US Navy lesbian couple share first gay dockside kiss

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by nortonrider

Do you believe that the words Straight and Ignorant are interchangeable?

No, but the majority of people who are ignorant to gays and their rights happen to be straight - this coming from a straight guy.

[Kwesi]

Originally Posted by nortonrider

Do you believe that the words Straight and Ignorant are interchangeable?

No. That's precisely why I used "ignorant" instead of "straight." I am straight and I like to consider myself an ally of LGBT community. There are millions just like me. Folks who recognize that a fellow human being should not be persecuted based on something that really shouldn't matter. In fact, I should've substituted "gay" with "enlightened" or something along those lines. This isn't a gay vs. straight issue it's tolerance vs. irrational intolerance and you see it everywhere unfortunately.

[nortonrider]

Originally Posted by i_got_a_mohawk

I somewhat doubt it, and think you are clutching at straws.

There are ignorant folk in every demographic.

I just was surprised to see my post was edited to say something that I didn't want it it say and figured that I would point it out.

[fingerbun]

Originally Posted by john_martin_sai

And your point was....?

[Chebass88]

The "tolerance" game is pretty funny. I am hetero, and love women of all shapes and colors. I don't find other men appealing at all, and am not going to engage in relations with one. However, just because I do not like something or find it acceptable for myself does not mean I can prohibit someone else from who **THEY** find attractive. Other than tradition and good old fashioned hate, there is no reason to prohibit homosexuals (and homosexual behavior, if you want to separate the two) from the same status accorded to me, who just happens to be a part of the hetero majority.

But this doesn't mean that one population subset should be promoted OR excluded over another. And this is where the fault lies - it is not "a sailor kissing her loved one when she returns from deployment". It is a lesbian sailor. Ooooh. Gasp! Many people in this thread already viewed it as a non-issue. Of course, the media portrayed it as an inflammatory issue, knowing that the shock value would guarantee the ratings desired. Thousands of sailors/soldiers/marines/airmen come home every day and are reunited with their loved ones, and we never talk about them.

Given enough time, it will be a complete non-issue. Two females kissing after a deployment? So what. Two guys holding hands in a grocery store? Meh. Two females in a happy multi-year marriage? Zzzzzzzzz.

Without the broad passage of time to mitigate such changes though, social change occurs through the passage of laws prohibiting discrimination, or what is perceived as actively promoting a certain lifestyle.

[Lee H]

Originally Posted by i_got_a_mohawk

For a start, gay pride parades don't exclude straight people.

Sure you could have a straight pride parade. But nobody would really care because straight people aren't pushing to get the rights that only gay people have.

The mentality that pushed such segregation is fueled by groups (generally within the majorities) who have abused the pride term, to act as a segregator. The negative connotations surrounding "pride" for majorities has been soiled by a minority within the majority. (prime example being why "White Pride" is never seen as a positive thing).

I had a personal experience with just such a person, who abused rights recently.
Besides my day job, I work part time as a bar bouncer (and in doing so am often bored and posting on here via phone). I had a large gay man decide that he was going to hang out with the girls in the women's bathroom. The first time I caught him I gave him a warning. The second time was when the bar owner's wife came to me complaining that she could not use the bathroom because of him. I reached in the bathroom, and grabbed his collar, and pulled him out of the bathroom. I told him that if he went in there again, I was going to escort him out of the bar. He pushed me out of his way, and told me that I could not remove him, because he was gay, and IF I touched him it would be a hate crime

Now this story goes on and on, and the end result was him still whining that I could not remove him, as he was standing outside the bar. I missed the end of his BS, because I started my harley, and the pipes covered his voice...

The pertinent point to this conversation is that you cannot dismiss segregation as being a trait of those who are against homosexuality. I personally experienced it being used as a tool for the manipulation of others, and an excuse for bad behavior.
If you are going to call one side intolerant, take careful consideration of those who are intolerant on the other side, or your point could backfire

[Actium]

Originally Posted by pharmakon

Anyone catch the problem in this article?


As a former sailor, I am highly offended by this!

Wouldn't Sailor be in caps? Just sayin...

