tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4883208894706839450.post6525076124542394651..comments2023-06-02T09:43:42.178-05:00Comments on J.A.T.G.A.B. Jewish Author Tough Gay Activist Bear: The hate ... The hate...Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11792277745958053121noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4883208894706839450.post-4439214173400515682009-06-13T14:01:58.347-05:002009-06-13T14:01:58.347-05:00"Josh" thank you so much for your reason..."Josh" thank you so much for your reasoned and rational comments. You are obviously a deeply unhappy person and for that I am truly sorry. But your comments only prove just what I was saying in my blog post, which I doubt if you read, and which you certainly aren't mature enough to comprehend even if you did. Reread your comment and you can see that it positively drips with SELF-hatred.<br /><br />I am not being facetious when I suggest that you might benefit from counseling or therapy. You clearly suffer from N.P.D. [http://jatgab.blogspot.com/2009/05/lgbt-and-npd.html] and who knows what else.<br /><br />In the meantime, I have noted your IP address, sweetheart.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11792277745958053121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4883208894706839450.post-19269492372127158022009-06-13T10:39:14.673-05:002009-06-13T10:39:14.673-05:00I read the original post, and yes, it WAS hateful....I read the original post, and yes, it WAS hateful. You're a self-righteous c*nt who wants to be "the only gay in the village," and viciously rip into anything new like the homophobes which preceded you and your generation. It was incredibly meatheaded for you to say those things, that asexuals were "trying to muscle in on your territory" and giving us a bunch of ridiculous, fallacious spin trying to deny that isn't fooling anyone. For a great many people, you will forever be that irate, closed-minded yokel who proves once and for all that once new ideas are accepted, humanity slips back into its old ways, and even homosexuals can harbour stinging prejudice, and be self-righteous, and self-centred, and otherwise pig-headed goons.<br /><br />**** you,<br />JoshAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4883208894706839450.post-91497087849508825712009-02-22T15:31:00.000-05:002009-02-22T15:31:00.000-05:00Thanks for some very interesting and thought-provo...Thanks for some very interesting and thought-provoking comments, Ksen and grasexuality. <BR/><BR/>While I do interact with younger people, I have to confess I was unaware of the new use of the term "hate." I'll keep what you say in mind, although it does generally seem as if people are using it in its original definition, at least some of the time.<BR/><BR/>Whatever groups are included or may at some point be included in GLBT, as long as everyone in whatever group has a support system of some kind and access to the media -- even if it's just a blog or website -- to get across their pov, it should help them feel less marginalized.<BR/><BR/>As for how to identify when you cross over two or more groups, I suppose it depends on where and with whom you feel most comfortable. People often stand with the group that they feel needs more exposure and understanding. <BR/><BR/>Again, thanks for your comments.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11792277745958053121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4883208894706839450.post-68240787710889734122009-02-22T13:51:00.000-05:002009-02-22T13:51:00.000-05:00I agree with you about the PC stuff--I think in so...I agree with you about the PC stuff--I think in some cases it gets to be quite ridiculous, even to the point that people attempt to brainwash others through the use of "sensitivity programs." And I, personally, don't think it's un-PC to talk about homophobia among some trans people--Christine Jorgensen certainly wasn't fighting for gay rights, now, was she. Go ahead and blast her for it, if you want.<BR/><BR/>However, I do think there may be a generation gap here, because I think "hating" is a word that older people and younger people actually define quite differently. You seem to be taking it at its original meaning, as in to harbor intense antipathy towards something. But to younger people, it's just slang for making any kind of negative comment, with or without any real malice behind it. This is probably why it seems so frivolous, and makes them seem overly dramatic--because to you, it implies something much more serious than what they are really trying to imply. Though, personally, I really dislike the word "hating" in any sense.<BR/><BR/>I'm not entirely sure what your point about youth actually was, though. If you are pointing to it as a reason why asexuality doesn't need to be taken so seriously, I don't really see how that applies. There are a number of <A HREF="http://www.asexuality.org/en/index.php?s=558a5bd7c07936f7e4af39e3d525391e&showforum=32" REL="nofollow">older asexuals</A> out there, too.