TTY: Morrissey groped at San Francisco International Airport

UPDATE Oct. 6:

Morrissey airport security incident CCTV video posted - Gawker

UPDATE 1:50 PM PT
:

Uncleskinny posted the link:

A TSA spokesperson has denied any officer misconduct to Rolling Stone. "TSA takes all allegations of misconduct seriously and strives to treat every passenger with dignity and respect," Mike England says. "Upon review of closed circuit TV footage, TSA determined that the supervised officer followed standard operating procedures in the screening of this individual."

UPDATE July 31:

Morrissey claims sex assault by security at US airport - BBC News

Excerpt posted by klaus:

He added that the arrival of a second person to screen Morrissey was normal, and helped "to ensure the passenger does not have threat items, such as explosives concealed under clothing."



San Francisco International Airport
- true-to-you.net
29 July 2015

On leaving the US on 27 July I flew from San Francisco International Airport to London on flight BA 284.

At 2:30 in the afternoon I went through the usual airport security procedure including the stand-up 'scanner', and all was well - no bleeps and nothing unusual.

Before I could gather my belongings from the usual array of trays I was approached by an "airport security officer" who stopped me, crouched before me and groped my penis and testicles. He quickly moved away as an older "airport security officer" approached.

The officer who sexually assaulted me was identified as the General Manager On Duty. Luckily I was accompanied by two members of British Airways Special Services, who were horrified at the sexual attack and suggested that I lodge a complaint. I asked if there would be any point in lodging a complaint since, as with any complaint against a figure in "authority", the complaints are simply collected in order to protect the guilty officer should the matter go further. The British Airways Special Services employees assured me that a complaint was worthwhile, and so I filed the appropriate information. However, before doing so, the guilty "officer" was confronted, and the conversation went thus:

You have just sexually groped this man.
Officer: That's just your opinion.
What you have done is illegal.
Officer: That's just your opinion.
You have no right to do what you have just done.
Officer: That's just your opinion.

Apart from "that's just your opinion", he would not comment, even though, since the penis and testicles were mine and no one else's, then my opinion must surely have some meaning. But, of course, what the airport security officer was saying was: your opinion will never count in the eyes of the law. The words "that's just your opinion" volunteered themselves from this 'officer's' mouth before he had even heard the question. He knew he could be confronted, but he also knew that he could never be challenged (even though the entire incident is most certainly on CCTV camera).

In the interests of imperishable bureaucracy my submitted complaint against this 'officer' will obviously be either unread or ignored because, as we all know, on matters of officialism it is not possible to be pleasantly surprised by anything at all. However, what is clear is that, should you find yourself traveling through San Francisco International Airport, you should expect sexual abuse from the so-called 'security officers' who, we are unconvincingly warned, are acting only for our security.

Do people have minds?

Morrissey
29 July 2015



Media coverage:
 
Last edited:
A

Anonymous

Guest
One would be immediately and viciously attacked for parading around because one is a proud heterosexual. It would be absolutely obscene and surely it could only be meant as a mocking or threatening gesture to homosexuals.

Hmm... You know, that really gets you thinking (ie. what purpose do homosexual "pride" parades truly serve?).

Theoretically, accepting the validity of homosexual "pride" parades and rejecting the validity of heterosexual pride parades is another double standard and one should be allowed to throw a heterosexual pride parade without backlash. But as shown in the link in the above post, the idea of parading around to show pride in an arbitrary personal trait is absolutely ridiculous. There should be no pride parades for any sexual orientation.

The purpose of parades is not to show "pride" in some personal trait in a narcissistic show of superiority for people who share that one trait at the expense of those who don't. Parades should not be celebrating arbitrary personal differences, they should be about people coming together and celebrating REGARDLESS of personal traits. Canada Day or St. Patrick's Day parades, for example, are about putting all your personal traits aside and coming together regardless of colour, gender, sexual orientation etc. These types of parades are INCLUSIVE and celebratory, not exclusive and superiority oriented.

No one commits suicide because they are not accepted as heterosexual.

If you have a problem with gay people accepting themselves, you have a problem with gay people, and if you have a problem with gay people, you have a problem.

