American Idol Homophobia

[zinzone]

I been viewing the US TV show , 'American Idol'. The final has just finished between a gay and a straight as to who is to be crowned the winner.
Results are determined by viewer phone votes, etc.
The gay was by a very wide margin vastly superior in every respect to the straight, yet the latter has been crowned the winner.
A total nonsence result.
But once again revealing blatant and obvious homophoobia.

Hmmm...is that why Clay Aiken managed to win?

[vnman]

I been viewing the US TV show , 'American Idol'. The final has just finished between a gay and a straight as to who is to be crowned the winner.
Results are determined by viewer phone votes, etc.
The gay was by a very wide margin vastly superior in every respect to the straight, yet the latter has been crowned the winner.
A total nonsence result.
But once again revealing blatant and obvious homophoobia.

I don't know about homophobia but the gay guy was definitely better than his opponent. Idols is not only about singing... it's more important to be likable

[zinzone]

Go to any proper news report, blog or comment and below are samples of the kind of things being said:


"Kris got the homophobe vote, no doubt about it. Like palantir said, Adam Lambert should be relieved. How positively dorky to be crowned "American Idol" anyway. I enjoy this show for some strange reason, but it becomes a joke when the obviously superior singer loses because of a bunch of freaking homophobes (another word for hypocrite in my book - especially those from the South)."




"adam lambert is on a completely different level - he's too good for american idol. this just goes to show what happens when you let middle america vote...these are the same people who voted for bush. twice. "



"Plain and simple - this was my first year watching American Idol - and I thought it was great. I've been a fan of Adam's since the beginning, he was by far in a league of his own. Whether he appeals to you or not, nobody was even close in this competition in terms of talent, confidence and performance ability. To lose to Kris was pathetic, even Kris himself was shocked and knew he didn't deserve to win. So with that being said, it was my first year of watching this show, and will most certainly be my last. "

Clay Aiken was even more flaming than Adam.

America may have gotten it wrong -- I have no idea because I do not watch the show -- but I do not scream "homophobia" and go on a FOQ rant if the fag doesn't always win.

I liked Adam but he was a little screechy at times. Some of his performances, such as his first one on Tuesday night are absolutely incredible.

It's frequently the case that the winner sells about 2 copies of their album and the runner-up becomes a star.

[Narakmak]

Clay Aiken did not win. He was runnerup.


On May 21, 2003, Aiken came in a close second to Ruben StuddardWiki

The Washington Post is theorizing the current winner mainly won because of the "family Christian" vote. The winner was an out believer while the loser was not publicly declaring any religious life. You could see that as code for gay vs straight, probably a factor for sure.

Clay Aiken did not win. He was runnerup.

On May 21, 2003, Aiken came in a close second to Ruben Studdard

Ruben who?

LOL. There you go...winning ain't all it's cracked up to be.

It's frequently the case that the winner sells about 2 copies of their album and the runner-up becomes a star.

As shown by Chris Daughtry (3rd place), whose latest album has sold over 5 million, unlike the winner whose name I can't remember. Maybe I am slow, as I had not realised Adam was gay (did not stop him doing a great duet); I enjoyed all his songs, and he reminded me a bit of Bryan Ferry.

I had not realised either that American Idol was so important (100 million votes!!!) or that "family Christian" Americans would have taken it so seriously. I do recall, though, one pick-up driver shouting "frigging homos" as he passed three of us sitting at the side of the road in the "Bible Belt", presumably because we were wearing cycling clothes (Spandex, Lycra, etc), and another one firing a shotgun out of the window towards us under similar circumstances; on the other hand, far more invited us into their homes to spend the night with them and their families as we passed through (preferably after doing our laundry, as we were long distance cycle touring, so rather sweaty!), with the utmost trust and generosity for total strangers.

Adam has never said he was gay. Though some people assume it, based on mannerisms I guess? I thought we were trying to get away from pegging people based on stereotypes.

America may have gotten it wrong -- I have no idea because I do not watch the show

.....Adam has never said he was gay.

Then how do you know???

Though some people assume it, based on mannerisms I guess?

He might just be super friendly, but pics like this are all over the `net.

Adam Lambert kiss (http://ready2beat.com/entertainment/music/adam-lambert-gay-kiss-photos)

[thrillbill]

Before the final American Idol show that would determine the winner, Fox News (sorry, it is the only American TV news channel I get on my cable in Thailand) brought up the question if the "Christian vote" would make a difference; for Kris Adams came from a small town in Arkansa, attended church, represented family values...blah blah blah. When the Fox commentators were bringing up whether the "Christian vote" would make a difference, they suggested that "flamboyant" Adam Lambert was more popular and was predicted to win.

THEN when Kris Adams won, nothing was mentioned, NOTHING... was mentioned on FOX news shows about the Christian vote making a difference. What I heard from Fox was that people like voting for an "underdog".
_______________________________________
Fox news made a big deal when Miss California was asked about gay marriage in the beauty pageant and tried to blame that she didn't win the Miss America title because of her answer . (Miss CA said that she didn't support gay marriage.) What about the other finalists that didn't win? Fox was focussing how Miss CA's good value system represented many Americans.. Then a week later, it came out that Miss California had posed in some "racey" photo shots when she was in highschool ---promotion photos for modeling. Was she criticised for that by Fox News ? (Would the church call this good family values?) Fox News overlooked it and said that dirt was being dug up on her by the gay community.

[quote="Beach Bunny":2x02hqh9]America may have gotten it wrong -- I have no idea because I do not watch the show

.....Adam has never said he was gay.

Then how do you know???[/quote:2x02hqh9]

I do watch the news, you know. You don't have to watch a second of American Idol to have an idea what is going on.

I do watch the news, you know.

The news, presumably, being FOX news - that explains a great deal!!

(No offence, but I am a little worried that my agreeing with you recently, and even defending you in your discussion with Wes - not that you are not able to do so perfectly adequately yourself - may be misinterpreted)

No FOX news on UBC (thankfully).

[kittyboy]

IMHO - There were probably a couple of things going on with the selection of Kris Allen as the winer of american idol.

1st - IMHO the guy is just fantastically handsome, clean cut, with an all around nice guy personality. IMHO - these type shows are more like high school popularity contests with the winner determined by gushing good looks.

2nd - Researchers on gays and lesbian in society - (mostly in the US - and yes at the risk of sounding like a self-important fat head -- this is part of my research area-- I am still willing to send you my vita GF if you think I am full of shit.) - have a fancy word Heterosexism, which basically means that heterosexuality is seen as the sexual norm or standard. The wikipedia link below gives a good overview.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosexism

Even the most liberal and tolerant people often have residual negative feelings toward homos- it is basically latent negative feelings which translates into discrimination toward gays and lesbians.

It is not unlike aversive discrimination or unconcious discrimination toward people of color.

Given the winners good looks and rampant heterosexism in society I am not surprised by the result.

But again just my well informed humble opinion.

I gather that Adam's sexuality was made a point of on Fox News (which I too, BB, do not get with True but I did not see any mention of it on BBC/CNN although I could easily have missed it), which could explain the whole thing.

It seems more likely that it has nothing to do with homophobia on the part of American Idol as the thread title suggests, but that it was a rather clever marketing ploy by Fox (who also own American Idol); by raising the homosexual flag on Fox News they raised the interest of the so-called "family Christians" enough to get them to vote in American Idol (and at least watch the final, even if they may not have watched previous rounds), virtually doubling the numbers from previous votes and so allaying any fears that sponsors may have had that the programme's popularity had peaked and was heading for a dive if Simon Cowell and Paula Abdul leave as judges.

As Wikipeda very clearly state in the reference given above (in an article which they rate as a "stub - Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition" and consequently is anything but "a good overview"): "While heterosexism is sometimes confused with or eclipsed by the word homophobia, heterosexism refers to a bias toward heterosexuality, while homophobia refers to antipathy towards homosexuality (or gay men and lesbians)". Pissyboy is, as usual, "confused"; whatever one's sexual preference, heterosexuality is not only "seen as the sexual norm or standard", statistically or by any other measure it is the sexual norm.

As has been said before elsewhere, we all have very different views on what constitutes good looks (personally I do not see Kris Allen as either "fantastically handsome" or "clean cut", particularly with his attempt at a moustache in the final), but the opinion that the vote is "determined by gushing good looks" more than any other factor is simply absurd - unless one considers, for example, the other top two previously mentioned here (Clay Aiken and Ruben Studdard) to be in that category.

[kittyboy]

As has been said before elsewhere, we all have very different views on what constitutes good looks (personally I do not see Kris Allen as either "fantastically handsome" or "clean cut", particularly with his attempt at a moustache in the final), but the opinion that the vote is "determined by gushing good looks" more than any other factor is simply absurd - unless one considers, for example, the other top two previously mentioned here (Clay Aiken and Ruben Studdard) to be in that category.

As Wikipedia very clearly state in the reference given above (in an article which they rate as a "stub - Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition" and consequently is anything but "a good overview"): "While heterosexism is sometimes confused with or eclipsed by the word homophobia, heterosexism refers to a bias toward heterosexuality, while homophobia refers to antipathy towards homosexuality (or gay men and lesbians)". Pissyboy is, as usual, "confused"; whatever one's sexual preference, heterosexuality is not only "seen as the sexual norm or standard", statistically or by any other measure it is the sexual norm.

I will stand by my humble opinion that Kris Allen is fantastically good looking - because that is what it is... just my opinion. And that the winner of american idol is about gushing good looks... Again IMHO....

On the second point... I have read the original research that is cited in the wiki article. The article is a good overview of heterosexism and a nice starting point to think about the issue. I suspect that you have not read the original research and really cannot make a sustentative evaluation of the material. I have copies of the the research, I can send you pdf files of the published papers if you would like to read up on the issue.

GF you state the following (notice I quoted you exactly тАУ I did not change or add words to your post - a policy you should try to follow - IMHO you do need better role models) - "whatever one's sexual preference, heterosexuality is not only "seen as the sexual norm or standard", statistically or by any other measure it is the sexual norm."

Heterosexism, Heteronormativity, Heterocentrism - etc.. whatever you want to call it is rampant in the US. Most people believe that a heterosexual relationship is superior to a homosexual relationship. It seems, you agree with my posting тАУ GreatтАж I am glad you see my wisdom and keen insights and agree that heterosexism exists. Norms change and evolve and that is why it is important for gays and lesbians to become more visible and open as a step toward greater acceptance.

I hope you are not implying that you believe that heterosexuality should be the sexual norm for society. That is the impression I got from your posting. If you do think that heterosexuality should be the norm, then I think that is tragic as it speaks of internal homophobia, and self-hate.

It is kind of sad that you might hate yourself so much.

I will stand by my humble opinion that Kris Allen is fantastically good looking - because that is what it is... just my opinion. And that the winner of american idol is about gushing good looks... Again IMHO....

