think you misunderstood his point. he was referring to the category man just as Monique Wittig was referring to the myth of "woman".

Wittigs says that to be a lesbian is to not be a woman because a lesbian is not straight nor a possession of men. lesbians defy that category.

Similarly, Silverstein is saying he is not a man because our dominant cultural understanding and expectation of a man is to be straight, masculine looking, competitive. He doesn't buy into that ideology and therefore is not a man.

We are talking about the social construction of gender and sex here.

hope that helps.

Posted by Vanessa on March 16, 1999 at 21:40:32:

I'm pretty liberal. I think that being gay is nothing to be ashamed of necessarily, and that homosexuals certainly shouldn't be
discriminated againSt, I also believe that in general they get a very bad rap and suffer from a lot of stereotypical catagorization.....BUT can't people just be allowed to have and express honest opinions about them? What if someone really is afraid to get too close? Isn't that legitimate?? I was purchasing a pager the other day and was helped by a lady who looked like she was reeking a gayness. She got way too close and was extremely helpful, she even went as far as quickly touching my hand and and telling me we would figure out what was wrong(with my pager) together while winking at me. Honestly this repulsed me. I just wanted to tell her to get the hell away from me. Who did she think she was? And what did she think she was doing? This is how I felt for better or worse. I don't know what was worse her invasion of my space or being offended that she thought I might be gay. AmI homophobic?Am I heterosexist? Ya I guess so, but is that really bad? I'm not doing it maliciously. Today, our world is so stuck in this politically correct thinking, that people (including myself) would never venture to call a homosexual a "fag" in public, but have no problem doing it in the comfort of their home around friends and family. I think that if people weren't so afraid to speak the way they really felt (in the presense of homosexuals) and were able to engage in an honest debate that they might be able to come to some kind of greater understanding. Unfortunately, I don't think this is possible because, gay people especially the "out" gay people in our class, are so ready to attack. Why? It's kind of intimidating. Why do you feel the need to automatically go on the defensive? I just don't get it? Can someone explain???

Posted by Elizabeth on March 17, 1999 at 20:13:22:

In Reply to: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? posted by Vanessa on March 16, 1999 at 21:40:32:

Vanessa,
I too have experienced sexual advances from lesbians. The one time that I felt extremely awkward and a bit offended was when my husband and I took a weekend trip to Rosarito, Baja California. We were sitting at a bar and two females approached us. When of them asked my husband for a cigarrette while the other started playing with my hair and asked me too dance. I declined her offer kindly but she kept persisting that I dance with her. She then began to rub her private part, (if you know what I mean), on my knee. I was extremely shocked and did not know what to say or do. She was dancing to the beat of the music and kept telling me how pretty I was and that I would have fun. She then asked my husband for permission to take me out to dance but he said that we were going to be leaving. Tha is when she "got the hint" and left. This sexual advance was shocking because I was completely unprepared for it. Am I a homphobic because of this? Because I did not want to dance with her? I want to argue that this sexual advance is the same as a sexual advance from a male. I have experienced so many times when males are extremely persistent and don't give up until you practically have to throw a bucket of cold water on them! So, was the women's come on at the store really different than a male's come on?

Posted by M.J.G. on March 17, 1999 at 12:55:57:

In Reply to: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? posted by Vanessa on March 16, 1999 at 21:40:32:

I don't think it's so much as why we're always so ready to fight but why we do have to fight to begin with. Why do we have to fight for our most basic rights as human beings? We live in a heterosexist world in which we have to fight for the privlige of holding a job, of having a place to live or even to walk on the streets. We live in the world in which our rights are seen as special rights. If we lived in a world where gays and straights were treated equally, had the same access to healthcare and so many other benefits, where you wouldn't be judged because of one aspect of your life rather than for who we really are there wouldn't be a need to fight. It would be nice not to have to fight but as long as there's discrimination as long as there is hatred, as long as queer youth are not safe to even walk through the halls of their own high schools there is a need to fight. For we are not asking for much when we ask to have the same fundamental rights that everyone else enjoys. If the roles were reversed and homosexuality became the norm and heterosexuals had to live in a homosexist society would heterosexuals not fight too?