Everyone is welcome at a gay rights event. You aren't going to have to prove anything. I prefer human rights to gay rights, women's rights, or any other subset, so I do understand that part of your argument. However, most people who campaign for heterosexual rights are actually campaigning against human rights, however clever their argument may be.
 

The_Beginning

Well-Known Member
Got any empirical evidence to back up this nonsense? If so, this might be the time to provide links, cos at the moment, you're making yourself sound like a moron.

Empirical evidence? I can't exactly do a research study. As already mentioned by CrystalGeezer, I am simply describing my own observations. The best that one can do is provide anecdotal evidence and encourage others to keep a keen eye open for the described phenomena.

I'm not saying whites are under constant attack from all sides. People who are black, brown, white, or green all receive racist sentiments from certain people because of the colour of their skin. The fact that it is OK to disparage one for being white but not to disparage one for being of colour is where the problem lies. I don't have to show the frequency of the occurences since that's not even the point. It has been observed that using "white" pejoratively is trendy and accepted. It is OK to use white as an insult, but if one used black as an insult, one can say with reasonable certainty that they would be immediately and viciously attacked, especially on the Internet. Considering these points is enough to show the attitude around the issue.

There are people who actually believe that only whites can be racist. People of colour, then, are free to say whatever they want -- and indeed be hateful -- toward whites and that is acceptable and not considered racist behaviour.

Double standards.

One recent example comes to mind. I was on IMDB reading comments about a film. One of the comments was entitled something like "stupid white people" and went on to say that the family in the film made dumb decisions, presumably due to the fact that they are white.

Just imagine the immediate and vicious attack one would face if they announced on Twitter: "The black family ahead of us in line took so long! Those stupid blacks!" Perhaps they have 3 followers and the comment would go largely unnoticed like the film comment. But you can imagine the backlash if a celebrity with 500,000 followers made a similar comment.

Political correctness is dead. We have since entered the realm of political hysteria. One is expected to have a very specific attitude about things in society and to say very specific things. If one does not conform, one will be policed by the political hysterics. One is required to hold beliefs that are pro female, pro homosexual, pro black. On the surface, that seems good. Of course it is good to accept everyone as equal regardless of arbitrary personal traits. But when you consider that there is currently an anti white, anti male, anti heterosexual expectation and not a true attempt to achieve equality but an attempt to tread on the "oppressors", one realizes that the guise of equality is Wizard of Oz-esque. There is no expectation of equality. It is expected that a white person will favour a black person due to "white guilt", not because that person happens to be a good person, regardless of skin colour. The list goes on, for the examples of double standards that are policed by the political hysterics are endless.
 

The_Beginning

Well-Known Member
primitive nations? wtf? what nations would that be?

Primitive, undeveloped, to varying degrees. We have counties in Africa and Asia that are steeped in corruption, famine, and disease. We have countries where women and homosexuals are burned alive for existing.

Relatively speaking, I would call that primitive. Uganda be kidding me if you think it's just peachy in parts of India where they drink the same water they shit in, in parts of China where they skin dogs alive and cook them on log fires, in Afghanistan where a disobedient woman might be shanked to death for opposing her husband.
 
Last edited:

The_Beginning

Well-Known Member
No one commits suicide because they are not accepted as heterosexual.

If you have a problem with gay people accepting themselves, you have a problem with gay people, and if you have a problem with gay people, you have a problem.

Everyone is welcome at a gay rights event. You aren't going to have to prove anything. I prefer human rights to gay rights, women's rights, or any other subset, so I do understand that part of your argument. However, most people who campaign for heterosexual rights are actually campaigning against human rights, however clever their argument may be.

How does that have anything to do with the necessity of parades for arbitrary personal traits though? If anything, some disillusioned, young homosexual will hear his parents referring to the "perverted gays" they saw on the news at the "pride" parade and realize that no one will ever see him as a human being due to the generally narcissistic and superficial image that homosexuals have achieved in public society. He knows that he is simply human, but the representations that we have present him as a hyper-extroverted, sex crazed freak. He is not this, he is simply a young man, but he is unable to escape the misrepresentations society casts upon him the moment he identifies as homosexual.

It's not a personal issue. It's a societal issue.