Well, Pissyboy, if I am impressed by nothing else of yours I am impressed by the breadth of your taste - after all, there are few people who could honestly say that Kris Allen, Clay Aiken (although he came 2nd) and Ruben Studdard all had "gushing good looks"!!


On the second point... I have read the original research that is cited in the wiki article. The article is a good overview of heterosexism...I have copies of the the research .....

I have not, as I have no interest in the subject; I am quite satisfied with Wiki's own view of their own article, that it "Provides very little meaningful content". There would, in any case, be no need for you to send me the research, as links to it are provided by Wikipedia, as usual. I did actually find the "Daily effects of straight privilege" (http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~hyrax/person ... vilege.htm (http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~hyrax/personal/files/student_res/straightprivilege.htm) ) quite amusing, if only because although I am sure they apply to many (possibly even most) gays none have ever applied to me. I would have liked to take the test by the Heterosexism Enquirer - "helping to fight against heterosexist attitudes" - (http://www.mun.ca/the/themain.html )to see if my attitudes were heterosexist, as you imply they might be, but unfortunately the test was discriminatory and was only "for heterosexuals...& for those who may have internalized homophobic stereotypes"; I still took it, however, and as I scored 6/372 on the test I " must be an individual who thrives on diversity, inclusiveness, & acceptance. You actively go out of your way to ensure that you respect & acknowledge everyone no matter what their sexual identity... and, you may be a social activist." (Flattering, but way off the mark!). I would have scored 0, but I lost 6 points to question 13:

"Considering the menace of overpopulation, how could the human race survive if everyone were heterosexual?

a. Good question! It would be quite frightening if everyone on the planet reproduced. (0)
b. At least the continuation of the species is guaranteed with heterosexuality! (6)"

Sesquipedalian terms are only impressive when properly used: there is no such thing as a "sustentative evaluation" (an evaluation cannot be "sustentative", which explains why such a pairing has never been used in any article published on the net, for example) - possibly you misheard something when you were cleaning out the toilets and you mean an objective evaluation.


GF you state the following ..... "whatever one's sexual preference, heterosexuality is not only "seen as the sexual norm or standard", statistically or by any other measure it is the sexual norm."

Indeed I did - but you have ignored what I said and introduced "Heterosexism, Heteronormativity, Heterocentrism - etc.. whatever you want to call it" instead!!!

Becoming "visible and accepted" has nothing to do with changing "the sexual norm" - little research (or intelligence, so even you may manage it) is required to realise that at present "by far the greatest amount of sociosexual behaviour is heterosexual behaviour" (Encyclopedia Britannica) and that whatever the influence "gays and lesbians" may have on the rest of the world it is rather unlikely that the majority of the population will ever be anything but heterosexual, so making it "the norm". This has nothing to do with homophobia, superiority or inferiority - becase something or someone does not match "the norm" does not necessarily make them inferior - you are, as I suspected "confused".

I have given some definitions of "the norm" and "heterosexuality" below - you may find it useful as most "college professors" who conduct " research in the area of gays and lesbians in the workplace" might be expected to know this and your lack of knowledge may catch you out.

There are only a few parts of your posts I agree with (namely, to use your own descriptions of yourself, that you are "happier living through denial and delusion тАж a self-important fat head" and "full of shit"), so this not one of them.


Norm:

1. a standard or model or pattern regarded as typical; "the current middle-class norm of two children per family"
(hypernym) standard, criterion, measure, touchstone
2. a statistic describing the location of a distribution; "it set the norm for American homes"
(synonym) average
(hypernym) statistic
(hyponym) age norm
(classification) statistics (WordNet 2.0)

an established standard or average: as a : a set standard of development orachievement usually derived from the average or median achievement of a large group b : a pattern or trait taken to be typical in the behavior of a social group (Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary)

: average : as a: a set standard of development or achievement usually derived from the average or median achievement of a large group b: a pattern or trait taken to be typical in the behavior of a social group c: a widespread or usual practice, procedure, or custom <standing ovations became the norm>(Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

A standard pattern of behaviour that is considered normal in society (Encarta Dictionary)

A person who spends leisure time passively or idly ... from the name of a cartoon character created in 1975 by Alex Stitt (Australian slang, Oxford Dictionary)

Heterosexuality:

of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward the opposite sex b: of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between individuals of opposite sex ((Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

Encarta: sexual desire or sexual relations between people of opposite sexes (Encarta)

Heterosexuality refers to sexual behavior and attraction to people of the opposite sex, or to a heterosexual orientation. As a sexual orientation, heterosexuality refers to "an enduring pattern of or disposition to experience sexual, affectional, physical or romantic attractions primarily to "persons of the opposite sex" (Wikipedia)

[kittyboy]

I will stand by my humble opinion that Kris Allen is fantastically good looking - because that is what it is... just my opinion. And that the winner of american idol is about gushing good looks... Again IMHO....

Well, Pissyboy, if I am impressed by nothing else of yours I am impressed by the breadth of your taste - after all, there are few people who could honestly say that Kris Allen, Clay Aiken (although he came 2nd) and Ruben Studdard all had "gushing good looks"!!


On the second point... I have read the original research that is cited in the wiki article. The article is a good overview of heterosexism...I have copies of the the research .....

I have not, as I have no interest in the subject; I am quite satisfied with Wiki's own view of their own article, that it "Provides very little meaningful content". There would, in any case, be no need for you to send me the research, as links to it are provided by Wikipedia, as usual. I did actually find the "Daily effects of straight privilege" (http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~hyrax/person ... vilege.htm (http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~hyrax/personal/files/student_res/straightprivilege.htm) ) quite amusing, if only because although I am sure they apply to many (possibly even most) gays none have ever applied to me. I would have liked to take the test by the Heterosexism Enquirer - "helping to fight against heterosexist attitudes" - (http://www.mun.ca/the/themain.html )to see if my attitudes were heterosexist, as you imply they might be, but unfortunately the test was discriminatory and was only "for heterosexuals...& for those who may have internalized homophobic stereotypes"; I still took it, however, and as I scored 6/372 on the test I " must be an individual who thrives on diversity, inclusiveness, & acceptance. You actively go out of your way to ensure that you respect & acknowledge everyone no matter what their sexual identity... and, you may be a social activist." (Flattering, but way off the mark!). I would have scored 0, but I lost 6 points to question 13:

"Considering the menace of overpopulation, how could the human race survive if everyone were heterosexual?

a. Good question! It would be quite frightening if everyone on the planet reproduced. (0)
b. At least the continuation of the species is guaranteed with heterosexuality! (6)"

Sesquipedalian terms are only impressive when properly used: there is no such thing as a "sustentative evaluation" (an evaluation cannot be "sustentative", which explains why such a pairing has never been used in any article published on the net, for example) - possibly you misheard something when you were cleaning out the toilets and you mean an objective evaluation.


GF you state the following ..... "whatever one's sexual preference, heterosexuality is not only "seen as the sexual norm or standard", statistically or by any other measure it is the sexual norm."

Indeed I did - but you have ignored what I said and introduced "Heterosexism, Heteronormativity, Heterocentrism - etc.. whatever you want to call it" instead!!!

Becoming "visible and accepted" has nothing to do with changing "the sexual norm" - little research (or intelligence, so even you may manage it) is required to realise that at present "by far the greatest amount of sociosexual behaviour is heterosexual behaviour" (Encyclopedia Britannica) and that whatever the influence "gays and lesbians" may have on the rest of the world it is rather unlikely that the majority of the population will ever be anything but heterosexual, so making it "the norm". This has nothing to do with homophobia, superiority or inferiority - becase something or someone does not match "the norm" does not necessarily make them inferior - you are, as I suspected "confused".

I have given some definitions of "the norm" and "heterosexuality" below - you may find it useful as most "college professors" who conduct " research in the area of gays and lesbians in the workplace" might be expected to know this and your lack of knowledge may catch you out.

There are only a few parts of your posts I agree with (namely, to use your own descriptions of yourself, that you are "happier living through denial and delusion тАж a self-important fat head" and "full of shit"), so this not one of them.


Norm:

1. a standard or model or pattern regarded as typical; "the current middle-class norm of two children per family"
(hypernym) standard, criterion, measure, touchstone
2. a statistic describing the location of a distribution; "it set the norm for American homes"
(synonym) average
(hypernym) statistic
(hyponym) age norm
(classification) statistics (WordNet 2.0)

an established standard or average: as a : a set standard of development orachievement usually derived from the average or median achievement of a large group b : a pattern or trait taken to be typical in the behavior of a social group (Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary)

: average : as a: a set standard of development or achievement usually derived from the average or median achievement of a large group b: a pattern or trait taken to be typical in the behavior of a social group c: a widespread or usual practice, procedure, or custom <standing ovations became the norm>(Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

A standard pattern of behaviour that is considered normal in society (Encarta Dictionary)

A person who spends leisure time passively or idly ... from the name of a cartoon character created in 1975 by Alex Stitt (Australian slang, Oxford Dictionary)

Heterosexuality:

of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward the opposite sex b: of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between individuals of opposite sex ((Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

Encarta: sexual desire or sexual relations between people of opposite sexes (Encarta)

Heterosexuality refers to sexual behavior and attraction to people of the opposite sex, or to a heterosexual orientation. As a sexual orientation, heterosexuality refers to "an enduring pattern of or disposition to experience sexual, affectional, physical or romantic attractions primarily to "persons of the opposite sex" (Wikipedia)

Go Fuckyourself -
Another post that is true to form. It has self-important references but not much substance.
I am very candid about my limited taste in pop culture. I have no taste nor is my opinion worth much on the subject.

As I have mentioned, I am a college professor who does research in this area (gays and lesbians in the workplace). I would be happy to swap CVs.
I have no idea what your background is but IMHO you seem to believe you are an expert in lots of areas...However, I suspect that you are basically full of shit.

You mentioned you "have no interest in the subject" - which I assume you mean you have no interest in the subject of heterosexism. Again notice I quoted you without adding or subtracting words to suit my tastes. A practice you should follow. When you change other people's words then quote them it is really very very dishonest. Use me as your role model.

I will again say that having read not only the research cited but other research in the area, wiki provides a good starting point and overview of heterosexism and though you are not interested, it is my area of expertise. The links provided by wiki are incomplete. If you change your mind I can send you some good articles that will help you broaden your horizons beyond just Google searches. Trying to establish your expertise in an area based on Google searches is really the lamest form of research.

If I understand your ranting above, you are saying that homosexuality is not and cannot become a sexual norm.

One interesting finding of LGBT research is that contact with LGBTs by heteros lessens their heterocentrism and encourages them to be more tolerant toward sexual minorities. Sexual norms are not just the most prevalent sexual behaviors but they include what are considered acceptable sexual behaviors.

Sorry GF but you again are full of shit and out of you area of expertise.
As gays and lesbians come out of the closet and interact with heterosexuals the heteros become more comfortable with the homos and their perceptions of what are acceptable behaviors change and homosexuality becomes an acceptable norm.