Posted by m.c. on March 17, 1999 at 03:03:52:

In Reply to: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? posted by Vanessa on March 16, 1999 at 21:40:32:

Vanessa,

It is unfortunate that you experienced unwelcomed sexual advances but to have that experience taints all your views about all/most queer people is unfortunate. I hope from this class you've learned that our community is much more diverse than an image of sexual predators. It saddens me that in your ability to be able to express how you really feel, you are also confirmed of your distrust of queers. You want to know why we are defensive and "always so ready to fight" as if our hurt because of homophobia and heterosexism should not deserve fending if it makes straight people uncomfortable. Please try to put yourself in our shoes for a minute. Your self-esteem does not erode from daily heterosexism and homophobia. Indeed, you bask in this heterosexist world and enjoy the privileges of holding your boyfriend's hand on the streets, of being able to marry and have the blessings of all including the State. I don't have that luxury. I worry when I will be gay-bashed. I don't bother telling certain people I'm gay because I know they will treat me differently. Even with my straight friends who are gay-friendly, I get tired of being the token gay spokeperson as if i somehow magically supposed to know everything about queerness. So, being bombarded with hate, heterosexism and ignorance, I do get more sensitive than others when it comes to lgbt issues because my life and being is at stake. When the highest teenage suicide rate is of queer teens; when the majority of teen runaways and throwaways are queer youth; when a judge denies a lesbian mother custody of her child because she's "unfit" and grants child custody to her former husband who is a convicted killer; when so-called Christians are protesting at Matthew Shepard's funeral and condemning him to hell which in effect legitimate the killing of queers; when Ann Landers advice that a gay uncle should not be so presumptuous as to asking his niece to be a flower girl at his wedding to his partner whom the whole family knows because it might confuse the poor child to accepting that this is okay (LAT 3/15); when the American public are readily to watch violence, murder, brutality on TV and readily censor a kiss between 2 persons of the same-sex because it may be damaging to their sensibility, especially their children; and on-and-on with stories of injustice, it makes my blood boil. It makes me angry that these things are happening everyday, and I think anger is a good thing. It's when you are dulled by the slings and arrows that I think I would be most scared. When the oppression is so prevalent that one loses the ability to fight, when one's mind is colonized, when "sexuality" is no longer contested, this is when I will be in hiding while the straight people can rest in comfort that there will be no confrontation, no challenges, to their ways of life.

So, with regards to your comment about being "PC", I really hate this term. It was introduced by conservatives to delegitimate any effort by people to be sensitive and decent to one another. Rather than accepting that challenges to one's world view may enhance one's sensitivity to other cultures, we label these challenges on choices of words as PC, thought-police. So now it's uncool to be PC and we can continue in our ignorance and insensitivity to others.

Well, that' enough babbling from me. I do hope you have a better understanding of why we are defensive. I hope you will respond back given all these responses.

Posted by Monique on March 17, 1999 at 01:01:05:

In Reply to: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? posted by Vanessa on March 16, 1999 at 21:40:32:

I would not say that homosexuals are always ready to fight. I think that defending your identity to others all the time can be quite frustrating and I'm sure it's a bit annoying. Imagine if America was dominated by homosexuals and heterosexuals were the
minorities, could you honestly say that defending yourself all the time would not make you a bit hostile? I've had a lesbian or bisexual woman hit on me before and I was uncomfortable because it was the first time that happened to me and I did not know how to react. I treated her the same way I treat men that hit on me that I have no interest in. People should not be disrespected because they are not who you want them to be. How would she have known that you were heterosexual? Everyone take risks when they try to find a date. I do think that the woman in the pager shop was brazen but if a man were to do the same thing the situation would still be discomforting (at least for me). I do think that people need to address these issues in public as well as private. The only way you can learn about something is if you are exposed to it.

Posted by San on March 16, 1999 at 21:59:46:

In Reply to: Why are homosexuals always so ready to fight?? posted by Vanessa on March 16, 1999 at 21:40:32:

I think anybody who has been discriminate against will always be defensive, they are constinantly trying to fit and make people
understand they are people to. They may feel the world is against them. I know when I'm defensive it's because I have not been
understood. And about that mishap, it is unfortunate that you experienced that, but haven't you ever experienced that with a male?
There are hetersexual pigs as well as homosexual. Pigs are pigs.

Posted by M.J.G. on March 17, 1999 at 13:07:42:

In looking at the questions posted and the comments, I've been tempted to ask you all something and hopefully get some responses. I feel that often times you have to be in someone else's shoes to atleast have an idea of what their life is like. In this class we have been exposed to what it's like for LGBT to live in a heterosexist world. I just wanted to ask you all what you think would be the case if we lived in a world where the mainstream was LGBT and rather than being a heterosexist society it was homosexist. Would heterosexuals living in a Homosexist society have to go through the same thing that we LGBT go through by living in a heterosexist society?

