Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
Then I'd like to answer a few points from telekinetic, for he is trying to genuinely consider what I'm saying, even if he opposes it.
|
Thank you, I like to at least respect the amount of effort you have put into communicating your position with a full read-through and attempt at analysis, and appreciate that you did the same.
Quote:
Quote:
|
This paragraph exposes his personal biases and assumptions (that he passes off as being those alternately of 'the west', 'the system', or 'society'.)
|
And is this unsubstantiated accusation not your personal bias ...?
|
I did not intend it to be an accusation. It was my interpretation of your position, and you confirmed my interpretation within this very reply. What part of it do you feel is accusatory? You can have no other assumptions and biases than your own (whose else would you have?), and when I go into detail (1, 2, therefore 3) about what I see the assumptions as being, you confirm that my analysis of your thought process was, in fact, accurate.
Quote:
|
If people would just respond to the points raised and not try to blame or find personal motivations, there can be a lot of sharing of wisdom.
|
I think the difficulty a lot of people are having with your approach to this topic is that you are not trying to have a discussion with us. You are trying to share your wisdom, which is (in your mind) concrete and infallible facts about the way you see the world and society. Many of these things conflict with how most of us see society, but instead of discussion these conflicts, you just repeatedly tell us that we are wrong, and you are right. This does not make for good discussion, and if it continues, I doubt this thread will go much further, as anyone with pattern recognition skills has given up on it by now, if that haven't already.
Quote:
Quote:
|
1) Men are forced (by who?) to lose their manhood if they are effeminate
|
I probably shouldn't blame you for not knowing this very important fact about men and manhood. You probably grew up in a time in the West, when 'manhood' was already cleverly redefined as 'heterosexuality' and the entire pride and pressures of manhood that men have has shifted from manhood to 'heterosexuality' and instead of trying to prove their manhood, westernised males prove their heterosexuality (real or not, almost often exaggerated). And the stigma of 'third gender' has shifted to 'homosexuality' so, men keep away from showing any kind of desire or intimacy for men, like hot potatoes. However, It's a fact that anyone who has grown up in a society that has not been heterosexualized (Non-Western societies are still living in that time zone), knows all too well. The straight category is basically the 'manhood' category. And the category that you people today know as 'homosexual' is actually the 'third gender' category. My society is right now in the phase of being forcefully westernized/ heterosexualized (homosexualization of effeminate males is an integral part of this process), and I'm very concsiously studying the process whereby this change happens.
|
I am shrinking the font of your response on this section, to more accurately reflect the relative the the weight it carries, for me, in this discussion.
Presenting your opinions as unsourced facts is a cheap debate tactic, at best, and disingenuous, at worst. Your whole reply can be summed up as "yes, I believe that" and we can move on.
Quote:
Quote:
|
2) Effeminate homosexuals represent themselves (or are represented, alternately, by various groups) as being what it means for men to like men.
|
True.
|
I should have been more clear when stating my interpretation of your position. To clarify now, these three points are not something I believe, but something I believe YOU believe. Therefore, I will take your 'true' to mean 'yes, you accurately represent my position'
Quote:
Quote:
THEREFORE
3) Masculine homosexuals have to remain closeted and self-loathing, since, if they were outed as liking men, people will group them with the effeminate homosexuals and they will therefore lose their manhood because 1 and 2.
|
Although, the crux of what you're saying is right, the use of the word 'Masculine homosexual' is wrong.
|
No, it is not, but we will address that in a second. Again, this is me rephrasing your point, and you are confirming that (other than my word choice, which I admittedly used intentionally) I represent you accurately.
Quote:
|
I am not talking about a few males here, that the concept of 'masculine homosexual' would suggest. I'm talking about the entire straight population.
|
At best, a hasty generalization, or at worst, a false assertion
Quote:
|
The term 'homosexual' like actually stands for the effeminate male's sexuality for men.
|
No, homosexual means:
Quote:
1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex
|
and I will be ignoring/deleting any of your repeated insistences to the contrary.
Quote:
|
So, the terms 'masculine' and 'homosexual' are oxymorons. You might say, masculine males who like men (or who would like men if allowed), but then that would mean almost everybody.
|
Now THAT is a hasty generalization if I've ever seen one, and I don't believe it to be true for a minute. If you want to start another thread titled "all men really want to have sex with men" feel free, but I think that is MASSIVE scope-creep for this particular one. It makes some of your other assumptions make sense though, I suppose.
Quote:
Quote:
|
The anti-man group that the OP believes is being oppressed is the masculine homosexual. His proposed solution to this is to restrict the term 'homosexual' (with all of the, in his mind/society, negative connotations it carries) be restricted to effeminate men ("third genders"), so that upstanding manly men who just like to suck a little dick and pound some man-ass (or get pounded, I'm not totally clear if thats allowed for the manly men) now and then don't have their man-status negatively affected.
|
Although, laid in a very 'anti-man' way, you're partly correct. You're sounding pretty dismissive of the idea though, you've not explained what is wrong if I propose the above.
|
What I see wrong with this is you seem to have no problem with their being a stigma against effeminates or self-identified queers/homosexuals, as long as you're not included in it. That is a step backwards, not a step forwards.
Quote:
|
That is the way it has always been in the history. And that is the way it is in most parts of the world. Why shouldn't the West follow it too?
|
Obvious appeal to tradition fallacy is obvious.