Wrong again Go Fuckyourself.

I detect an element of internal homophobia in your posting. Are you sure you are not a self-hater?
IMHO - Excessive self-importance can actually hide deep self-hate and a longing for approval. But hey that is just my opinion and whether or not you have internal homophobia (quoting y ou) I"have no interest in the subject".

[Wesley]

I thought it was all totally predictable, Typical Homophobia there and typical heterosexual Phobia here

Are you sure you are not a self-hater? IMHO - Excessive self-importance can actually hide deep self-hate and a longing for approval.

Is gender studies your area or psychology? Even if he is a scholar in that area, it isn't unusual for experts to have differences of opinion.

Cute avatar...I share my home with a tabby.

[kittyboy]

Are you sure you are not a self-hater? IMHO - Excessive self-importance can actually hide deep self-hate and a longing for approval.

Is gender studies your area or psychology? Even if he is a scholar in that area, it isn't unusual for experts to have differences of opinion.

Cute avatar...I share my home with a tabby.

Thanks for the note. That is my kittyboy...his real name. I was not very original in naming him.
The next cat I get I will have to come up with a better name... What do you think of Cat Boy? or BoyCat...or CatGirl? hmm... pretty bad I guess.
I know it is silly but I do love my cat. He is my surrogate child.
What is your tabby's name?

I am in the school of business - the management department. I teach organizational behavior and gender and diversity in organizations. Much of the theoretical framework for my work is based on the psychology and sociology literature dealing with gays and lesbians.

As for GF - I am pretty sure he is not a scholar. A googler (is that a word? - to google is now a verb - so maybe googler is the noun describing the person who googles?) perhaps.

[Wesley]

Fox had a new report on tonight, they wasted the whole time and really said nothing, although they admit it may have been the Christian demographics of the south where most of the callers are from and where likely they liked the humble mannerisms of the little cutie that won. By the way its is also where most of the right wing Christian evangelicals live so it would have been depending on how close it was. Has anyone herd how close the vote was... I agree, by the way he was much better looking than Adam.

Wes

I thought it was all totally predictable, Typical Homophobia there and typical heterosexual Phobia here

I had no idea it was quite that bad "there"! I have not been to the States for 20 years, and it is a good few years since I have been "home" to the UK, but this fixation with stunning good looks, cuties and homophobia seems to be markedly different in the States to the UK: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090528/ap_ ... e_s_finale (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090528/ap_on_en_tv/eu_britain_boyle_s_finale)

Oh, and I think homophilia (amongst all the other phobias,sexisms, centrisms,etc) is the technical term you may be after for the popular phobia here!


Even if he is a scholar in that area, it isn't unusual for experts to have differences of opinion.

I am not a "scholar" in that or any other area - nor have I ever claimed to be an expert. Neither am I (nor was I ever) in "the school of business", whatever that may be! You will soon realise that the same (apart from the claim to be an expert!) applies to Pissyboy.


I have no idea what your background is but IMHO you seem to believe you are an expert in lots of areas

I have never claimed to be "an expert" in any area, although I have detailed exactly what my level of expertise is in a few. If, as you repeatedly allege, I have made such a claim, post a reference.


If I understand your ranting above, you are saying that homosexuality is not and cannot become a sexual norm.

You still do not appear to understand what is meant by a "norm". What is "the sexual norm" is a question of what is standard, prevalent or NORMal. Heterosexuality is and will remain "the sexual norm" unless some other form of sexual activity becomes more prevalent and replaces it - personally I cannot see any signs of that happening. Whether other forms of sexual behaviour are acceptable or not to the majority is a totally different question.

There can only be one "sexual norm", just as there can only be one norm for any trait, characteristic, etc. A "norm" is quantifiable and verifiable - it is not something which is open to debate, rejection or acceptance.

Nobody meets the "norm" or average in every area - to do so, while probably mathematically possible, is unlikely given so many variables, so we are all "abnormal" in some way. Simply because someone is "abnormal" in a particular area does not necessarily make them accepted or rejected by those who are nearer the norm - in most cases the question simply does not arise.


I detect an element of internal homophobia in your posting. Are you sure you are not a self-hater?

Quite sure. Being gay has, literally, never been a problem for me in any way, socially, professionally or personally (something I realise is both fortunate and unusual, as I appreciate that it can be a major problem for many gays, if not most). It is simply the way I am and consequently I have never seen any reason to either question it, resent it, or to publicise it - I know my own strengths and weaknesses and my physical and mental limitations and capabilities, and I have found knowing that I was gay to be of little real importance to me (and, presumably, to those who know/knew me).

[kittyboy]

I am not a "scholar" in that or any other area - nor have I ever claimed to be an expert. Neither am I (nor was I ever) in "the school of business", whatever that may be! You will soon realise that the same (apart from the claim to be an expert!) applies to Pissyboy.


I have no idea what your background is but IMHO you seem to believe you are an expert in lots of areas

I have never claimed to be "an expert" in any area, although I have detailed exactly what my level of expertise is in a few. If, as you repeatedly allege, I have made such a claim, post a reference.


If I understand your ranting above, you are saying that homosexuality is not and cannot become a sexual norm.

You still do not appear to understand what is meant by a "norm". What is "the sexual norm" is a question of what is standard, prevalent or NORMal. Heterosexuality is and will remain "the sexual norm" unless some other form of sexual activity becomes more prevalent and replaces it - personally I cannot see any signs of that happening. Whether other forms of sexual behaviour are acceptable or not to the majority is a totally different question.

There can only be one "sexual norm", just as there can only be one norm for any trait, characteristic, etc. A "norm" is quantifiable and verifiable - it is not something which is open to debate, rejection or acceptance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again GF - Lots of self-reference but not much substance. I am glad you agree that you are not an expert in this area, however, I am well versed in the subject. Again GF - I would be happy to trade CVs.
You really are just helplessly out of your league here.

Incorrectly defining the term тАШnormтАЩ then applying that incorrect definition to the term тАШsexual normтАЩ, then arguing your point from there is a very weak argument - we have a term for it here at the university. We call it sophmoric.
However, in a few more years when you get to be a senior I expect more reasoned arguments.

Norms are behaviors deemed acceptable by society.
тАШSexual normsтАЩ include a wide range of behaviors and include what society deems to be acceptable and are not just the most common sexual behavior. Sorry there is not just one sexual norm that is ridiculous.
Many segments of society consider Homosexuality an acceptable sexual norm and it will be more widely accepted when more people know and accept homosexual indviduals.

Norms are always "open to debate, rejection or acceptance."
In 1973 the American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses.
For APA members following the diagnostic guide, homosexuality became acceptable or a norm when the APA changed its definition.

So again you are just wrong.

[Wesley]

This you both realize is not going to be decided on this forum. Thanks for the right word there gone fishing. Its not really oh so bad here, Although I spend little time here, I can say I spend most of it at work and very little social life. However, when in the most liberal state of all they voted down Gay Marriage or marriage as being defined as between a man and a woman. I would say. We should be satisfied with common law relationships until the church secularizes, as per Bonhoeffer. However,if I know gays like I think I do, the divorce rate would definitely go up should marriage be legalized

All the best,

Wes

I was not very original in naming him.

My cat (http://mlomker.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83452e54d69e201156f6bd5bc970c-pi) was named Precious by the shelter that I rescued her from. I'm afraid I'm even less original than you, I usually just call her Kitty. lol. I have a Senegal parrot (http://mlomker.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83452e54d69e201156f6bd5c1970c-pi) named Cricket. That one is a bit more original since he sounded like one when he was young.

I personally haven't gotten around to finishing my master's thesis in IT Management and I suspect it'll remain that way.

[Art]

Norm: "standard, pattern, model," 1821,
from Fr. norme, from O.Fr.,
from L. norma "carpenter's square, rule, pattern,"
of unknown origin. Klein suggests a borrowing (via Etruscan) of Gk. gnomon "carpenter's square."
The L. form of the word, norma, was used in Eng. in the sense of "carpenter's square" from 1676.
(Online Etymology Dictionary, ┬й 2001 Douglas Harper)
A multifaceted term that seems to oscillate between a descriptive and a prescriptive (┬╗normative┬л) meaning. But we have to make a choice:


Ought vs. Is (http://everything2.com/title/Ought%2520versus%2520Is%252C%2520Government%2520ve rsus%2520Autonomy)
In Book III of his Treatise on Human Nature, David Hume asserts that normative statements (saying that something ought to be so) cannot be derived from descriptive statements (saying that something is). This is widely agreed upon among philosophers and is sometimes referred to as the "is-ought problem". A related tenet of philosophy is that knowledge can come from either observation or from deductive reasoning. Descriptive statements are based on observations, whereas normative statements are products of deduction. Some statements are based entirely on observation (naturalistic statements), while others are solely deductive (normative, or prescriptive statements). Bodies of knowledge can be built from statements in either or both categories, but neither can a normative statement be derived from a descriptive statement nor can a descriptive statement be derived from a normative statement.
Some examples for the current use of ┬╗norm┬л:


The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Psychology
Norms (Subject: Psychology) -- Donelson R. Forsyth

Consensual standards that describe what behaviors should and should not be performed in a given context are called social norms. They prescribe the socially appropriate way to respond in the situation тАУ the тАЬnormalтАЭ course of action тАУ as well as proscribing actions to avoid if at all possible. Social norms, in contrast to statistical norms or general expectations based on intuitive base rates for behavior, include an evaluative component. People who do not comply with the norms of a situation and cannot provide an acceptable explanation for their violation are evaluated negatively. This condemnation can include hostility, pressure to change, negative sanctions, and punishment, but the reaction depends on the magnitude of the discrepancy, the importance of the norm, and the characteristics of the person who violates the norm. Wearing too colorful a tie, not bowing properly when introduced, or talking about overly intimate matters with a new acquaintance may violate situational norms of propriety, but they will rarely earn public rejection. Small violations that reflect personal idiosyncrasies, if kept private, are often overlooked, as are violations committed by prestigious or powerful individuals. Violations of moral norms prohibiting theft or prescribing duties, in contrast, will be roundly condemned (Sabini & Silver, 1978). This evaluative reaction is, however, asymmetric. ...