<BR/><BR/>I also agree that you can't be a spokesperson for trans people. But there's a very fine line you have to tread here, because in the GLbt community, trans people often get lost in the shuffle. Whether they are intentionally dismissed or ignored (as unfortunately often happens), or just because people don't take the time to understand what their issues are, I think the people involved need to recognize their culpability. Being part of (especially a leader of) an organization that claims to support trans people means that if you decide not to include them in something, you ought to be held responsible for it.<BR/><BR/>It's fine to have blogs and things which are mainly focused on gay issues. Trans people and asexuals will, and have, started their own blogs. These are communities within a community, and it's fine to branch off in different directions like that. But when you start talking about the larger community, then we get into problems of inclusion vs. non-inclusion.<BR/><BR/>Personally, I think we all have a lot more to fight for than just gay rights, and I'm NOT talking about asexuality. I wouldn't claim that asexuals should be a major focus, although I do think it is important to recognize how phallocentric and sexualized our culture is. I think gender, rather than sex-related, issues are more radical, and more at the heart of everything. I believe that if trans people are taken seriously, and given the rights they should have, then all the rest would naturally follow. But change seems to be happening starting on the outer edges of the issue and working itself in, rather than the other way around. People can only handle so much of it at a time, I suppose.<BR/><BR/>All of this is mirrored very well in the feminist community--you have black feminists getting upset at white feminists for not recognizing their issues, and different schools of thought warring with one another at the same time. I can certainly see why gay assimilationists wouldn't want to include other queers within their community, although I think their approach is a little like putting a tiny band-aid on a giant, gaping, gangrenous wound.<BR/><BR/>And, just to hit the "slippery slope" argument before it rears its ugly head, I absolutely do not support pedophilia, bestiality, furries, and so on as being a part of the queer movement. I think that we probably ought to define what "queer" means more specifically, because all these things are related to GENDER norms, not just challenging any norms. Some sanctions are there for a good reason. I think we are being too vague, and inviting people to claim that this is about purely sexual minorities, when clearly it is not. There IS a valid reason why these people are trying to get in on our movement, and we should take responsibility for it.<BR/><BR/>I do think that asexuality inherently challenges some aspects of heteronormativity (which I've already outlined in my own blog), but I'm not saying that to edge into your community. I'm already here, as an asexual woman partnered to a trans woman, doing more visibility work for the lesbian community than for either ace or trans stuff. The discrimination I face from that makes whatever crap I get about asexuality seem like barely a speck of dust.<BR/><BR/>Maybe we have different ideas of what the community ought to be. But I really don't think we (two) are disagreeing all that much. You have every right to your opinion, and although it may have been formed in some level of ignorance, I'm not going to say you're hateful or being oppressive. I'm not going to call in the PC police. Say what you want, go ahead and call me a nitwit! I, for one, am not terribly sensitive to name-calling, and in fact, I quite enjoy a bit of verbal sparring. Hopefully, my comment will inspire some food for thought. :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4883208894706839450.post-85698899047755068532009-02-22T11:53:00.000-05:002009-02-22T11:53:00.000-05:00You know, maybe the issue is the alphabet soup. Yo...You know, maybe the issue is the alphabet soup. You know how the GLBTQQSABCDEFG...... All the little categories and and compartments will never be enough to encompass the full spectrum of Queerness, and it gets in the way because somebody always feels excluded. Feelings get hurt.<BR/>Never mind that the categories tend to bleed into one another. I am trans, but being attracted only to men means I'm gay too. So am I Gt or Tg? Which part of my identity goes first in the alphabet soup, and should I have to choose? Should there be a C for cub in there too? A P for passing straight? At the end of the day, I'm Queer and at hats pretty much it. Same thing with the Asexuals. Are they Homophiles first or Asexuals second? Who gets to decide? And is the cookie cutter even applied?<BR/>There's too many compartments that are supposed to signify some fort of a community, but IMHO the ever expanding acronym is doing more harm than good.<BR/>Just my 2 cents.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10435587456231259609noreply@blogger.com