Follow Ups:
     Re: I magine living in a Homosexist world m.c. 19:11:22 3/18/99 (0)
     Re: I magine living in a Homosexist world Ralph 12:25:45 3/18/99 (0)
     Re: Imagine living in a Homosexist world Yuya 22:19:13 3/17/99 (0)

Posted by m.c. on March 18, 1999 at 19:11:22:

In Reply to: I magine living in a Homosexist world posted by M.J.G. on March 17, 1999 at 13:07:42:

if there actually is a "B" and a "T" included rather than just a homosexist world (only lesbians and gays to dominate), I don't think the world order would be the same. especially, considering Paula Rust's argument about the deconstructive potential of bisexuality to break down the gender/sex/sexual orientation binary.

Everyone's sexuality would be okay. so would the variation in gender and sex identifications. You couldn't have a "homosexist world". an lgbti world would be a world that celebrates variations of sexual and gender practices. maybe these categories wouldn't even exist because there is no reason to differentiate to discriminate.

If say only homosexuals were to dominate then there is that possibility of creating a homosexist world. i don't think procreation is a problem. who says love has anything to do with procreation or recreation? Think of all the loveless straight marriages/couplings where women are seen as baby-machines and children are nothing other than properties.

anyway, i think the point is to get straight people to empathize with the oppression lgbts face, not to actually debate whether this society is possible or not. it's practically insignificant.

Posted by Ralph on March 18, 1999 at 12:25:45:

In Reply to: I magine living in a Homosexist world posted by M.J.G. on March 17, 1999 at 13:07:42:

Would a homosexist society really thrive? and what kinds of new problems would emerge?
How would we create offspring? Some may say we should love everyone male and female, but even if we all loved each other, the only way to have kids is through heterosexual sex, Isn't creating offspring (idealistically) out of love? If you are in love with a same sex partner you will never have kids of your own (you could adopt), but in a homosexist society I think there would be a lot less children. And what problems would kids go through if they have to be divided by their homosexual mother and homosexual father? Wouldn't the child be confused? If God wanted us to be with same sex partners then he would have enabled us to procreate in another way, wouldn't have HE? Maybe or maybe not? I don't think it is a bad thing or evil to be queer, because everyone IS created differently, but there IS a reason why we do not live in a homosexist society and most people are not gay.

If we did live in a homosexist society i would feel that there was a reason it is like that just the same!

Posted by Yuya on March 17, 1999 at 22:19:13:

In Reply to: I magine living in a Homosexist world posted by M.J.G. on March 17, 1999 at 13:07:42:

If we lived in a society where homosexism was mainstream, then, yea, heterosexists probably would have a hard time just like
homosexuals do now. You don't know what someone goes through until you're living in her shoes. Because we're taught how to think when we're growing up, who's to say that wouldn't happen if we were living in a homosexist society? But that would mean the majority of the people would be LGBT and there would be a gay version of the kkk or some warped version of neo-nazis, but is that really feasible? If the majority was LGBT, how would we procreate? Test tube babies? Gay men and lesbian women would just have to make them? How's that going to affect your relationship with your partner? Or would you rely on the small number of heterosexists to increase the population? We won't know what it'd really be like to be that discriminated against until we experienced it for ourselves, but what are the chances? White people don't know what it's like for blacks to survive in our society today. Very fewwould, right? Granted, there will be a lot of people who'll say that they feel sympathetic, but will they really know what it's like? I don't think so. So we're pretty much stuck with each other until society eventually fixes itself, or finds something else to discriminate against.