The International Encyclopedia of Communication
Social Norms (Subject: Communication Studies ┬╗ Health Communication Communication Reception and Effects ┬╗ Public Opinion. Key-Topics: normativity) -- Rajiv N. Rimal and Maria Knight Lapinski

What people choose to do, the behaviors they enact or refrain from enacting, is guided by a number of factors, including their own dispositions, the situational context in which they find themselves, the social roles they take on, and their interpersonal relationships. The study of how people's behaviors are guided, in part, by social norms has been the focus of considerable research in recent years. Although the influence of norms on human behavior occurs across many domains, a great deal of research has focused on understanding normative influences in health-related behaviors, likely because of the inclusion of the subjective norm concept in the theory of reasoned action (TRA; Ajzen & Fishbein 1980); the TRA has been widely used to predict health behaviors (тЖТ Reasoned Action, Theory of). Norms have been conceptualized in several ways, but terms identified in the literature that deal implicitly or explicitly with the influence of referent othersтАЩ attitudes or behaviors on people's own behaviors include: subjective norms (Ajzen & Fishbein 1980), social norms (Perkins & Berkowitz 1986), normative influences (Cialdini et al. 1990), or simply norms (Bendor & Swistak 2001). Cialdini et al. (1990) make a conceptual distinction between two different types of norms: descriptive and injunctive. Descriptive norms are conceptualized as perceptions about the prevalence of ...

The International Encyclopedia of Communication
Behavioral Norms: Perception through the Media (Subject: Communication Reception and Effects ┬╗ Information Processing and Cognitions Psychology ┬╗ Cognitive Psychology. Key-Topics: normativity, social issues) -- Dhavan V. Shah and Hernando Rojas

Social norms entail learned expectations of behavior or categorization that are deemed desirable, or at least appear as unproblematic (Sherif 1936) for a specific social group in a given situation (тЖТ Social Norms). Mass media have been found to help shape тЖТ perceptions of behavioral norms (тЖТ Observational Learning; Media and Perceptions of Reality). These perceptions are consequential for health behaviors, social and sexual practices, democratic participation, and a range of other outcomes. Certain social norms that are considered of extreme importance are typically elevated to the category of legal norms and are enforced through institutional apparatuses. Other norms remain subject to less formalized modes of social control, including systems of rewards and punishments based precisely on sociability that include different combinations of isolation and recognition. Social scientists have long focused on certain key institutions of socialization in which those generalized expectations of behavior are learned by a new generation, namely the family, formal education institutes, and peer group interactions. Mass media are increasingly recognized as another important institution of socialization and cultivator of behavioral norms (тЖТ Socialization by the Media). Social scientists began to acknowledge media as an important socialization institution with the explosion of mass communication ...

The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought
Norms (Subject Sociology) -- Margaret Gilbert

At its most general the idea of a norm is the idea of a pattern. There are two main ways in which this idea has been developed in social theory, where social norms have been the focus of concern. First, there is the idea of a norm as an actual pattern of behaviour, as what is normal in the sense of being regularly or standardly done by members of a population. (The labels тАШsocial habitsтАЩ and тАШusageтАЩ are used of some such patterns.) Second, there is the idea of a norm as a prescribed pattern: as what is considered in a given population to be the thing to do. (The labels тАШconventionтАЩ, тАШsocial ruleтАЩ and Law are used of certain patterns in this category.) I shall refer to norms of this type as тАШprescriptive normsтАЩ. Social norms are often associated with expectations. Two different kinds of expectation need to be distinguished: predictive expectations about what will in fact be done by members of a population, and normative or deontic expectations. Normative expectations involve a belief that the тАШexpectedтАЩ behaviour ought to occur, in some more than merely predictive sense. Actual patterns are likely to be associated with predictive expectations, prescribed patterns with normative expectations. The term тАШnormтАЩ itself is relatively recent in standard social theory usage. The more established terms тАШcustomтАЩ, тАШtraditionтАЩ, тАШconventionтАЩ, тАШlawтАЩ and so on tend to be used for specific types ...

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Management
Norms (Subject: Business and Management ┬╗ Human Resource Management, International Management) -- Linda S. Gottfredson

A score on a standardized test is interpreted by comparing it to some external standard. When scores are compared to those of some reference population, they are called normтАРreferenced; when compared to some absolute performance standard, they are criterionтАРreferenced. Norms are the distributions of scores (means, standard deviations, etc.) for a test's various reference groups. Normed test scores are most commonly reported as percentile ranks or standard scores, such as z, T, or IQ scores. AgeтАР and gradeтАРequivalents are sometimes reported, especially for achievement tests in elementary school, but they have more technical disadvantages and are prone to misinterpretation. Latent trait or тАЬscaledтАЭ scores provide a new form of developmental norms that solve some but not all the interpretive problems of ageтАР and gradeтАРequivalents. Norm groups (also called reference groups, normative samples, or standardization samples) may be national or local, and represent different age, grade, or social groups. Broad or narrow, however, they must be representative of the populations in question, clearly defined and described, and appropriate for their intended purposes. Intelligence testing compares scores of children of the same age (see intelligence tests). Academic achievement tests typically compare the scores of children in the same grade and often from the same school or geographic area.

Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology
Norms (Subject: Social Psychology ┬╗ Socialization) -- Steven P. Dandaneau

Norms are informal rules that guide social interaction. They are, as Cristina Bicchieri (2006) calls them, тАЬthe rules we live by.тАЭ As such, norms constitute a critical component in the makeup of human cultures and therefore play a highly significant role in determining what it means to be human. When codified, norms are rendered laws or other types of institutionalized regulatory strictures. When conceived without moral consequence, the term can also refer to mere behavioral regularities, even though adherence or lack thereof to these can and often does result in significant consequences (e.g., it would be highly unusual as well as probably harmful to name an American child Adolf Osama or, depending on one's constructed gender, Sue). Variously defined even by sociologists themselves, there is perhaps no other sociological concept more regularly and widely deployed in everyday talk, nor one about which more has been written and discussed. It is therefore not surprising that a concept as equally vague as it is elemental to the sociological enterprise is also one that is the subject of continuous theoretical debate. Typically considered the founder of modern sociology, ├Йmile Durkheim famously theorized society as both a system of integration involving social bonds and institutions and, even more importantly, as a normative order sui generis. While the former manifestation of ...

The International Encyclopedia of Communication
Intercultural Norms (Subject Communication Studies ┬╗ Intercultural Communication. Key-Topics: cross-cultural research, normativity) -- Min-Sun Kim

Normative conduct is a major component of systems of culture. Each culture has its specific norms for everyday social interaction. Differences in norms and cultural expectations often become grounds for intercultural miscommunication and misunderstanding (тЖТ Cultural Patterns and Communication; Nonverbal Communication and Culture). There are innumerable definitions of norms in the social science literature. For example, norms are defined as тАЬrules of conduct,тАЭ тАЬblueprints for behavior,тАЭ and тАЬcultural expectations.тАЭ Comparing existing definitions, Gibbs (1965) finds three attributes of a norm: тАЬ(1) a collective evaluation of behavior in terms of what ought to be; (2) a collective expectation as to what behavior will be; and (3) particular reactions to behavior including attempts to apply sanctions or otherwise induce a particular kind of behaviorтАЭ (тЖТ Intercultural Norms; Social Norms). Sumner (1906) divides norms into three categories: folkways, mores, and laws. Folkways are those pervasive everyday activities widely accepted by the people of a culture. Folkways include such actions as the way we greet others, the way we eat, and other such actions. Mores are those norms placing strong moral demands on an individual's behavior. Examples of mores include commandments derived from religious doctrine, incest taboos, and rules about what is acceptable to eat (e.g., in the United States ...

The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy
Normative (Subject: Philosophy)

Ethics, philosophy of social science From norm, which means standard or rule, and it is associated with evaluation. A theory is normative if it involves norm-prescription and is descriptive if it simply describes the facts but does not prescribe what one ought to do. Normative ethics is the subject of inquiring about the principles or rules of correct moral behavior and is contrasted to meta-ethics, which analyzes the meaning and logical relations of evaluative terms. To define a normative term in terms of non-moral properties is called by Moore the definist fallacy. Sociologists as well as moral philosophers have pictured our lives as governed by complex hierarchies of norms. тАЬTheories that prescribe standards are normative.тАЭ Glymour, Thinking Things Through ...

A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind
Normative (Mind and Cognitive Science ┬╗ Philosophy of Mind) -- Samuel Guttenplan

As a rule, satellites follow elliptical orbits, and, also as a rule, drivers in the UK keep to the left side of the road. But there is a big difference between these two sorts of rule-guided behaviours: satellites are governed by the rules or laws of motion; whereas drivers choose to follow the rules of the road. In this second case, one speaks of the rules as norms. Moreover, though this is more controversial, it has been maintained that one can speak of normativity even when there is no exercise of explicit choice in the relevant behaviour. Thus, many linguists, following CHOMSKY, think of our use of language as a case of rule-following even though speakers are not usually aware of the relevant norms. The notion of normativity, in a slightly different guise, figures in other areas of the philosophy of mind. Firstly, it is often said that the attribution of propositional attitudes is normative, though it may not be immediately apparent what rules or norms are at issue in this case. What is meant is roughly this: there are standards of RATIONALITY that govern our attribution of attitudes to each other even though it may well be impossible to spell these standards out in terms of specific rules or norms. For example, it seems plausible that we cannot attribute beliefs about atoms and electrons to a child of three. The тАШcannotтАЩ here marks the fact that it would not be rationally ...

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Management
Group Norms (Business and Management ┬╗ International Management, Organizational Behavior) -- Sarah Ronson and Randall S. Peterson

Norms are the unwritten rules that provide guidelines for acceptable behaviors by members of a group. Certain behaviors develop into norms or expectations for all group members over time for a number of reasons, including an influential group member or leader expressing them, group members imitating the actions of others, socially rewarding certain behaviors, group members developing a shared script for events, etc. (Feldman, 1984; Bettenhausen and Murnighan, 1991). Norms can affect not only behavior within a group, but can also influence an individual member's behavior or attitude outside of the group (Sherif, 1966). Norms tend to develop informally and gradually, and to be stable. Situations that are uncertain or unstable are particularly likely to lead to the development of group norms because group members use the group as a reference point for making subjective judgments (Sherif, 1966). Thus, norms tend to serve some function for group members, such as providing information about subjective reality and about how to behave. Norms also benefit the group as a whole. They can (1) define and help enforce behavior that will enable the group to survive (Feldman, 1984); (2) improve group efficiency and effectiveness by making group member behavior predictable (Feldman, 1984); (3) improve member satisfaction by helping members avoid behaviors that the group would not approve of (Feldman, ...

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Management
Cultural Norms (Subject: Business and Management ┬╗ International Management) -- John O'Connell

Cultural norms are standards of conduct or acceptable behavior in any given culture. The way people communicate (adding gestures vs. just speaking), the way they eat (fork in right hand if from United States and left hand if from Europe), how close one stands when communicating to another (distant in the United States, close in Latin America), equality of men and women (strive for equality in many countries; not an issue in other countries), the work ethic (commitment to employer vs. individual creativity), and many other situations are influenced by the norms of a society or culture. An expatriate or other person living overseas should be aware of the normative behaviors of the host country prior to taking up residence. See also cultural variables; expatriate training; value dimensions (Hofstede's) (1982). How best to integrate expatriate managers into the domestic organization. Personnel Administrator, July, 27 33. ...