Quote:
Quote:
|
The whole premise seems to be that he wants it to be OK to have sex with men without being labeled a homosexual or grouped with effeminate gays.
|
And if allowed, that is what any straight gendered male would do.
|
Yeah, I definitely noticed when you said that the first time, but repeating it as fact isn't going to get me to agree with you any more this time.
Quote:
1) Although, I have not quite dwelt upon it in detail, I have mentioned that the male effeminacy should be given due respect and dignity in the society, like it enjoyed in the very ancient times. The very first step to go towards that is to take it from behind the false 'man likes man' label, where it hides in the Western society, and give it recognition.
You people seem to think that to do this is to be anti-effeminacy. I don't see how!!
|
Because you're totally fine with them being stigmatized, as long as you also aren't.
Quote:
|
How is hiding behind straight male sexuality for men going to ever make male effeminacy find its due place and rights in the society?
|
Their 'due place' and rights are the same as yours and mine. They and you and I are human beings, and their 'place' and 'rights' should start and end with that.
Quote:
|
2) Why should I feel guilty about not dwelling upon it in detail on a thread I've created to discuss specifically how men are wrongly included in this concept of 'sexual orientation' developed by the third genders to camouflage their femininity. Why do you people think that men don't deserve any right? And any question of rights have to include women and queers in it to be of any relevance?
|
You take the inferior rights of women and "queers" as a given, and complain that your rights are being infringed by being grouped with them. If everyone has equal rights, your argument collapses in on itself. Therefore, it is based on the assumption that women and effeminate men must be and remain second-class.
Quote:
|
And why should masculine gendered males have to suffer the stigma of male effeminacy?
|
They shouldn't, because there should be no stigma.
Quote:
|
If you are concerned about the genuine rights of women and queers, then you would not support going about it the wrong way, to forcibly include male sexuality for men as part of queerhood, so that it makes the feminine males feel better about themselves.
|
Male sexuality for men is homosexual. Whether this is expressed in a feminine way or a masculine way, it is and will remain, by definition, homosexual, in all contexts.
Quote:
|
And you don't feel that it violates the gender rights of masculine gendered males. Because in your eyes, to be masculine gendered is to be 'evil', the 'oppressor' and nothing can be away from the truth.
|
I feel nothing of the sort, and I don't see where in my post you pulled that from.
Quote:
|
You still haven't suggested how this view is bigoted ...
|
Basing an entire social concept around the idea that there is nothing wrong with stigmatizing homosexuals is bigoted. Plain and simple.
Quote:
|
People who have agendas, always seek to belittle broader issues by nailing them on to the person who raises the issue.
|
The only one with an agenda here is you, we are merely carrying on a discussion of your posts.
Quote:
|
You want to remove the negative connotation to what> Male desire for men. Or male effeminacy? Or like the Western society, you think the two are related?
|
Related does not mean inextricably linked. They are related. This relationship is not inseparable. And I would like to remove any negative connotation from both.
Quote:
|
All I'm calling for, is to realign the male world in the way its meant to be. Where identities are based on our notions of whether we're men or women. And sexual preferences are just that -- preferences.
|
Hey, if that's all you were calling for, we'd be in total agreement. It isn't.
Quote:
Are you saying that either there should be sexual categories as defined (and more importantly, practised) by the western notion of 'sexual orientation' -- or -- remove all categories and just have the binary sex categories of men and women?
I am all for it. But do you think, you'd be doing justice to the transgendered, who need an identity separate from the men. You may not acknowledge the transgendered and insist that they have to fit into the 'man' and 'woman' categories, but I reject that as a bigoted Western view.
|
You are mixing up your terminology here. Effeminate homosexuals are not transgenders. Transgenders can be either homosexual or heterosexual, based on their combination of the gender they choose and the gender they choose to be romantic or sexual with.
Anyways, now that I think we understand each other, I want you to understand one other thing: I don't disagree with the basic idea that everyone should be able to live how they choose, dress how they choose, fuck who they choose, marry who they choose, and society should be nothing but accepting of any combination of the above.
I think the binary sexuality labels are nearing obsolete in this country in some circles within our generation or the next.
What I don't agree with is your idea that it is so important to distance yourself from the stigma of homosexuality, and insist you are straight. If you truly desire sex with both men and women, more power to you, keep doing your thing, you will get no judgement here, but what I feel you should be fighting for is equal rights for all, not increased status for you and stigma for others.
Understand what I mean?
---------- Post added at 09:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:22 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural manhood
And no!!! I'm not talking about 'masculine gays' ... (masculine gay is an oxymoron) ... I'm talking about the straightest of men in westernized spaces, who won't be seen dead holding another man's hands, not even in their most private moments -- because that is how the western society has conditioned them -- through innumerous social mechanisms (sexual orientation being one of the most important ones, the other, less imp one being Christian injunctions). Yet, if they get a chance, a desire deep inside them would would start craving for intimacy with another man. Had it not been for their conditioning, they would have had long term, committed bonding with a man.
As the normal, regular males (straights -- actually, those who really have an exclusive, deep heterosexual orientation are not 'normal','regular males) have done in any age or culture where the society did not play politics with their natural sexuality.
|
It is going to be a tough sell to get people to respect your desire to "act straight and have sex with men" if you keep insisting that we all want to do it, too. We aren't talking about the theoretical mating habits of chimps, here, you are talking about us specifically, and all we have to do to provide a counter to your position is wonder if we'd like to go suck a dick...hmmmm....nope, not particularly.