I really do believe we would save society a lot of grief if these "pride" parades were scrapped. I would hypothesize that in the long run it would actually improve overall attitudes and acceptance and prevent some suicides.

- - - - -

For the record this really has nothing to do with Morrissey being groped.

The reason that this tangent discussion is occurring is the common thread of double standards (ie. it's serious when a woman is sexually assaulted yet it is a joke when a man is sexually assaulted).

It's related in a roundabout way.
 
Last edited:
A

Anonymous

Guest
How does that have anything to do with the necessity of parades for arbitrary personal traits though? If anything, some disillusioned, young homosexual will hear his parents referring to the "perverted gays" they saw on the news at the "pride" parade and realize that no one will ever see him as a human being due to the generally narcissistic and superficial image that homosexuals have achieved in public society. He knows that he is simply human, but the representations that we have present him as a hyper-extroverted, sex crazed freak. He is not this, he is simply a young man, but he is unable to escape the misrepresentations society casts upon him the moment he identifies as homosexual.

It's not a personal issue. It's a societal issue.

I really do believe we would save society a lot of grief if these "pride" parades were scrapped. I would hypothesize that in the long run it would actually improve overall attitudes and acceptance and prevent some suicides.

- - - - -

For the record this really has nothing to do with Morrissey being groped.

The reason that this tangent discussion is occurring is the common thread of double standards (ie. it's serious when a woman is sexually assaulted yet it is a joke when a man is sexually assaulted).

It's related in a roundabout way.

No, it has nothing to do with Morrissey being groped. That is true. Also, I don't think you mean any harm but your viewpoint, in my opinion, comes across as privileged. If some young gay person hears his parents call a gay pride parade 'a bunch of perverts' then this isn't the first time they have heard this type of language. It won't be a new experience. It wasn't the parade that made his/her parents into bigots. The new experience will be seeing people who are happy and proud, acknowledging who the are, while he has hidden who he is.

Some of the things you say I agree with. I don't like hearing "white" accepted as a pejorative term, but you have to realize that it's just a small group of people that think this acceptable, and they happen to be very vocal. You should also consider why that is more likely to be considered acceptable. It's the swing of the pendulum. Not too long ago the things you're considering as double standards would have paled in comparison to actual society-wide, institutionalized double standards. If I was a black person in the United States I would be a radical. It's amazing, with the history, that any black person is willing to give any white person the slightest benefit of the doubt.

Society is filled with pro-heterosexual messages and when a few people start making pro-equality statements people lose their minds. Now we've reached a stage where it's okay to be gay as long as you don't talk about it. And of course the flipside of that is the image of the deviant homosexual hiding their true nature. I agree that in a perfect society there would be no need for a gay pride parade, but we're not there yet, and if you are truly accepting of all people you can look at very recent history and maybe get some sense of why we're in the state we're in.

One thing you are failing to see is that it's not your struggle so it's not your place to accept or approve. You're not being tolerant or liberal, you're just being a human being.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
How did race enter the picture? Morrissey was groped because the TSA sexually assaults people for a living, not because he's a white guy. They equal-opportunity-assault across race, gender, and class. Google "TSA sexual assault." It's well-documented, just another day at the office, which former TSA staff admit to.

A likelier reason is that Morrissey cancelled on SF so many times, didn't schedule a makeup date this last time around, and the uniformed toad was a fan who figured it was his one chance to grope the Moz jewels, or a disgruntled ex-fan who wanted to pay him back for the cancellations. Not saying this is definitely why or that it's OK, but this is much more feasible than the race angle.

White guys -- the ones who benefit from white, male privilege -- claiming they're oppressed by minorities and women is as ridiculous as privileged Christians in America claiming that liberals and gays are taking their religious rights away. They're looking for reasons to be offended and they've got too much free time and/or emotional problems so they dream this stuff up.

We all know the people who talk this "Privilege" shit are the ones with the most privilege. I saw on Kristeen Young's wall she posted lyrics with the words "Privilege". This is a woman that has lived in a penthouse in New York for over a decade. Privilege these days is the person with the most money, as that gives them chances and power.
I'd rather people a rich black woman than a poor white man. Which one do you think has the most privilege?
 

evennow

Writers on the storm
One would be immediately and viciously attacked for parading around because one is a proud heterosexual. It would be absolutely obscene and surely it could only be meant as a mocking or threatening gesture to homosexuals.