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Psychology
Norm Theory (Subject: Psychology) -- Dale T. Miller

Postulates that every experience brings its own frame of reference or norm into being either by guiding memory retrieval or by constraining mental simulation (see Kahneman & Tversky, 1982; Miller, Turnbull, & McFarland, 1991). The assumption that the norms used in making inferences, predictions, and comparative judgments are evoked by the event itself, and hence are most appropriately viewed as тАЬpostcomputedтАЭ representations, contrasts with the more traditional assumption that norms consist of тАЬprecomputedтАЭ structures (e.g., schemas and expectancies) that the perceiver brings to the experience. According to the precomputed view, each member of a category (e.g., dogs) is evaluated with reference to the same norm (e.g., a schema for dogs); according to the postcomputed view no two members of the category will evoke exactly the same norm. The sight of a dog will bring to mind schematic information about dogs, but it will also bring to mind exemplars of specific other dogs, such as ones that the perceiver has seen recently. One of the most important determinants of norm formation is similarity. The counterfactual images that an event retrieves from memory or generates in imagination will tend to resemble closely the actual event (see counterfactual thinking). But the evoked norms will never match the observed event in all respects: If they did there would never be any surprise ...

The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy
Pure Theory of Law (Subject: Philosophy)

Philosophy of law. A theory developed by the Austrian legal philosopher Hans Kelsen and philosophically based on neo-Kantianism. The theory is pure in the sense that the law should be a universally valid system that is free of all that is changeable and yet able to give ideals that guide lawyers in the search for justice. All moral, political, and sociological contents must be purged from the science of law. According to Kelsen, law is a system of norms, a hierarchy of normative relations that measures human conduct by the use of sanction. The legal norms constitute a relation of condition and sequence rather than a command: тАЬIf A is done, B ought to happen.тАЭ The validity of legal norms is not based on conflicting authorities, but is ultimately derived from a basic norm (Grundnorm) that is postulated in the historically first constitution. The validity of the basic norm is not derived, but must be assumed as an initial hypothesis. Legal theory is concerned with the conceptual tools for analyzing the relations between the fundamental norms and all lower norms within a legal system. It is not concerned with its moral content, which should be the subject-matter of politics or moral theory. On this basis, Kelsen attacked natural law theory, which insists on a necessary connection between law and morality. He drew a sharp distinction between тАЬisтАЭ and тАЬought,тАЭ and denied the possibility ...

┬╗Norms┬л are simply thrilling: ┬╗If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman,
both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death;
their blood shall be upon them.┬л (Lev. 20:13)

[Wesley]

Just thought you mightg want to hear the other siide of the story

Wes

This you both realize is not going to be decided on this forum.

Well, Wes, minds far greater than mine are still unable to decide on the "correct" definition, and as I do not have the egotism to describe the authors/editors of such works as WordNet 2.0, Merriam-Webster's various dictionaries, the Encarta Dictionary, Blackwells' various Dictionaries and Encyclopedias, etc as "тАж..incorrectтАж..sophmoricтАж..ridiculo us .тАж. just wrong" I, at least, fully agree with you.

As I have said before, and at least some have agreed, I really cannot see why calling a recognised and legal gay partnership "marriage" is so important - and, personally, I think that "marriage", at least technically, can only be between a man and a woman: there are simply some things that physically only a man can do and others that only a woman can, and marriage involves some of these (or at least the option for them). Whether the homophilics like it or not this will always be the case and there is nothing that can be done to change that. I had actually never come across the terms homophilia and homophilic before but, dare I say it, some of the homophilics here appear just as bigoted as some of the homophobes elsewhere!



A multifaceted term that seems to oscillate between a descriptive and a prescriptive (┬╗normative┬л) meaning.

Art, how very true - the definitions appear to be as varied as they are many, as clearly stated by The International Encyclopedia of Communication: "тАж.. There are innumerable definitions of norms in the social science literature.....".

Even Blackwell contradicts itself: "..... Norms are the distributions of scores (means, standard deviations, etc.) for a test's various reference groups ....." vs "..... Norms are the unwritten rules that provide guidelines for acceptable behaviors by members of a group....." and even " .....the тАЬnormalтАЭ course of action .....".

I imagine that one's preferred definition very much depends on whether you are right or left brain dominant - I have always been very strongly "left brain", which is probably why I always go for the more rational/logical choice rather than the more imaginative/holistic one. It is clearly "the subject of continuous theoretical debate " but as I prefer to deal in practicalities rather than theory such debate will have to be done without me!




I have never claimed to be "an expert" in any area, although I have detailed exactly what my level of expertise is in a few. If, as you repeatedly allege, I have made such a claim, post a reference.
Lots of self-reference but not much substance..... Again GF - I would be happy to trade CVs.

Cat got your tongue on this part, Pissyboy, or were you so busy deciding whether you were "a college professor who does research in this area (gays and lesbians in the workplace)" (28 May - 0341hrs) or "in the school of business - the management department. I teach organizational behavior and gender and diversity in organizations" (28 May - 0811hrs) that you missed it?

I have already given my reasons for my maintenance of my anonymity elsewhere, at length ( anonymity-t15161.html (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/anonymity-t15161.html) ), the primary one being that I prefer my posts to be able to stand on their own merits without relying on any claims of expertise if at all possible, so there is little point in my sending you my CV in return for one you have found while taking out the trash.

While you are doing your research on what I have claimed to be an expert in, maybe you can also check on those quotes(*) you refer to where you say I have been "adding or subtracting words to suit my tastes.....When you change other people's words then quote them it is really very very dishonest." and give some specific examples of those too (before and after, and a link) to back up your accusations and to show just who is being "very very dishonest". Or maybe you are too busy .....

*: "quotes", just to help you out as your Use of English skills appear limited, are identified by being put in quotation marks (" ") and usually italicised. The example you have previously given, concerning a technical training course, was not a quote but a not unreasonable assumption which made no material difference to the post, whether correct or not, and which when the point was raised I made very clear was only an assumption which, according to information subsequently given by the OP, I stated was incorrect.

[kittyboy]

Well, Wes, minds far greater than mine are still unable to decide on the "correct" definition, and as I do not have the egotism to describe the authors/editors of such works as WordNet 2.0, Merriam-Webster's various dictionaries, the Encarta Dictionary, Blackwells' various Dictionaries and Encyclopedias, etc as "тАж..incorrectтАж..sophmoricтАж..ridiculo us .тАж. just wrong" I, at least, fully agree with you.

As I have said before, and at least some have agreed, I really cannot see why calling a recognised and legal gay partnership "marriage" is so important - and, personally, I think that "marriage", at least technically, can only be between a man and a woman: there are simply some things that physically only a man can do and others that only a woman can, and marriage involves some of these (or at least the option for them). Whether the homophilics like it or not this will always be the case and there is nothing that can be done to change that. I had actually never come across the terms homophilia and homophilic before but, dare I say it, some of the homophilics here appear just as bigoted as some of the homophobes elsewhere!



A multifaceted term that seems to oscillate between a descriptive and a prescriptive (┬╗normative┬л) meaning.

Art, how very true - the definitions appear to be as varied as they are many, as clearly stated by The International Encyclopedia of Communication: "тАж.. There are innumerable definitions of norms in the social science literature.....".

Even Blackwell contradicts itself: "..... Norms are the distributions of scores (means, standard deviations, etc.) for a test's various reference groups ....." vs "..... Norms are the unwritten rules that provide guidelines for acceptable behaviors by members of a group....." and even " .....the тАЬnormalтАЭ course of action .....".

I imagine that one's preferred definition very much depends on whether you are right or left brain dominant - I have always been very strongly "left brain", which is probably why I always go for the more rational/logical choice rather than the more imaginative/holistic one. It is clearly "the subject of continuous theoretical debate " but as I prefer to deal in practicalities rather than theory such debate will have to be done without me!




I have never claimed to be "an expert" in any area, although I have detailed exactly what my level of expertise is in a few. If, as you repeatedly allege, I have made such a claim, post a reference.
Lots of self-reference but not much substance..... Again GF - I would be happy to trade CVs.

Cat got your tongue on this part, Pissyboy, or were you so busy deciding whether you were "a college professor who does research in this area (gays and lesbians in the workplace)" (28 May - 0341hrs) or "in the school of business - the management department. I teach organizational behavior and gender and diversity in organizations" (28 May - 0811hrs) that you missed it?

I have already given my reasons for my maintenance of my anonymity elsewhere, at length ( anonymity-t15161.html (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/anonymity-t15161.html) ), the primary one being that I prefer my posts to be able to stand on their own merits without relying on any claims of expertise if at all possible, so there is little point in my sending you my CV in return for one you have found while taking out the trash.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong Again Go Fuckyourself - Still very sophomoric. My students do better Google searches and have better excuses for handing me bullshit for research papers. You lying skills are good but need imporvement.

The definitions posted by Art of social norms in the sociology and psychology literature are very clear. Social and sexual norms are behaviors acceptable by society - the definition I gave.
Admitting you are no expert in the area is a good start.
However, trying to define the term 'norms' to fit your needs when applied to sociological and psychological processes makes you plain stupid. They have clear definitions accepted by the disciplines.
You may not like the accepted definitions but it is stupidity defining them to your liking.

Also, you used the word 'homophilics' тАУ You are using it in the negative sense - refer to your posing above - almost as a substitute for homophobes. It has the exact opposite meaning of how you are using the word. It is the opposite of homophobic.

I am a college professor; I do research in the area of gays and lesbians in the workplace. I teach in the school of business, specifically the management department and yes I do teach organizational behavior and gender and diversity in organizations.
No inconsistencies тАУ sorry to disappoint.
I assume the reason you do not want to swap CVs is because your self-importance is not supported by your accomplishments.

LetтАЩs see your self-reported expertise.
When you claimed to be able to interpret Bayesian statistics, which requires training and expertise - were you implying that you knew what you were talking about?
I guess I should have assumed you were full of shit and not expertise.
Sorry, my mistake.

[Wesley]

Ah, at last a reason for being simple minded, I see no need to write such long dissertations on what words are real and what is not nor who is wrong or who is right. Opinions are like assholes, we all have one. Dictionaries are for a reason and If I type a work that spell check will not correct, I assume I need to reword my sentence to accommodate the lack of intellect as to use a word that does not Yet exist,

So it is true the difference between our culture and that of heterosexuals is much more flagrant and produces no children of our own and continues to produce new gay people to carry on our cause. I suspect sooner or later we will see a marriage of some sort between man and man. However, it will be short term and likely increase the statistical increase of divorce should they decide to include us in that category as well. I suspect they will give two statical arguments , how bad it was with divorce before gays had the right to marry and how much worse, by percentage it is now that they are included. Personally, I would hate to be bound by the laws that pertain to marriage. The legal consequences of sleeping with the boy next door and the resulting divorce could become expensive. So far, I have been though three 8 year relationships, all of which I was able to keep all my possessions, including the Volkswagen.