Posted by Angel on March 18, 1999 at 18:16:28:

Yo People,

I just wanted to state that we should introduce a theory that involves people having the ability to fall in love with other people without the dictates of society deciding for us nor some predetermined biological factor. I'm not saying that these factors are not true for many people, but what I am saying is that it is possible to love someone who does not fit what we are socially or biologically programmed to. Social and biological factors may influence different people by various degrees yet I know many people who fell in love with people they never thought they would. For example, there may be biologically heterosexual men who have fallen in love with another man and want to begin to desire him sexually. Society may say that skinny women are better than large women but there could be men who fell in love with a large women and start sexually enjoying the fact she is large. My point is no matter what social or biological sexual predispositions people have there is always the possibilty of love overriding all of thos instincts. Love may be very fluid and has the possibilty of crossing all barriors. Maybe that's why these divisions were created..to prevent us from loving one another completely. Later
Angel De Marco Alekent

Posted by Lauren on March 17, 1999 at 21:16:46:

This question is for all the queer people in the class. If you could take a pill that would transform you into a heterosexual overnight would you and why? Keep in mind that there would be no side effects and even though you would remember how you were before the taking the pill, you would never have any homosexual desires again. For all the heterosexuals reading this, would you take a pill that would make you homosexual and why?

Follow Ups:
     Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? Justin 04:19:33 3/18/99 (1)
          Re: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? Julie 13:14:04 3/18/99 (0)
     Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? Jose N 01:18:31 3/18/99 (0)

Posted by Justin on March 18, 1999 at 04:19:33:

In Reply to: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Lauren on March 17, 1999 at 21:16:46:

How offensive!!!!!!!!!! Let me see...

Hey, this is for all of the Black people in class.....If you could, and there were no side effects, would you take a pill that would make you white?

No, wait, this is for all of you Jewish people, If you could, and there were no side effects, would you take a pill that would make you Christian?

Or, this is for all of you Asians, if you could, and there were no side effects, would you take a pill to make you American (and white)?

Finally, this is for all of you Atheists, if you could, and there were no side effects, would you take a pill to make you believe in (Christian) God?

This kind of question clearly comes from the dominant oppressive order perspective and has a kind of "blame the victim" effect where since society oppresses and vilifies a certain group (arbitrarily, and unfairly) would members of that group prefer to be members of the dominant (good) group?

Remeber for all of those who are thinking about responding to the gay question, this magic pill only turns you straight as straight people are today with all of the baggage that goes along with it, i.e., emotionally constipated men, male patriarchy, female oppression and objectification, pervasive homophobia, racism, elitism, etc.. Would that really be an improvement? Perhaps if one was a gay white male from the upper-middle class.....

I hope that those queers who reply to this question, really think about the consequences before replying....

(Although I did not address it in my post, remeber, you lose all of the "good" stuff about being queer as well as the "bad" stuff about it.)

Follow Ups:

Re: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? Julie 13:14:04 3/18/99 (0)

Posted by Julie on March 18, 1999 at 13:14:04:

In Reply to: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Justin on March 18, 1999 at 04:19:33:

Justin,
I understand that the question could be seen as offensive, but I really don't see the need for you to attack whoever wrote it. I think that that person was just asking a question because they were curious. I have heard people ask that question before, so you shouldn't act like the person made it all up on their own. I see the comparisonsd you made, but I really don't think the writer meant it to be offensive.

Posted by Jose on March 18, 1999 at 01:18:31:

In Reply to: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Lauren on March 17, 1999 at 21:16:46:

hey there,

my answer would be yes, and only because it would makes things a lot easier for me. i wouldn't have to worry about losing a job becuase of who i love or sleep with at night. i wouldn't have to continue to put on a charade when i meet new people. i wouldn't have to lie to my parents about what club i went to and who i took home that night. if there were a pill out there that would make me straight over night, i would take it so i could just be normal.

Posted by M.J.G. on March 19, 1999 at 16:23:09:

In Reply to: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Lauren on March 17, 1999 at 21:16:46:

Hmmm let me see. I have the pleasure of having loving and caring person in my life, an understanding family that after two years of struggle finally loves me and accepts me for who I am, a sincere group of friends which i adore, and a warm, diverse embracing community which I am a part of. And to top it off, regardless of what the Christian Right says, God still loves me. So No, I don't think I would take that pill and give up all that I have and if I was to be born again and had the option of choosing to be queer or straight I would definetly choose queer.

Follow Ups:
Re: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? Lauren 20:32:17 3/19/99 (0)

Posted by Lauren on March 19, 1999 at 20:32:17:

In Reply to: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by M.J.G. on March 19, 1999 at 16:23:09:

I didn't mean for the question to be offensive so you're rude response was totally unnecessary. I was just asking a question. And, in case you didn't notice I asked the heterosexual people in the class if they would take a pill to make them gay. Maybe you should stop being so defensive.

Posted by Justin on March 20, 1999 at 10:31:29:

In Reply to: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Justin on March 18, 1999 at 04:19:33:

HHHHmmmmmm....