[Kwesi]

Originally Posted by Lee H

I had a personal experience with just such a person, who abused rights recently.
Besides my day job, I work part time as a bar bouncer (and in doing so am often bored and posting on here via phone). I had a large gay man decide that he was going to hang out with the girls in the women's bathroom. The first time I caught him I gave him a warning. The second time was when the bar owner's wife came to me complaining that she could not use the bathroom because of him. I reached in the bathroom, and grabbed his collar, and pulled him out of the bathroom. I told him that if he went in there again, I was going to escort him out of the bar. He pushed me out of his way, and told me that I could not remove him, because he was gay, and IF I touched him it would be a hate crime

Now this story goes on and on, and the end result was him still whining that I could not remove him, as he was standing outside the bar. I missed the end of his BS, because I started my harley, and the pipes covered his voice...

The pertinent point to this conversation is that you cannot dismiss segregation as being a trait of those who are against homosexuality. I personally experienced it being used as a tool for the manipulation of others, and an excuse for bad behavior.
If you are going to call one side intolerant, take careful consideration of those who are intolerant on the other side, or your point could backfire

I'm having a hard time seeing exactly what you're trying to say. Is it that because there are probably some sketchy gay folks out there, limiting the freedoms of an entire group of people should be considered? I hope that's not it...

[i_got_a_mohawk]

Originally Posted by Lee H

I had a personal experience with just such a person, who abused rights recently.
Besides my day job, I work part time as a bar bouncer (and in doing so am often bored and posting on here via phone). I had a large gay man decide that he was going to hang out with the girls in the women's bathroom. The first time I caught him I gave him a warning. The second time was when the bar owner's wife came to me complaining that she could not use the bathroom because of him. I reached in the bathroom, and grabbed his collar, and pulled him out of the bathroom. I told him that if he went in there again, I was going to escort him out of the bar. He pushed me out of his way, and told me that I could not remove him, because he was gay, and IF I touched him it would be a hate crime

Now this story goes on and on, and the end result was him still whining that I could not remove him, as he was standing outside the bar. I missed the end of his BS, because I started my harley, and the pipes covered his voice...

The pertinent point to this conversation is that you cannot dismiss segregation as being a trait of those who are against homosexuality. I personally experienced it being used as a tool for the manipulation of others, and an excuse for bad behavior.
If you are going to call one side intolerant, take careful consideration of those who are intolerant on the other side, or your point could backfire

That's where you should know what you are able to do (ie, throw him out), and not buy into the BS.

Yes, people try to abuse powers like that all the time.

You judge the individual, you don't judge the demographic.

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally Posted by Chebass88

Step 1. Go to Google Images.
Step 2. Enter "first kiss deployment"
Step 3. Be shocked at all of the photos of male personnel kissing their female significant others (while in uniform)
Step 4. Post about how that behavior will degrade with time.

So, again, how is this any different? Are you suggesting that there will be a degradation of the standards for the traditional "first kiss" and it will turn into something completely different?

As far as I am aware, repeal of DADT did not eliminate the codes of behavior while in uniform.

Sir, you have been doing nothing but bringing reasonableness and nonreactionary arguments into this thread. And per controversial TB OT topic defacto norms, this is unacceptable!

(and yeah, the two women in the original photo are hot )

[fingerbun]

Originally Posted by Lee H

I had a personal experience with just such a person, who abused rights recently.
Besides my day job, I work part time as a bar bouncer (and in doing so am often bored and posting on here via phone). I had a large gay man decide that he was going to hang out with the girls in the women's bathroom. The first time I caught him I gave him a warning. The second time was when the bar owner's wife came to me complaining that she could not use the bathroom because of him. I reached in the bathroom, and grabbed his collar, and pulled him out of the bathroom. I told him that if he went in there again, I was going to escort him out of the bar. He pushed me out of his way, and told me that I could not remove him, because he was gay, and IF I touched him it would be a hate crime

Now this story goes on and on, and the end result was him still whining that I could not remove him, as he was standing outside the bar. I missed the end of his BS, because I started my harley, and the pipes covered his voice...