Wes

As I have said before, and at least some have agreed, I really cannot see why calling a recognised and legal gay partnership "marriage" is so important - and, personally, I think that "marriage", at least technically, can only be between a man and a woman: there are simply some things that physically only a man can do and others that only a woman can, and marriage involves some of these (or at least the option for them).The late great Homintern believed the same as I recall. If I search hard enough there may be an old post, I think of his, where he quotes the Episcopalian liturgy giving reasons for marriage.

As I have said before, and at least some have agreed, I really cannot see why calling a recognised and legal gay partnership "marriage" is so important - and, personally, I think that "marriage", at least technically, can only be between a man and a woman: there are simply some things that physically only a man can do and others that only a woman can, and marriage involves some of these (or at least the option for them).The late great Homintern believed the same as I recall. If I search hard enough there may be an old post, I think of his, where he quotes the Episcopalian liturgy giving reasons for marriage.

You really think he's dead? I know exactly where he is.

You really think he's dead? I know exactly where he is.Locked up with George?

[Wesley]

Ah my dear Curious one, let us leave the suffering of individuals to their suffering. In as much as they have made a bed they must now sleep in. Homiturns bed is eternal As said in the movie The Day earth stood still " nothing ever dies, the universe wastes nothing, everything is simply transformed" I hope. If not then dust to dust. But for the Living at least let them alone in their misery as best we can. After Our PM I would have hoped George would not have been mentioned again

All the best my dear Curios one. You should try the Philippines again the men are wonderful. And pretty much free. Not costing more than rearing your own son.

Wesley

Wrong Again Go Fuckyourself - Still very sophomoric..... plain stupid.

Well, at least I am in good company, along with The International Encyclopedia of Communication ("тАж.. There are innumerable definitions of norms in the social science literature.....") and others.


Also, you used the word 'homophilics' тАУ You are using it in the negative sense - refer to your posing above - almost as a substitute for homophobes. It has the exact opposite meaning of how you are using the word. It is the opposite of homophobic.

That is exactly, and obviously, how I intended to use it: "some of the homophilics here appear just as bigoted as some of the homophobes elsewhere!". I could alternatively have used the term "homophile" ( http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... =Homophile (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Homophile) ).


I assume the reason you do not want to swap CVs is because your self-importance is not supported by your accomplishments.

Such an assumption, regardless of whether it is correct or not, has no foundation - the "norm" for your posts.


LetтАЩs see your self-reported expertise. When you claimed to be able to interpret Bayesian statistics .....

I have never made such a claim. "Bayesian" has been used 4 times on this Forum: three times by you and once (surprise, surprise) by Homintern.

The post you are probably referring to is one where I questioned the validity of a study on homosexuality as an inherited trait being based on a limited study of only one generation; nothing to do with being "able to interpret Bayesian statistics", simply the logical reasoning that any study of an inherited trait has to be made over a number of generations. You (surprise, surprise) claimed superior expertise and personal knowledge and said the study was valid but beyond the understanding of those lacking your training and ability (the rest of us). Had I known the term "homophile" at the time I would probably have used it.

Try again.

"I guess I should have" known you would be totally unable to back up anything you have said. Surprising that a "researcher" is unable to find anything from a single source (this forum), with a simple to use search engine, to support his repeated claims/accusations; statistically, of course, that would indicate that the "researcher" is either wrong or not a "researcher" at all.

I suspect sooner or later we will see a marriage of some sort between man and man. However, it will be short term and likely increase the statistical increase of divorce should they decide to include us in that category as well.

No-one will ever know until they try, Wes, and things may be very different "over there" (in the US), where the divorce rate is apparently between 40 and 50 % ( http://www.aboutdivorce.org/us_divorce_rates.html ) , but in the UK where Civil Partnerships and Marriage have identical divorce laws the married (straight) divorce rate is around 12%, while the civil partnership (gay) rate is below 1% ( http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch= ... =&id=78650 (http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=78650) ).

In Holland gay and straight divorce rates were much the same at around 1% ( http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News ... 59,00.html (http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1685059,00.html) ), while in Sweden, however, the reverse to the UK is true ( http://www.narth.com/docs/sweden.html ) and gay rates are much higher.

It is difficult to compare directly, as there are so many variables: in some countries common law marriage/partnerships hold much the same rights as formal marriage/partnership so there is little reason for a formal marriage or divorce, in others divorce rates are low due to the influence of the church and couples just "separate", etc.


Lies, damned lies and statistics (and damned statisticians, real or imaginary!)

Jesus, Mary and Joseph... the fag lost. Get the fuck over it already.

[kittyboy]

The post you are probably referring to is one where I questioned the validity of a study on homosexuality as an inherited trait being based on a limited study of only one generation; nothing to do with being "able to interpret Bayesian statistics", simply the logical reasoning that any study of an inherited trait has to be made over a number of generations. You (surprise, surprise) claimed superior expertise and personal knowledge and said the study was valid but beyond the understanding of those lacking your training and ability (the rest of us). Had I known the term "homophile" at the time I would probably have used it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are many definitions of the word norms. However, the word norms has specific meaning in specific context. You are trying to use the word as it is used in terms of measurement. However, if you go deeper and look up the words 'sexual norms' it has a specific meaning. Sexuall norms are the behaviors deemed acceptable by society. So you are either plain stupid or willfully ignorant when you imply that 'sexual norms' are about the average sexual behaviors of people. Sexual norms are the sexual behaviors along a continuum of behaviors that society finds acceptable. The reason it is important is that as straight people interact with gays, they have less hostility toward gays and lesbians and come to see homosexuals and homosexual sex as within the acceptable sexual norm. To say that the тАШsexual normтАЩ is some sort of statistical measure is to not understand stats and to not understand how the phrase тАШsexual normтАЩ is used in the social sciences.

You wrote this in a previous thread.
KT, I was aware that Pissyboy wrote it, but I thought that there was at least some chance of a rational explanation from you of just why you agreed that control and power formed the basis of all relationships,

You added words and emphasis to my original post to suit your own needs. What I detect is that you have a pattern of changing words and selective cut and pasting to bolster your opinions. When you change my words and add your own emphasis then you become a lying sack of shit who is fundamentally intellectually dishonest.

I do refer to that article about gayness and heredity. You give a strong critique of the paper offering up your 'expert' (my words - again you should use me as your role model as I do not change other people's post) views on the paper, however, you acknowledge that you know shit about the methods (Baysean) they used, you have admitted you donтАЩt know shit about the area of gay and lesbian research, and as seems to be typical you misrepresent the elements of the paper to fit your own agenda. Again I would say that the overall pattern makes you a lying sack of shit who is intellectually dishonest so your OPINIONS about the validity of the paper are shit. As I have said I would be happy to swap CVs but of course you are such a lying sack of shit that you run away and hide from the offer.

The only PM I got from Homi was a note basically agreeing with me that you were an asshole and he encouraged me to keep giving you grief.

Beach BunnyтАж solve the mysteryтАж What did happen to that loveable old cunt Homi?

Finally, I don't give a rat's backside about who won American Idol but I would fuck the gushingly handsome winner, his wife could watch if they wanted to do a three way.

[CoffeeBreak]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUmzGl0z ... re=popular (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUmzGl0zy4k&feature=popular)


No question that the best singer lost because the crazy nutters of middle America etc could not stand for someone who may be gay to be the winner.

Looks like the UK public are biased against fat old biddies who look like the back end of horses.

"To say that the тАШsexual normтАЩ is some sort of statistical measure is to not understand stats and to not understand how the phrase тАШsexual normтАЩ is used in the social sciences. "

I leave it to The International Encyclopedia of Communication, again, to give their view: "тАж.. There are innumerable definitions of norms in the social science literature.....". You, of course, may be more expert then they (I emphasise "may").


"You added words and emphasis to my original post to suit your own needs. What I detect is that you have a pattern of changing words and selective cut and pasting to bolster your opinions. When you change my words and add your own emphasis then you become a lying sack of shit who is fundamentally intellectually dishonest."

What words? As I requested before, and as you have never been able to do "give some specific examples of those too (before and after, and a link) to back up your accusations".


"тАж..you acknowledge that you know shit about the methods (Baysean) they used, you have admitted you donтАЩt know shit about the area of gay and lesbian research, ....."

Untrue, yet again. I have never made any such acknowledgement or admission (if I have, again please quote me with a link).


"as seems to be typical you misrepresent the elements of the paper to fit your own agenda"

Again, please quote me and give a link to the misrepresentation - my primary criticism of it (although there were several others) was that inherited traits cannot be validated by a study of a single generation, which was all that their findings were based on.


"The only PM I got from Homi was a note basically agreeing with me that you were an asshole and he encouraged me to keep giving you grief."

So what? You don't. My second reason for using this board (the first, as mentioned elsewhere, being its soporific value) is that it is excellent for anger management. I am not the most patient person, so by pointing out the shortcomings and stupidity of those such as you I expend any temper/irritation/irritability etc which I may otherwise vent on those who I actually care about, which I would subsequently regret - a win-win situation, even for you as you appear to thrive on the attention.


"As I have said I would be happy to swap CVs but of course you are such a lying sack of shit that you run away and hide from the offer."

You appear to have a fixation either about my CV or about sending me yours. Bizarre. I have no interest in your CV, as I am not interested in taking the time and effort it would require to validate it; similarly, you would have no means of validating mine (my name, for example, never appears on the internet except on confidential sites which you do not have access to, such as government tax records). I have, as I have said, given my primary reasons for my anonymity elsewhere, however I have had no hesitation in giving my personal details to those on this board who have corresponded with me where it served a purpose, whom I respected as posters (irrespective of whether I agreed with their views or not), and whose confidentiality I consider I could rely on ( I have yet to be let down). You do not meet any of those requirements.

I look forward hopefully, but not expectantly, to reading any of the "specific examples" of my transgressions "(before and after, and a link) to back up your accusations", which it is not unreasonable to ask you to provide if such accusations are valid. I would have expected better from a "college professor", but your responses have been quite up to my expectations.

Looks like the UK public are biased against fat old biddies who look like the back end of horses.

Well, she still managed second place which is a lot more than I would have done. What amazed me was seeing both her and the winning dance troupe making the headlines on Thai News (Channel 7, I think) last night.

Well, she still managed second place.

Which is exactly what Adam the Fag managed. One would think if there was such a strong anti-gay (or perceived gay) bias, he would not have even made it into the top ten.

[kittyboy]

I leave it to The International Encyclopedia of Communication, again, to give their view: "тАж.. There are innumerable definitions of norms in the social science literature.....". You, of course, may be more expert then they (I emphasise "may").

Again you are just being willfully ignorant тАУ the word norm has specific meaning in specific context, which you ignore. The problem is you ignore the context of word and seem to think you can apply any definition of the word in any context...Uuuuhhhh.... that is just plain wrong.
Sexual norms, which are specific categories of social norms are acceptable behaviors not statistical measures as you have insisted.