Hmm... You know, that really gets you thinking (ie. what purpose do homosexual "pride" parades truly serve?).

Theoretically, accepting the validity of homosexual "pride" parades and rejecting the validity of heterosexual pride parades is another double standard and one should be allowed to throw a heterosexual pride parade without backlash. But as shown in the link in the above post, the idea of parading around to show pride in an arbitrary personal trait is absolutely ridiculous. There should be no pride parades for any sexual orientation.

The purpose of parades is not to show "pride" in some personal trait in a narcissistic show of superiority for people who share that one trait at the expense of those who don't. Parades should not be celebrating arbitrary personal differences, they should be about people coming together and celebrating REGARDLESS of personal traits. Canada Day or St. Patrick's Day parades, for example, are about putting all your personal traits aside and coming together regardless of colour, gender, sexual orientation etc. These types of parades are INCLUSIVE and celebratory, not exclusive and superiority oriented.

Exactly....although what about Black History Month here in America? Where is our White History Month? And if we did get one and it had more days in it than the black month black people would be up in arms ;) I say if people want to celebrate "sameness" have at it...as long as it is not at the expense of another group, and even then the KKK and other white supremacist organizations as well as the black panthers and other African American organizations have the right to gather in public. So in the end...what were we talking about? :D
 

littlelamb

New Member
Theoretically, accepting the validity of homosexual "pride" parades and rejecting the validity of heterosexual pride parades is another double standard and one should be allowed to throw a heterosexual pride parade without backlash. But as shown in the link in the above post, the idea of parading around to show pride in an arbitrary personal trait is absolutely ridiculous. There should be no pride parades for any sexual orientation.

Seems to me the history of western civilization has basically been one long parade of the white, heterosexual, and monied classes. Statements such as the one above are generally expressions of despair around losing control of those that have historically been enslaved, imprisoned, burnt, hanged, raped, and banished for their 'deviant' humanness. I get it: it sucks when the person you hired gets promoted instead of you. But fifty years of consciousness evolution has not quite yet created an equal playing field, so I suspect the scales may wobble a bit as they find their level. No worry though; I'm sure the day when we all hold hands across the globe and share a delicious Coca-Cola is right around the corner.
 

evennow

Writers on the storm
Seems to me the history of western civilization has basically been one long parade of the white, heterosexual, and monied classes. Statements such as the one above are generally expressions of despair around losing control of those that have historically been enslaved, imprisoned, burnt, hanged, raped, and banished for their 'deviant' humanness. I get it: it sucks when the person you hired gets promoted instead of you. But fifty years of consciousness evolution has not quite yet created an equal playing field, so I suspect the scales may wobble a bit as they find their level. No worry though; I'm sure the day when we all hold hands across the globe and share a delicious Coca-Cola is right around the corner.

I hear ya' brother:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Anonymous

Guest
Exactly....although what about Black History Month here in America? Where is our White History Month? And if we did get one and it had more days in it than the black month black people would be up in arms ;) I say if people want to celebrate "sameness" have at it...as long as it is not at the expense of another group, and even then the KKK and other white supremacist organizations as well as the black panthers and other African American organizations have the right to gather in public. So in the end...what were we talking about? :D

are you being sarcastic? i really hope so :/ god, this thread is one of the worst things i've ever read. I didn't know there are still people that believe that reverse racism or racism agains white people bs. Then again, i'm in a forum dedicated to someone who said that eating meat is the same as paedophilia
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
We all know the people who talk this "Privilege" shit are the ones with the most privilege. I saw on Kristeen Young's wall she posted lyrics with the words "Privilege". This is a woman that has lived in a penthouse in New York for over a decade. Privilege these days is the person with the most money, as that gives them chances and power.
I'd rather people a rich black woman than a poor white man. Which one do you think has the most privilege?