The pertinent point to this conversation is that you cannot dismiss segregation as being a trait of those who are against homosexuality. I personally experienced it being used as a tool for the manipulation of others, and an excuse for bad behavior.
If you are going to call one side intolerant, take careful consideration of those who are intolerant on the other side, or your point could backfire

A gay guy wants to go into the womens' room in a country where that's not the done thing....sure...don't let him. He wants to complain that it's discrimination, sure call him on the BS. I agree with all that. That's not a reason to ban all gay behaviour though.

It's a case of drawing an intelligent line. In some parts of the world they deal with heterosexual adultery preemptively by removing the clitorises of women so they can no longer feel sexual pleasure. There is such a thing as being too extreme in the lines you draw.

[ShredderMaximus]

I've always wondered why certain people have such a fixation on what other people are doing with their "junk." Unless it is either directly or indirectly causing pain/suffering (consensual s&m and bsdm not included...) on an individual or group of individuals, thats their thing, have at it!

Originally Posted by Kwesi

This isn't a gay vs. straight issue it's tolerance vs. irrational intolerance.

[/thread]

[EricF]

Originally Posted by i_got_a_mohawk

...judge the individual, you don't judge the demographic.

Exactly.

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

Originally Posted by i_got_a_mohawk

Because a member of the minority shouldn't be treated any differently than a member of the majority?

I don't see homosexuals stopping heterosexuals doing anything, yet the opposite is far from true (as a couple members in this thread have illustrated).

For what it matters, a great deal of the people here who are pro-equality, are heterosexual.

+1

[Kwesi]

Originally Posted by Chebass88

The "tolerance" game is pretty funny. I am hetero, and love women of all shapes and colors. I don't find other men appealing at all, and am not going to engage in relations with one. However, just because I do not like something or find it acceptable for myself does not mean I can prohibit someone else from who **THEY** find attractive. Other than tradition and good old fashioned hate, there is no reason to prohibit homosexuals (and homosexual behavior, if you want to separate the two) from the same status accorded to me, who just happens to be a part of the hetero majority.

But this doesn't mean that one population subset should be promoted OR excluded over another. And this is where the fault lies - it is not "a sailor kissing her loved one when she returns from deployment". It is a lesbian sailor. Ooooh. Gasp! Many people in this thread already viewed it as a non-issue. Of course, the media portrayed it as an inflammatory issue, knowing that the shock value would guarantee the ratings desired. Thousands of sailors/soldiers/marines/airmen come home every day and are reunited with their loved ones, and we never talk about them.

Given enough time, it will be a complete non-issue. Two females kissing after a deployment? So what. Two guys holding hands in a grocery store? Meh. Two females in a happy multi-year marriage? Zzzzzzzzz.

Without the broad passage of time to mitigate such changes though, social change occurs through the passage of laws prohibiting discrimination, or what is perceived as actively promoting a certain lifestyle.

I'm with you about 100% on everything you've said in this thread but I think when it comes to civil rights issues of any kind, it has to be an issue before it's a non-issue. Folks have to be educated as to why intolerance on such a level is wrong. Their children need to be told that just because someone is different (sexuality, race, nationality, religion, etc.) doesn't make them any better or worse than you. I'm sure race was a non-issue during the majority of the slave trade, that's just how things were. But somethings, as I'm sure you'd agree, need to change and chance doesn't happen when folks are quiet .

[stratovani]

Originally Posted by ShredderMaximus

I've always wondered why certain people have such a fixation on what other people are doing with their "junk." Unless it is either directly or indirectly causing pain/suffering (consensual s&m and bsdm not included...) on an individual or group of individuals, thats their thing, have at it!



[/thread]

+1000000!

[ShredderMaximus]

Originally Posted by Lee H

I had a personal experience with just such a person, who abused rights recently.
(bunch of text)

I bet he was high on "the weed" too...














j/k

[Jim Nazium]

Originally Posted by Kwesi

...I think when it comes to civil rights issues of any kind, it has to be an issue before it's a non-issue.

I agree. It will be great when this is no longer noteworthy, but we aren't there yet. This was the first time a gay couple was allowed to have this sort-of-ceremonial "first kiss", so it's news.

[Bob Lee (QSC)]

Originally Posted by john_martin_sai

That's almost the exact opposite of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

[Kwesi]

Originally Posted by ShredderMaximus

I bet he was high on "the weed" too...














j/k

LOL!!! Best laugh I've had so far !