Why do people get so hung up on gays anyway?

Obviously, but then you get the people that don't want to discuss it, don't want to acknowledge it and finally the people that don't think it should exist.

Basically for the same reasons some people think that Jersey Shore should be taken off air.

@KCK: That having multiple partners isn't considered cheating.

I have more sympathy with the people who think Jersey Shore should be taken off-air. Not much more, but at least it's taking up space which could be used for programmes they want to watch, whereas what gays get up to in the bedroom is absolutely none of their business.

@snailbait Er, yes, that was what I said originally.

G: Yes, but you could say that gay marriages are...yeah, you know where that is going. It is taking eligible people off the market whom would otherwise be forced to 'pretend to be straight'. Now, you might say 'but gays won't suddenly marry people of the opposite gender, they'll just remain single!'

To that, I say, do you REALLY think the Jersey Shore will be replaced by some Joss Whedon magnum opus?

edited 24th Jan '11 7:25:53 PM by MrAHR

Oops sorry. I meant having multiple partners is considered cheating. My bad.

@snailbait Now I'm confused.

You said, at least I think, that the ignorant masses believe having multiple partners is okay. I'm disagreeing with that.

@snailbait Oh...pffft! I said the opposite, therefore we're both in agreement!

@ AHR: Of course it wouldn't be. But if, in some bizarre parallel universe where this was a plausible occurance, Jersey Shore was replaced by a Joss Whedon series, those people would watch and enjoy said series. If gays were in straight marriages, this would have no effect on the lives of people opposed to homosexuality. The only reason homosexual relationships bother them is because they can't mind their own businesses.

Oh okay. Pardon my stupidity.

@snailbait I forgive you!

It's just outdated and modern bigotry stems from general slant against sex as anything for recreation. Heck, the Bible expressly encourages, say, multiple wives, but many modern Christians find polygamy/ polyamory/ sex out of wedlock in general to be "sinful" and repulsive.

Honestly, if we can think of polygamy as a sin, surely the Bible can be stretched enough to claim that homosexuality is okay and that women are equal to men.

Alright, if in my skim through I missed something that was said similar to what I'm about to say, I will apologise in advance.

Anthropologically speaking you can see a strong correlation between societies that have a strong space for growing the population and homophobia, similarly, you see it also in the reverse direction. When there are large population pressures preventing or discouraging an increase in population, tolerance of homosexuality rises considerably.

In the case of the greeks and romans, they actually have very low population capacity and you can see a high amount of homophilia. Then later, you can see, with Europe constantly being depopulated with plenty of breathing room, homophobia skyrocketed. As another example, China has historically been filled to the brim with people and historically has been highly tolerant of homosexuality up until the Soviet-influenced attacks on homosexuals. Even then, that only lasted a few decades after 1950, and today, China is again fairly tolerant (last survey I saw put it at 80% of Chinese don't care or are positive about homosexuality).

Specific manifestations change from time period to time period and in the case of Europe and Mid-east, it was mostly religion. In the case of China between 1950-1990, it was government instilled but because Chinese culture itself was never homophobic, it didn't last long once the government stopped forcing its heavy hand into the issue.

edited 25th Jan '11 8:23:38 AM by breadloaf