Lauren, I did not mean to attack you. For those who took the time to read my post carefully, I said that the question was offensive
and it came from the dominant order perspective. I never said anything about Lauren. However, I apologize if you were offended. I
though that my statement about comparing the gay pill question was powerfull. I mean one of the reasons that it bothered me so much
was that at first, the post just seemed like a repetition of other stuff that I had heard, typical "what if's." However, as I thought about it
more I realized what it was saying.....I mean I think that most of us who read the first post question were far less offended than if the
post had asked about racial or religious minorities. At least when I discussed this with others, they all had the "so what, relax and have
a beer" mentality. But, the rephrased question using Jews or African Americans was found to be universally offensive. This is a real
problem and it is common throughout our society.

I have seen other posts on this topic that fleshed out this notion far better than I did. I mean, living in the U.S., we are all taught that
we should want to be rich white masculine men. However, we have come a long way from Freud's Penis Envy theory that explained
much of womens' problems as coming from their secret desire to have a penis (take a pill and make them a man). Queer people have a
lot farther to go.

"Relax and have a beer" or accusing me of being insecure are attempts to discredit my message in a way that avoids actually defending
the alternate position that the status quo is OK. Can anyone really defend the question as a "good thing" on grounds other than that the
motives of its asker were good (which I am confident that they were)?

To finally answer the question though, I suspect that some queers would like to take the pill and others wouldn't. Today, in America, I
wouldn't. However, if it was in NAZI Germany or the US of the 1950's or under other very repressive regimes where the possibility of
state enforced serious physical harm was very real, then I would gladly take the pill. In the best of all possible worlds, both homos and
hets would take a pill at times that would change their sexual orientation temporarily, just to learn something new. And that both men
and women would do the same to change their sexes for the same reason.

Lauren, you question is important, and I am glad that you asked it.

--Justin

Posted by Ralph on March 19, 1999 at 20:47:24:

In Reply to: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Justin on March 18, 1999 at 04:19:33:

Why are you so bitter? Are you not comfortable with your homosexuality? The strongest opposition typically comes from those that are unsure of themselves and lack self-esteem. You seem to fit the profile. Have some confidence...sack up and have some nads!

P.S. Have a happy day!

Follow Ups:
Re: To Justin- Justin 10:43:06 3/20/99 (0)

Posted by Justin on March 20, 1999 at 10:43:06:

In Reply to: To Justin posted by Ralph on March 19, 1999 at 20:47:24:

Oh please!!!!!!!

Have a nice day.

(I think that I have had more than my share of "nads" at any rate)

--Justin

Posted by m.c. on March 19, 1999 at 13:45:04:

In Reply to: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Jose on March 18, 1999 at 01:18:31:

This is a good question to start a debate that would expose how omnipresent heterosexism and homophobia are. On the other hand, if it is just a curiosity of how individuals would respond, then, this question is more problematic.

Hmmm...let's see...

A pill without side effects, a religious conversion that suppresses one's desire, a 12-step homosexual anonymous program for the non-religious rich, shock therapy with some side effects, lobotomy with side effects, burning at the stake with definite effectiveness in ridding homosexuality...

yup, let's focus on the REAL problem here, the individual! it's not our culture's lack of tolerance. it's the people who need to change. aren't you just adding fuel to the fire that attempts to eradicate homosexuals?

i don't know what the intention of this question is, but by posing it this way, aren't you legitimating the discourse on blaming/focusing on the victim rather than the unjust system?

of course there will be queers out there who have internalized homophobia and see the pill/cure as a viable option. No one wants to be discriminated against, period. this is why these conversion groups are gaining momentum. it's not because they are "curing" people of homosexuality or queerness, it's because they offer a supportive environment where one can confess of one's homosexuality and then be led to ways of suppressing it in the love of a community that would accept one's difference and help one to overcome it. What a salvation of the soul to no longer have to hide one's homosexual tendency. yet, at the same time there are nice people around to help one suppress such desire that would otherwise lead one to sins and/or illnesses.

i understand the curious mind wants to know, but think about the effect of such framing of the questions. Language is a powerful tool. In this contestations of sexualities, debates are made of words from both sides. Choices of words frame the way we think about the topic. What is said is important as well as what is not said. What are implied and assumed can be as powerful in influencing and persuading our thought processes.