тАЬSocial norms entail learned expectations of behavior or categorization that are deemed desirable, or at least appear as unproblematic (Sherif 1936) for a specific social group in a given situation (тЖТ Social Norms).тАЭ The quote is direct from The International Encyclopedia of Communication. Sorry you definition of a sexual norm as some statistical average is just plain wrong. I assume you have no training in the social sciences, no training in methods or statistics, and you insist that a sexual norm is a statistical average. You really are the most ignornat poster of this board... well there may be a few others more ignorant..

Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology
"Norms are informal rules that guide social interaction. They are, as Cristina Bicchieri (2006) calls them, тАЬthe rules we live by.тАЭ As such, norms constitute a critical component in the makeup of human cultures and therefore play a highly significant role in determining what it means to be human. When codified, norms are rendered laws or other types of institutionalized regulatory strictures. When conceived without moral consequence, the term can also refer to mere behavioral regularities, even though adherence or lack thereof to these can and often does result in significant consequences (e.g., it would be highly unusual as well as probably harmful to name an American child Adolf Osama or, depending on one's constructed gender, Sue). Variously defined even by sociologists themselves, there is perhaps no other sociological concept more regularly and widely deployed in everyday talk, nor one about which more has been written and discussed. It is therefore not surprising that a concept as equally vague as it is elemental to the sociological enterprise is also one that is the subject of continuous theoretical debate. Typically considered the founder of modern sociology, ├Йmile Durkheim famously theorized society as both a system of integration involving social bonds and institutions and, even more importantly, as a normative order sui generis"

You definition of norms was about statistical averages. (I think I have to repeat myself so that you finally get the message) The definitions I have posted from your own source and the Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology clearly indicate that norms are about the rules of social interaction (the context of how I am using sexual norms) and not measuring some average -- so you think that your definition superceeds the definition of the founder of modern sociology --- well gee you must think you are an expert in sociology? I suspect that you will seize upon the phrase that it 'is the subject of continous theoretical debate', and try to argue from there that you are correct... sorry wrong - the meaning of the word societal norms is not in flux it is what are and are not societal norms or what behaviors are social norms are in flux. Exactly what I have been stating and a society norm et is not about statistical averages as you insist.
So again, using the word 'norm' and applying in an incorrect way is just plain ignorant.
No repeat after me...I gf am ignorant of how to use the word 'norm'. Write that on the blackboard 100 times and show me when you are done.

What words? As I requested before, and as you have never been able to do "give some specific examples of those too (before and after, and a link) to back up your accusations".


Your quote -
KT, I was aware that Pissyboy wrote it, but I thought that there was at least some chance of a rational explanation from you of just why you agreed that control and power formed the basis of all relationships,

I did not write that тАШcontrol and power formed the basis of all relationships.тАЩ. This is an example of adding words and emphasis to my post to bolster your own opinion. And again I think it makes you a lying piece of shit. I expect you to offer up some bullshit that you were not refering to my post and that you really did not ...blah balh balh.. lying shit.


As for the paper in question тАУ I admit I am incorrect. I had assumed that someone who made such forceful posts about a subject must think they know something about the subject at hand. I do apologize for mistaking postings based on pure ignorance for statements about some underlying expterise - my mistake. And do try to keep that anger issue under control. As I recall, though I could be wrong, I read something about the 'statistical norm' (notice the careful use of the word 'statistical norm' not just norm but statistical norm which has a very specific meaning -- again you should use me as your role model when using that word) for people who need anger management. As I recall they tended to be angry (of course), bitter, humorless, and self-important. I will try and find the link. I know you will be intersted in the proper used of the word statistical norm :)

So I again will say, because as you know this is my area of expertise. Sexual norms do change over time. As heteros get to know homos, their opinions change and homosexuality can and (IMHO) will become a sexual norm. That is clearly happening in the US and Europe. Gay marriage (which I have to agree with you I don't see why people bother - but it seems to be important to the lesbians) is becoming more and more accepted in the US and Europe. I would call that homosexuality becoming more of a norm... (used in the proper way of acceptable social behavior).

[Wesley]

(used in the proper way of acceptable social behavior).

_________________

It is Better stated, put up with rather than Accepted, the most likely scenario is that people will eventually get tired of voting it down. Christianity will never accept it but, Christianity as well seems to be on the way out. There will always be dissent the most likely problem is with your closet Queen masquerading as a heterosexual and trying to hide their particular proclivity... your argument over such a small definition is getting old, why not exchange emails and or write a dissertation on the issue and exchange term papers...

Wes

It is Better stated, put up with rather than Accepted, the most likely scenario is that people will eventually get tired of voting it down. Christianity will never accept it but, Christianity as well seems to be on the way out.What about Islam?

[Art]

What about Islam?

Anyway, IтАЩll quote him again. тАЬHenry,тАЭ said he, тАЬin America we think we are 95% straight and 5% gay. Well, here in Tunisia, if you walk down the street, you will see 20% just totally not interested, 40% who can be chatted round, and the last 40% are JUST AS INTERESTED AS YOU ARE.тАЭ
In Islamic countries the frequency of male-male sex is in all likelihood traditionally higher than in Western countries, where male-male sex is now increasingly limited to males with a gay identity.

The ┬╗gay liberation┬л was an exclusively ┬╗gay liberation┬л, not a ┬╗male liberation┬л from the heterosexual/homosexual dichotomy. It was very short-sighted not to proselytize the ┬╗heterosexual┬л world, because small minorities are time and again endangered. The border that separates male-female and male-male sex has become even more impenetrable.

Male-male sex of partners without a gay identity is decreasing in Western countries and will decrease in other countries as well with the advancing ┬╗gay liberation┬л or ┬╗gay colonisation┬л. On balance, there will be less male-male sex in the near future. Sexual revolution, freedom of choice? No chance!


I also related to your comment about the str8 village boys, as their definition of "str8" does not have the definitive borders that the classification of "str8" seems to have in other cultures. The truth of this statement being emphasized by the fact that a str8 working boy will hop in the sack with you at the drop of a dime (oh well, 1,000 baht anyway), where as some str8 boys working up on the farm will toss in the hay with you just for the fun experience. Go figure.

┬╗If homosexual activity persists on as large a scale as it does, in the face of the very considerable public sentiment against it and in spite of the severity of the penalties that our Anglo-American culture has placed upon it through the centuries, there seems some reason for believing that such activity would appear in the histories of a much larger portion of the population if there were not social restraints.┬л (659/660)

Version 1.01 All that counts is the ┬╗forceless force of the better argument┬л. Why not quote the devil?
Version 1.1

Many Britons serving in commanding positions overseas were the product of the hothouse atmosphere of public schools and single-sex colleges, where intimate male bonding, homosociality and homoeroticism veered off towards homosexuality. These conditions, and the emotions they engendered, continued overseas during expeditions, military campaigns and administrative postings.

You're scraping the bottom of the barrel in quoting Henry Cate.

[quote="Gone Fishing":utdpfcpn]

Well, she still managed second place.

Which is exactly what Adam the Fag managed. One would think if there was such a strong anti-gay (or perceived gay) bias, he would not have even made it into the top ten.[/quote:utdpfcpn]

Unless one were one of the many homophilics on this board (I am beginning to like that word, in cas you had not noticed!)

I assume you have no training in the social sciences, no training in methods or statistics,

Another unfounded assumption,as usual.


I think I have to repeat myself so that you finally get the message

Wrong again. Try something specific, that stands or falls on its own merits here(such as your baseless accusations) instead.


I did not write that тАШcontrol and power formed the basis of all relationships.тАЩ. This is an example of adding words and emphasis to my post to bolster your own opinion. And again I think it makes you a lying piece of shit. I expect you to offer up some bullshit that you were not refering to my post and that you really did not ...blah balh balh.. lying shit.

Wrong again. I was referring specifically to your post, and that is exactly what I meant. I never said that those were your exact words (a quote), but unless you are trying to find a substantial difference between "in charge" and "in control" it is an accurate and objective summary of your post. The full post is at is-it-really-lying-t17586-45.html?hilit=control (http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/forum/is-it-really-lying-t17586-45.html?hilit=control) (page 3), as you need to refresh your memory, but your critical sentences (unedited beween full stops) are as follows (I quote):

"All relationships are about power - and who has power in what domain and in what situation........."Who is in charge" in a partner type relationship? That question should always arise. ...How those questions are answered IMHO is the basis of a partnership... It is foolish to believe that those type of questions about power can be ignored."

Feel free to try again.


As for the paper in question тАУ I admit I am incorrect. I had assumed that someone who made such forceful posts about a subject must think they know something about the subject at hand. I do apologize for mistaking postings based on pure ignorance for statements about some underlying expterise - my mistake.

Wrong again; both your original assumption and your conclusion are, as usual, unfounded. I have never claimed any expertise in this area, neither have I said that I am ignorant in it. Your comprehension skills are letting you down again - being uninterested in a subject does not necessarily mean being ignorant of it.


I could be wrong

The only true thing you have said so far (although it was taken out of context).


Try harder - at least it will make you feel important for a little while, alhough I doubt anyone else is reading this.

[kittyboy]

Ah...it is childish to get into pissing contests about the meaning of words..but for me it is summer break and I need the diversion..All the cute boys have gone away for summer vacation.


I did not write that тАШcontrol and power formed the basis of all relationships.тАЩ. This is an example of adding words and emphasis to my post to bolster your own opinion. And again I think it makes you a lying piece of shit. I expect you to offer up some bullshit that you were not referring to my post and that you really did not ...blah blah. lying shit.

Wrong again. I was referring specifically to your post, and that is exactly what I meant. I never said that those were your exact words (a quote), but unless you are trying to find a substantial difference between "in charge" and "in control" it is an accurate and objective summary of your post.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I mean this in the nicest way - DonтАЩt tell me what I meant you stupid fuck. It is clearly not an accurate and objective summary of my post тАУ If you are claiming that you are an objective observer of my posts then you need to go back to the dictionary and not only look up the phrase тАШsexual normтАЩ but you need to get a clear understanding of the meaning of the word objective тАУ tsk tsk. Changing words and meaning is the height of intellectual dishonesty.
If you were my student I would give you a failing grade.
Now write 100 times on the black board тАУ I gf am a lying piece of shit.

Well at least you have stopped trying to claim that you used the phrase тАШsexual normтАЩ correctly тАУ LetтАЩs see those posting which clearly showed you had used the word incorrectly must have done the trick. Good job GF is detect progress in your intelectual development. You get a gold star.