Hold up, are you a white guy lecturing a non-white woman about race and privilege?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
We all know the people who talk this "Privilege" shit are the ones with the most privilege. I saw on Kristeen Young's wall she posted lyrics with the words "Privilege". This is a woman that has lived in a penthouse in New York for over a decade. Privilege these days is the person with the most money, as that gives them chances and power.
I'd rather people a rich black woman than a poor white man. Which one do you think has the most privilege?

What an ignorant, offensive statement. Who is "we"? What do we all know? I'm not white nor am I male, and I wasn't born into privilege. I've seen people make arguments like yours on blogs and articles about police brutality in America. The inference is that just because some people in that community have made it, racism is not really systemic and longer an issue. This is, of course, wrong and damaging.
 

evennow

Writers on the storm
are you being sarcastic? i really hope so :/ god, this thread is one of the worst things i've ever read. I didn't know there are still people that believe that reverse racism or racism agains white people bs. Then again, i'm in a forum dedicated to someone who said that eating meat is the same as paedophilia

Yes, sarcasm is hard to pick up in written form. I find it hard to believe that this thread is the worst thing you have ever read. It says to me that you are not a frequent flyer here because there are some past threads that make this one look like a discussion between Shakespearean writers. Exactly right and don't forget by liking the Royal family you basically endorsed the works of Hitler. As for reverse racism, this comes to mind:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hold up, are you a white guy lecturing a non-white woman about race and privilege?

lmao ikr? I don't know why white males want to be so oppressed. Be glad you are born with a privilige most minorities have to fight for, and in some cases, never achieve :(
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Primitive, undeveloped, to varying degrees. We have counties in Africa and Asia that are steeped in corruption, famine, and disease. We have countries where women and homosexuals are burned alive for existing.

Relatively speaking, I would call that primitive. Uganda be kidding me if you think it's just peachy in parts of India where they drink the same water they shit in, in parts of China where they skin dogs alive and cook them on log fires, in Afghanistan where a disobedient woman might be shanked to death for opposing her husband.

china and india are primitive countries? wtf?

are you buddies with crystal geezer?
 

The_Beginning

Well-Known Member
No, it has nothing to do with Morrissey being groped. That is true. Also, I don't think you mean any harm but your viewpoint, in my opinion, comes across as privileged. If some young gay person hears his parents call a gay pride parade 'a bunch of perverts' then this isn't the first time they have heard this type of language. It won't be a new experience. It wasn't the parade that made his/her parents into bigots. The new experience will be seeing people who are happy and proud, acknowledging who the are, while he has hidden who he is.

Some of the things you say I agree with. I don't like hearing "white" accepted as a pejorative term, but you have to realize that it's just a small group of people that think this acceptable, and they happen to be very vocal. You should also consider why that is more likely to be considered acceptable. It's the swing of the pendulum. Not too long ago the things you're considering as double standards would have paled in comparison to actual society-wide, institutionalized double standards. If I was a black person in the United States I would be a radical. It's amazing, with the history, that any black person is willing to give any white person the slightest benefit of the doubt.

Society is filled with pro-heterosexual messages and when a few people start making pro-equality statements people lose their minds. Now we've reached a stage where it's okay to be gay as long as you don't talk about it. And of course the flipside of that is the image of the deviant homosexual hiding their true nature. I agree that in a perfect society there would be no need for a gay pride parade, but we're not there yet, and if you are truly accepting of all people you can look at very recent history and maybe get some sense of why we're in the state we're in.

One thing you are failing to see is that it's not your struggle so it's not your place to accept or approve. You're not being tolerant or liberal, you're just being a human being.

"If some young gay person hears his parents call a gay pride parade 'a bunch of perverts' then this isn't the first time they have heard this type of language..."

No, and that's the point. The parents do not actually know any homosexuals (the irony is they probably do, aside from their son, but are unaware of the fact -- one does not take special note of knowing another human at work or at the shooting range) in their lives and they see only these "grotesque" representations. They would be appalled that their son is "one of those", for that is what he becomes upon announcing his homosexuality even if he is a moderately introverted, quiet, private individual. People find it hard to accept that most homosexuals blend in with the crowd because they simply are the crowd. Those who we see and that form the misrepresentations are actually an extreme and extroverted minority. But how can his parents know any better? It's similar to branding all blacks as hoodlums because that's what we are exposed to on the news. It's the availability heuristic at work; it is simple psychology that most people fall into the trap of.