What good does this question do for the stigmatized and oppressed individuals? Just a reminder of how different and not privileged s/he is for being different. Just another distraction from the real issues at hand, discrimination.

If curious mind wants to know, NO, I would not take such a pill. Of course, the oppressed little voice inside did consider the personal benefits. However, this is not progress to me even if there is such a pill to be invented. What kind of society are we striving for? suppress and rid of differences because the majority can't deal and don't want to be blamed when they discriminate. I expect more
from humanity.

The personal appeals of the pill mask the collective bargaining with lucifer himself! As long as i'm out of the whole, saved by the pill, who cares about other stigmatized people! Heck! maybe if they only change their ways, they wouldn't be discriminated against. Me, I was born with a little abnormality, nothing that a little pill couldn't fix. But, you see, I blend in now. No Side Effects. I just lost my cause to fight for justice. Justice is on my side now because I'm in. Not such a big bargain for this great amount of personal gain, eh? Hey, maybe with the advancement of technology, we could come up with a cure for the confused bisexuals and transgenders. it'll just be in time. Meanwhile, they just have to put up with the discrimination for being different. oohh, what progress we are making...

Follow Ups:
     Re: what a bargain! Steven 20:49:45 3/19/99 (0)
     Re: what a bargain! Lauren 20:42:20 3/19/99 (1)
          Offense, Defense m.c. 14:50:08 3/20/99 (0)

Posted by Steven on March 19, 1999 at 20:49:45:

In Reply to: what a bargain! posted by m.c. on March 19, 1999 at 13:45:04:

You have way too much time on your hands! Relax and have a beer!

Posted byLauren on March 19, 1999 at 20:42:20:

In Reply to: what a bargain! posted by m.c. on March 19, 1999 at 13:45:04:

I want to apologize to anyone I may have offended. When I wrote this question I in no way what so ever meant to offend anybody. I was just curious; and, for all of you that thought my question wsa "adding to the fire" remember that I also asked all the heterosexuals in the class if they would take a pill that would make them gay. It was just a question and I'm sure I was not the only one in the class who was wondering if people would take a pill to change their sexuality.

Follow Ups:
Offense, Defense m.c. 14:50:08 3/20/99 (0)

Posted by m.c. on March 20, 1999 at 14:50:08:

In Reply to: Re: what a bargain! posted by Lauren on March 19, 1999 at 20:42:20:

Lauren,

I didn't mean you offended me with your question. As I said, it is a good question to start a more in-depth discussion. I just wanted to bring to your awareness the effects of such a question. Do you understand why such question would add fuel to the fire? Whereas, asking straight people about taking gay pill is harmless intellectual masturbation? In fact, no straight person has bothered to answer your posting. Only queer people have because we are used to having to explain ourselves to "educate" others. Then, those, who didn't
identify themselves, participated only to ask us to chill out and have a beer.

as a gay person, i'm constantly asked these hypothetical questions about what if i could change. my personal being is put into question all the time. it gets tiring.

it's more disturbing to have to defend one's being again in this "LGBTS" class discussion board. i think this board serves more for straight students than lgbt students. it's great that some straight students can feel comfortable enough to ask questions that they've been wondering and curious. it's unfortunate that lgbt students once again have to explain or defend themselves. i'm not talking about your question in particular. AND, we get called as "bitter" or "defensive" when we don't respond with enough niceness that would make straight people comfortable. it's as if we dont' have the right to be bitter and defensive when you (not u specifically) ask us to explain ourselves.

as in many other spaces, this forum is not a safe space for lgbt students to express our anger. it's more disturbing that this space is supposedly made of COLLEGE-educated people who want to learn more about lgbt people. Yet, you do not really want to know when we are angry, what gets us riled up, why we are passionate to fight. this seems to bother many straight students. And, you're supposedly the more enlightened people that we are to ally.

Posted by Sandra on March 19, 1999 at 10:11:02:

In Reply to: Re: Would you take a pill that would make you straight? posted by Jose on March 18, 1999 at 01:18:31:

Jose-

I have several friends who feel exactly as you do. They have told me that they pften times wish they were straight so that they wouldn't have to go though all of the crap that queers,unfortunately, must endure. This saddens me, only because if I were a lesbian, I feel that I woul embrace that identity just ass I do my others. But it is different for me because I have the luxury of only thinking about it while there are so many out there living it. I would like to think that one day, people wouldn't even have to think about wishing that.
:)