My area of research is gays and lesbians in the workplace and I read extensively other literature on the general topic of gays and lesbians. It is clear from your posting that you have no understanding of the research or in general how social science research is conducted. It is also clear to me that you have no training or background in statistics. So your comments on these matters are purely uninformed opinion. Sure you donтАЩt want to swap CVs? I would be happy to prove my expertiseтАжdo I detect a bit of fear on your part that you will be shown to be a big fat liar? Liar Liar Liar - (if we are being childish lets go all the way)

I will go back to why IMHO this is an important topic. We as gays and lesbians have the ability to shape the perceptions of many of the heteros that we interact with. Interacting with them tends to lessen their negative feelings of homosexuality and homosexuals. IMHO тАУ that is an important idea and an important strategy for gaining greater acceptance.

[Wesley]

Well, I lived in a Muslim country for ten years; I found this to be trueтАж They have as many or more gays, but very few that are openly gay. Obviously, they like to keep both of their heads where they are. I would say that Islam in general is much more anti gay than Christian and western thought. But, what can I say I had a 6 year lover there but as far as I know no one knew we were lovers, men living with men is accepted because of the economics there are few that can afford to live like I lived on their own and it often takes more than one to pay the bills. If you get out of the city, it really gets serious and anything that might happen would bring immediate and aggressive rebuke, they would be thrown out of the family encouraged to marry to cover their proclivity and as well have children, so the family can maintain its standing among other Muslims.

The USA is changing slowly but changing, I was there when it was cool to be gay just before the HIV problem came along. Then everything changed and we were set back 20 or 30 years. Now things seem to be changing since we have learned about safe sex and now the straight people are still going bareback. I do not mean to belittle those who bareback, I do like my porn bareback but engaging enough to realize I need to play safe.

As to the question, it was really an open question that brought with it a lot of room to wiggle. Exactly waht were you asking if I did not hit it with my rabbit trails.

All the best my dear Curious,

Wes

[Smiles]

" ... You're scraping the bottom of the barrel in quoting Henry Cate ... "
THE PROLIFIC MR CATE

'Henry Cate' is now posting voraciously on Ting Tong Board under the handle 'Jaafar'(possible sp?). Whenever an innocuous reference to Sawatdee comes up he jumps in with all four feet and slangs it off just as voraciously. 'Jaafar' has issues ... but we all knew that.
'Jaafar' is a shortened version of his original handle on Sawatdee a few years ago (which he also took a powder from, in a very similar dramatic fashion). He first appeared on the very very early original Dreaded Ned board under the handle of 'Tex'.

AMERICAN IDOLICITY

But, to the original topic: that American Idol show is the most bloated, mediocre, over-hyped piece of unwatchable trash I've come to expect from Fox . . . i.e. the variety show version of a Glenn Beck right wing rant . . . . wherein (also being an i.e.) I can easily assume a generalized homophobia to be a socially acceptable stance.
But, the Gay Guy's voice sucked as well.

I mean this in the nicest way - DonтАЩt tell me what I meant you stupid fuck.

I didn't - merely what you said.


If you were my student I would give you a failing grade.

If I were your student I would deserve one.


Sure you donтАЩt want to swap CVs? I would be happy to prove my expertiseтАж

What is this fixation with my CV? I have made my reasons for not giving you mine or making it public very clear. If you would be so happy to "prove" your expertise then why not do so here? If you do not, after all this rhetoric, anyone bored enough to still be reading this thread may "detect a bit of fear on your part that you will be shown to be a big fat liar? Liar Liar Liar" !!!


Wes and Smiles, I am surprised to see the two of you here. My excuse is that we are in the middle of a thunderstorm - what are yours? Surely you must have something (or someone) better to do? Maybe you should try reading "In his Majesty's Footsteps" by Police General Vasit Dejkunjorn, the most boring book I have ever read - or, to be strictly accurate, half read - only for the most desperate of insomniacs and the most bored of the bored.

[Smiles]

" ... Wes and Smiles, I am surprised to see the two of you here. My excuse is that we are in the middle of a thunderstorm - what are yours? ... "
Well, I'm slumming.
Not sure about Wes . . . but then, I'm never sure about Wes, his every turn of phrase and regular deviations from the previous posts, topic, and general direction leave me head-scratchin' every time. Kind of charming really.

[kittyboy]

I mean this in the nicest way - DonтАЩt tell me what I meant you stupid fuck.

I didn't - merely what you said.
-----------------------------------------
Sorry adding words and emphasis to my post is not reporting what I said. Quite the opposite.
-----------------------------------------

If you were my student I would give you a failing grade.

If I were your student I would deserve one.
---------------------------------------------------
Yes you would fail my class. It is a positive sign in personal development that you recognize your limitations. However, I do have a soft spot for my special needs students (the slow ones who do not quite get it). I would sit you down and in the nicest way possible explain that you do not have a facility for factual analysis but more for creative fiction. I would then encourage you to switch to the English department where putting your fantasy to paper would be more appropriate.

So you are not going to present us with "your" CV after all?

A wise, but hardly a surprising decision.

╪г╪н┘Т┘Е┘О┘В ╪о╪п╪з ╪н╪з┘Б

[kittyboy]

So you are not going to present us with "your" CV after all?

A wise, but hardly a surprising decision.

╪г╪н┘Т┘Е┘О┘В ╪о╪п╪з ╪н╪з┘Б

And you international man of mystery - What about you? The aura of a secret agent hangs over you. Could you be Austin Powers iligitimate child? Your past is shrouded in mystery...Send your CV at anytime and I will be happy to swap.

I am a mildly successful college professor at a large midwestern university with a very modest publishing record who loves his job, and I am very proud of my accomplishments. And I am the first to admit my accomplishments are very modest.

[Bob]

It actually takes effort to skip over this never-ending thread when I'm online. I hope it dies soon given that the two main protagonists have provided more than ample proof that there's a substantial difference between respectful debate and moronic name-calling.

[giggsy]

so whats the consensus..are the american people who watch American Idol homophobes?

[Bob]

so whats the consensus..are the american people who watch American Idol homophobes?

They may be - but I see no evidence to support that. The country-western singer has been favored in prior seasons and, frankly, regardless of how good his voice is, the runner-up's style (makeup, hairdo, and clothing) probably made the winner look all the more "all-American."

It actually takes effort to skip over this never-ending thread when I'm online. I hope it dies soon given that the two main protagonists have provided more than ample proof that there's a substantial difference between respectful debate and moronic name-calling.

As you are an expert on the latter and have no experience whatsoever of the former I will leave this thread, to which you appear to be strangely drawn, to you.

[Bob]

As you are an expert on the latter and have no experience whatsoever of the former I will leave this thread, to which you appear to be strangely drawn, to you.

Thank you, sir, and I hereby donate it to the Colonel wherever he may be.....

As you are an expert on the latter and have no experience whatsoever of the former I will leave this thread, to which you appear to be strangely drawn, to you.

Thank you, sir, and I hereby donate it to the Colonel wherever he may be.....

...he's closer than you think.

[zinzone]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/america ... ribed.html (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/americanidoltracker/2009/06/the-days-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-are-over-for-adam-lambert-actually-this-seasons-groundbreaking-idol-never-really-subscribed.html)

Back to the original topic (American Idol Homophobia). I was surprised to see on CNN News today that Clay Aiken (the skinny white geek), who was beaten into second place in American Idol 2 by Ruben Studdard (the fat black slob), was also gay. Maybe there is a conspiracy after all.....

[kittyboy]

Hmmm...is that why Clay Aiken managed to win?

He lost.

IMHO - Because of the persistent racism in the US, I am surprised that Ruben Studdard won the contest. Maybe (big maybe) when it came down to a black guy or a rumored fag -- In the minds of many Americans it was the lesser of two evils. It could be that homophobia is more potent than racism in the US.

I have read quite a bit of the scholarly literature on racism in the US but it is not my area of expertise.

There is a very famous set of experiments by a guy called Dovidio (and others) that looked at unconscious racism in the US. They labeled it aversive racism. The basic idea is that the white majority in the US has negative feelings toward people of color. It is the basic us versus them phenomenon that you see in many social interactions. Given the opportunity, the majority white population (us) will, in very subtle ways, discriminate against people of color (them). There are always exceptions and it may be that in the area of sports and entertainment black American have made such progress that aversive racism is not an issue.

With the American idol contest between a possible gay guy who was white, and a black guy тАУ It is possible that the general negative feelings toward blacks were overwhelmed by homophobia - just a thought. The alternative is that racism and homophobia had nothing to do with the outcome and it is all a bunch of hand wringing.

I would be happy to supply reading material to anyone who would like to read up on the issue of aversive racism.

GF please do read up on the issue of aversive racism before you post more idiot comments about an area in which you have no knowledge.

Because of the persistent racism in the US, I am surprised that Ruben Studdard won the contest.

Same way Obama did, maybe?

[kittyboy]

Because of the persistent racism in the US, I am surprised that Ruben Studdard won the contest.
Same way Obama did, maybe?

Ouch.. Good point.
I voted for the guy but I am also surprised that Obama won the election.

Maybe race is becoming less of an issue in the US. I don't see it but it may be happening. I have a job offer at a university in the US south. When I went down for interviews I was surprised at the latent racism that still exists. (in the local community not the faculty)

The aversive racism literature points out that if a person is extremely well qualified race generally is not an issue. However, given two equally but moderately qualified candidates for a job the white candidate will often be rated higher than the black candidate by white raters.

Maybe Prez Obama was so well qualified or appeared to be that race was not an issue.

And IMHO - american idol is about the triumph of mediocore talent. Let me qualify that by saying my singing is about as melodic as the sound of cats being strangled.

Maybe Prez Obama was so well qualified or appeared to be that race was not an issue.

Are there that many racist Democrats? When the Republicans finally put a woman or person of color in office, then perhaps one could make a statement.

Are there that many racist Democrats? When the Republicans finally put a woman or person of color in office, then perhaps one could make a statement.Like Condi Rice, you mean?

...and Colin Powell?

[kittyboy]

Maybe Prez Obama was so well qualified or appeared to be that race was not an issue.

Are there that many racist Democrats? When the Republicans finally put a woman or person of color in office, then perhaps one could make a statement.

Racism is not my area of expertise but I am sure there are lots and lots of racist democrats. Whether it is more prominent in one party of another I do not know. However, the Democratic Party in the US appears to be more open and inviting to black people.

Blacks are about 13% of the US population whites are about 75%.
My understanding is that about 10% of black voters in the US votes republican and they represent about 1% or 2% of the Republican Party. Rice and Powell were appointed not elected, the republicans do not have a very good record or attracting or electing public officials of color.

This is getting a bit outside of my area of expertise but one explanation for people of color that become prominent in the Republican Party is tokenism. A well known sociologist named Kanter studied the idea of tokenism in the workplace. Again this is a very basic explanation of the topic, but tokenism is pretty much what it sounds like, it is policies or practices of limited inclusion of members of a minority group, creating a false appearance of inclusive practices. A few people of a particular underrepresented demographic are given prominent positions and trotted out as examples of inclusiveness. For the Republican Party in the US, Rice and Powell would be their tokens. If you looked at the overall numbers the Republican Party is overwhelmingly white.