"The new experience will be seeing people who are happy and proud, acknowledging who the are, while he has hidden who he is."

I think that's a flawed notion. The superficiality might suggest happiness -- indeed, gayness -- but that display means nothing for the parade attendees' personal lives. To suggest that the boy's "true self" is a loud and superficial parade attendee and not the same young man he always was is a silly idea. Most humans fall somewhere in the middle between introvert and extrovert. Half of homosexuals are on the more introverted side. Guess what? They probably aren't out parading around and have no desire to.

You have to realize that "pride" parades represent, and always have represented, a small minority of homosexuals and are really only becoming less relevant and even detrimental to young and impressionable homosexuals who actually think they are supposed to change their entire life around to match the "gay lifestyle" they see represented. There certainly would be some young people struggling with their sexual orientation for whom such representations would indeed drive them to further confusion, perhaps to depression, and potentially suicide.

"Society is filled with pro-heterosexual messages and when a few people start making pro-equality statements people lose their minds."

Yes. Again, it's because the current societal representation of the homosexual is this strange "other", not your neighbour or co-worker. I spoke on this above. "Pride" parades serve to celebrate this "otherness" and differences between "us and them" and they contribute to the representations that cause many people to react as such.

"Now we've reached a stage where it's okay to be gay as long as you don't talk about it."

That is a tricky one. People can be uncomfortable openly and seriously discussing anything to do with sex in general. That said, talking to someone on a personal basis and parading around nude are two very different things.

You have to remember that the homosexual subset of the population is, as a group of humans, not immune to having weirdos and morons among the group. I think people take for granted that when they have met one homosexual, they have met them all. It seems to be a rather retarded thought process considering that one would hope a reasonable person would be able to continue the line of thinking and realize that all humans are different, but it does not seem to commonly happen. There are heterosexuals and homosexuals alike (duh, they're human) who are loud and obnoxious and feel the need to speak loudly in inappropriate venues about their sex lives or anything else really. The issue is if you call out someone doing this who is a homosexual, they often pull the "you're a homophobe" card when in fact that person was actually being vulgar and obnoxious at the wrong place and the wrong time and it isn't about sexual orientation. Being a homosexual does not give one licence to do and say whatever they want, and that is an expectation that a small and vocal minority certainly have. That rubs people the wrong way too and is part of the whole parade and "pride" issue. One can accept oneself and be a confident individual without being a total asshole. We certainly see a lack of courtesy and respect for fellow human beings in modern society and the attitude around "pride" parades exemplifies this.

"...it's not your struggle..."

It is an assumption that I am a heterosexual, not a fact. As for the word "struggle": that opens a can of worms that I won't get in to but suffice it to say that self victimization is also something I do not defend.
 
Last edited:

The_Beginning

Well-Known Member
Seems to me the history of western civilization has basically been one long parade of the white, heterosexual, and monied classes. Statements such as the one above are generally expressions of despair around losing control of those that have historically been enslaved, imprisoned, burnt, hanged, raped, and banished for their 'deviant' humanness. I get it: it sucks when the person you hired gets promoted instead of you. But fifty years of consciousness evolution has not quite yet created an equal playing field, so I suspect the scales may wobble a bit as they find their level. No worry though; I'm sure the day when we all hold hands across the globe and share a delicious Coca-Cola is right around the corner.

Blaming people who happen to be white for things that happened before they were born is insane. Yes, it happens but plenty of stupidity occurs in society. This is stupidity at its finest.

Every group has been enslaved, conquered, and raped at some point. The Scottish could play the victim card about what happened to their ancestors or they could get on with it. The Jews certainly have a right to wallow in self pity and accept that they will never amount to anything and are forever "second class citizens" or they could leave the past in the past and live their lives. And they notoriously do -- for a small minority in America, their collective success and mastery in various industries is rather astonishing.

Those who wish to cry will cry. Those who wish to laugh will laugh. Those who wish to win make it happen.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
"If some young gay person hears his parents call a gay pride parade 'a bunch of perverts' then this isn't the first time they have heard this type of language..."

