- Joined
- 2 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 24,654
Sleepy said:Overcoming bigotry for one.
Have you any proof that bigotry is an always-everywhere feature of anyone how may be gay, or did the sentence just sound too glib to resist?
Sleepy said:Overcoming bigotry for one.
scorza said:"Diversity training" vs. "Political re-education". Same thing.
cleanbluesky said:The poster stated an opinion, if you wish to refute it please do so politely rather than taking time to express your personal feelings on a tabloid paper and dismissing his opinion simlultaneously as bigotry or some such.
The Daily Mail is merely a sensationalist paper as any other, although unlike others it prefers to draw sensationalism over immigration and race issues. If you dislike this, please buy one of the sensationslist papers that reinforce your existing opinions. Then we can dismiss you all as Guardianistas or some other cheap phrase that dismisses your opinion without the need to form an original sentence or address the points you have raised.
I still fail to see how thats achieving something. Not in the context as the previous poster was saying, anyway.Visage said:Nothing per se, but what is being acheived is the recognition that homosexuality is just as valid a sexuality as hetero sexuality.
In the same, way, Black pride is not about asserting that Black people are superior, but taking pride in the notion that colour affects ones validity as a human being is now outdated.
If Gay pride was about being proud to be gay, then only gay people would be allowed to take part, which is patently not the case.
No it isn'tBorris said:That's still namby-pamby PC nonsense though.
I do hope that wasn't said in an accusatory toneSleepy said:Overcoming bigotry for one.
Life long tory voter here, hardly a Guardianistas. Anyway the Daily Bigot is a symbol of whats wrong with middle Britain with its narrow minded views, its reactionary politics its fear of difference. As such its a legitimate target and the phrase is a valid identifier to label that demographic.cleanbluesky said:The poster stated an opinion, if you wish to refute it please do so politely rather than taking time to express your personal feelings on a tabloid paper and dismissing his opinion simlultaneously as bigotry or some such.
The Daily Mail is merely a sensationalist paper as any other, although unlike others it prefers to draw sensationalism over immigration and race issues. If you dislike this, please buy one of the sensationslist papers that reinforce your existing opinions. Then we can dismiss you all as Guardianistas or some other cheap phrase that dismisses your opinion without the need to form an original sentence or address the points you have raised.
Sleepy said:One encourages choice the others denies everything but the part line. Yep completely the same.
MookJong said:The intention of diversity training is to get you to understand and respect people from outside your own social spectrum. The intention is posative.
Political re-education can also be used show other people in a nagative light, the intention behind ultra left / right wing political re-education for example is not to be posative about other social groups.
cleanbluesky said:Have you any proof that bigotry is an always-everywhere feature of anyone how may be gay, or did the sentence just sound too glib to resist?
allready partially answered this upthread, but as responses here show there is still a negative response to being gay. So efforts to convince people that being gay isn't a crime are still required or do you want to live in a society where hatred of people is swept under the carpet?Moi said:History I take it, is a foreign country?
Sleepy said:Life long tory voter here, hardly a Guardianistas. Anyway the Daily Bigot is a symbol of whats wrong with middle Britain with its narrow minded views, its reactionary politics its fear of difference. As such its a legitimate target and the phrase is a valid identifier to label that demographic.
Other than those too weak to actually share their views and have their outmoded concepts deservedly ridiculed I haven't seen any hatred in this thread.Sleepy said:allready partially answered this upthread, but as responses here show there is still a negative response to being gay. So efforts to convince people that being gay isn't a crime are still required or do you want to live in a society where hatred of people is swept under the carpet?
Gilly said:What have gayers achieved by being gay?
Is diversity training about telling people what to think, or is it about setting boundaries on how they express their thoughts, through their actions, in the context of the workplace?scorza said:People should be free to think whatever they want without persecution imo.
Sleepy said:allready partially answered this upthread, but as responses here show there is still a negative response to being gay. So efforts to convince people that being gay isn't a crime are still required or do you want to live in a society where hatred of people is swept under the carpet?
Actually they did. If they really objected they could have quit. Guess their moral objection wasn't that strong though.scorza said:Like these firemen had a choice on whether or not to hand out leaflets at a gay pride event?
And people should expect to get the same service from public servants regardless of their sexual orientation. And as firemen are payed for by taxpayers money the publics right to service trumps their right to object to serve that part of the community. Anyway they can still think evil thoughts they just cannot refuse to do their jobs based on their brand of bigotry.So its ok to brainwash people as long as you're doing it for what you think are positive reasons? What is it they say the road to hell is paved with?
People should be free to think whatever they want without persecution imo.
They had the choice not to be firemen. The job was a core responsibility (as quoted earlier), and they don't get to pick and choose.scorza said:Like these firemen had a choice on whether or not to hand out leaflets at a gay pride event?
I know where your heading but sometimes its useful especially in a fast moving thread where concise terminology is required. The benefit of speed outweighs the inaccuracy of labelling a diverse population with a specific term.cleanbluesky said:Regardless of the legitimacy of your opinion of the Daily Mail, am I to take it that you approve of 'labelling' various demographics?
scorza said:Like these firemen had a choice on whether or not to hand out leaflets at a gay pride event?
So its ok to brainwash people as long as you're doing it for what you think are positive reasons? What is it they say the road to hell is paved with?
People should be free to think whatever they want without persecution imo.
Wan't reffering to anyone in this thread, aimed more at certain religious views expoused by some and to a demographic that has problems with differant sexual mores.Gilly said:Other than those too weak to actually share their views and have their outmoded concepts deservedly ridiculed I haven't seen any hatred in this thread.
Your argument is flawed, a group with a common interest need not face prejudice to still have common ground requiring political activism.cleanbluesky said:Gay pride is not merely about acceptance, it is a show of political force. There need not be any prejudice against homosexuals for a group to construct the idea that there is... if there was no prejudice then pro-homo organisations wouldn't need to exist, which is why you wont find them say 'everything is fine', instead all you hear is constant crticisim.
Sleepy said:I know where your heading but sometimes its useful especially in a fast moving thread where concise terminology is required. The benefit of speed outweighs the inaccuracy of labelling a diverse population with a specific term.