No, and that's the point. The parents do not actually know any homosexuals (the irony is they probably do, aside from their son, but are unaware of the fact -- one does not take special note of knowing another human at work or at the shooting range) in their lives and they see only these "grotesque" representations. They would be appalled that their son is "one of those", for that is what he becomes upon announcing his homosexuality even if he is a moderately introverted, quiet, private individual. People find it hard to accept that most homosexuals blend in with the crowd because they simply are the crowd. Those who we see and that form the misrepresentations are actually an extreme and extroverted minority. But how can his parents know any better? It's similar to branding all blacks as hoodlums because that's what we are exposed to on the news. It's the availability heuristic at work; it is simple psychology that most people fall into the trap of.

"The new experience will be seeing people who are happy and proud, acknowledging who the are, while he has hidden who he is."

I think that's a flawed notion. The superficiality might suggest happiness -- indeed, gayness -- but that display means nothing for the parade attendees' personal lives. To suggest that the boy's "true self" is a loud and superficial parade attendee and not the same young man he always was is a silly idea. Most humans fall somewhere in the middle between introvert and extrovert. Half of homosexuals are on the more introverted side. Guess what? They probably aren't out parading around and have no desire to.

You have to realize that "pride" parades represent, and always have represented, a small minority of homosexuals and are really only becoming less relevant and even detrimental to young and impressionable homosexuals who actually think they are supposed to change their entire life around to match the "gay lifestyle" they see represented. There certainly would be some young people struggling with their sexual orientation for whom such representations would indeed drive them to further confusion, perhaps to depression, and potentially suicide.

"Society is filled with pro-heterosexual messages and when a few people start making pro-equality statements people lose their minds."

Yes. Again, it's because the current societal representation of the homosexual is this strange "other", not your neighbour or co-worker. I spoke on this above. "Pride" parades serve to celebrate this "otherness" and differences between "us and them" and they contribute to the representations that cause many people to react as such.

"Now we've reached a stage where it's okay to be gay as long as you don't talk about it."

That is a tricky one. People can be uncomfortable openly and seriously discussing anything to do with sex in general. That said, talking to someone on a personal basis and parading around nude are two very different things.

You have to remember that the homosexual subset of the population is, as a group of humans, not immune to having weirdos and morons among the group. I think people take for granted that when they have met one homosexual, they have met them all. It seems to be a rather retarded thought process considering that one would hope a reasonable person would be able to continue the line of thinking and realize that all humans are different, but it does not seem to commonly happen. There are heterosexuals and homosexuals alike (duh, they're human) who are loud and obnoxious and feel the need to speak loudly in inappropriate venues about their sex lives or anything else really. The issue is if you call out someone doing this who is a homosexual, they often pull the "you're a homophobe" card when in fact that person was actually being vulgar and obnoxious at the wrong place and the wrong time and it isn't about sexual orientation. Being a homosexual does not give one licence to do and say whatever they want, and that is an expectation that a small and vocal minority certainly have. That rubs people the wrong way too and it part of the whole parade and "pride" issue. One can accept oneself and be a confident individual without being a total asshole. We certainly see a lack of courtesy and respect for fellow human beings in modern society and the attitude around "pride" parades exemplifies this.

"...it's not your struggle..."
It is an assumption that I am a heterosexual, not a fact. As for the word "struggle": that opens a can of worms that I won't get in to but suffice it to say that self victimization is also something I do not defend.

I see you as a person who is trying to be inclusive but in my opinion you don't understand that you don't get to choose. The world will change with or without your permission. You can't be liberal on your own terms. It's not your choice to determine if the way another person deals with their struggle is acceptable or not except to yourself. Thanks for taking the time to consider my points.
I have to say that your hypotheticals are not persuasive and come across as the sorts of manufactured fiction that politicians use to win votes, but have no place in a real exchange of ideas conducted in good faith. I'm only saying that as feedback to help you improve.
 

The_Beginning

Well-Known Member
china and india are primitive countries? wtf?

are you buddies with crystal geezer?

No country is perfect obviously, and level of development is relative. Sure, China and India look better compared to Liberia or Sierra Leone, but what does that count for really?
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom