Homosexual/Gay Preppers

The assumption that eunuchs were homosexual is pretty far fetched in my opinion. If anything they were asexual. The Isaiah verse is (IMO) referring to their low social status, like slaves, not their sexual orientation. They were more likely victims of homosexual abuse than homosexual themselves.

Eunuch - Wikipedia

 

Biblically speaking, the status of eunuchs and gay men (lesbians are not specifically mentioned) are quite different. Isiah 56:3-5 basically tells eunuchs that they don't have to worry about not having the posterity of children...as far as God is concerned, provided that the eunuch keeps the sabath, and god's other laws and commandments....the eunuchs get a special plaque in the "temple of god", much better than the breeders. Gays....man, they are still gonna burn! (biblically speaking).

The thing with eunuchs is that they can be straight, gay, or bi. All that is missing are some parts necessary for reproduction, same or opposite sex attraction isn't necessarily altered by a little slice and dicing. It doesn't necessarily follow that eunuchs are incapable of engaging in sexual intercourse, just that reproduction is unlikely.

I don't think that appealing to sacred texts or the pronouncement of popes, or clerics of any description achieves much in the way of tolerance, let alone acceptance of GLBTQI folk. There are some prejudiced people who'll resort to their go to bashing texts to justify their own inherent prejudices; and there will be folk who are inherently tolerant and accepting, who'll find ways of harmonizing texts to suit their own accepting and tolerant attitudes to gay folk etc.

Getting back to the OP, in a prepper group, or MAG, gay folk are probably not going to be a good fit with some groups who tend to a high degree of religious orthodoxy.....unless their survival value to the group, far exceeds the ickyness factor of being gay. A gay, black, jew in a white supremacist prepper group? That trifecta just ain't goin' ta fly! On the other hand, some groups won't give a damn what sexual orientation a person is ...man, I'd be happy to have Kristin Beck in any group I was a member of.

 

I don't think @william donati was suggesting that eunuchs were homosexuals, nor that he was equating the two. It also doesn't follow that eunuchs were necessarily slaves or were of low status. On the contrary, in some times and places, Eunuchs enjoyed high status, prestige and power.

Some women found castrati (eunuch) lovers better in bed than more reproductively intact men; and without the risk of unwanted pregnancy.

 

There's lots of things that society doesn't "accept"...me running around butt naked with my rifle shouting "THIS IS MY RIFLE, THIS IS MY GUN, THIS ONE'S FOR SHOOTING, THIS ONE'S FOR FUN", for example. Society is and always will be a finicky lot.

 

Anti

Well, if re-enacting your Paris Island days in the privacy of your own dwelling is your thing, I doubt many would care very much....just keep the blinds down and the curtains drawn.

I would say, that some in society will be finicky about some things at some times and in some places. However, society isn't static, and is capable of considerable change, even within a relatively short time frame. Anti-miscegenation is one of many examples where a less than tolerant society, became just that little more tolerant when society saw anti-miscegenation laws as manifestly unjust. Intolerance of mixed race marriage / cohabitation was, in a number of US States, upheld by law, but when challenged, those laws were overturned. Progressively, laws discriminating against LGBTQI people will eventually be nullified, not withstanding a somewhat more conservative flavor of executive government coming into office.

 

Just like with my butt naked PT routine...if the LGBTQI kept their personal stuff inside the privacy of their own homes, rather than insisting on shoving it down everyone's throats in public...society wouldn't have much problem with their behavior. Thanks for making that point for me Chell!

 

No, it doesn't make your case for you...

You seem to ignore that in your case, prancing about in public naked (with or without a firearm), is just as likely to result in a court appearance as it might if a GLBTQI person were to do the same.

Same sex couples holding hands or showing affection in the same way as heterosexual couples...well, if heteros can't cope with that, then they should be the ones skulking in their dwellings with blinds lowered and curtains drawn, lest their sensitivities be overly challenged.

It is in the nature of privileged groups within society, be it colour, age, sexual orientation, gender, or financial status, that they are often blind to their own privilege; but get awfully upset when others seek to enjoy the privileges that the privileged take for granted.

The status quo, prior to the Gay Rights movement began to become more influential, was not a good or safe place for them to exist in (it still isn't, but it is improving), if the price of GLBTQI folk enjoying the same full rights as citizens, or the occasional gay mardi gras, is that some "straight" citzens' sensitivities will be challenged, then, my view as an elderly, straight, white, male is....suck it up...it just ain't going to go away.

 

Don't make the false assumption that the "upset" of a minority of morons is a trait of the rest of us...that would be the same kind of wacky stereotyping that the minority or morons tend to engage in. Most of us have no problem with other people's lifestyles...unless they are trying to shove it down our throats and acting inappropriately in our presence...which is exactly what my prancing about butt naked would be...despite my inherent human right to do so despite other people's prudishness (or weak stomachs). You're an intelligent guy, Chell...so I'm kinda curious why you have fallen for the "privilege" bias BS that I would expect from some American Idiocrat snowflake, but not from anyone with more than half a brain. The only people who such BS applies to would be those who never venture out of their little protected fishbowls and have no life experience...not the population in general.

If you truly believe in that goofy privilege bias theory, you must also believe that you cannot possible understand America and Americans because you are not living here...and I know that you don't believe that. ;-)

 

Chimo, all groups have inherint 'privilege bias'. White men have a way of doing things, white women have a way of doing things... that creates 'privilege bias'.

Black men have their own way of doing things, you can't fit into thug ville in St Louis, or Chicago unless you are willing to do what your gang members do. They have an inherent privilege bias for belonging to their groups. Now most people don't want that so we dissaprove and say not for me and move on.

I have had to deal with the 'male privelege issue' most of my career. And truth be told it isn't privelege, its a networking think men do with other men because they are connected as men. Men do things a certain way that women don't.

I had a guy say to me one time, 'I know you do 2x the amount of work as Joe but we don't pay you as much because he as a family to support and you don't' (FYI we did get thsi sorted out rather quickly)

He didn't even realize what he had said. I have run up against this type of attitude over and over. And like many things in life, you just have to work around the inequality or inherint prejucies people have. I don't fight it unless I think I can win. Then I hit that kind of unthinking, innate prejudice pretty hard upside the head.

PS and just for the record, I don't want to see any man run around naked with his guns hanging out!.

 

Sorry ma'am, but that is all pure horsepucky. Fact is some people are just plain asses...no need to excuse their bad behavior with yet another made up mental illness.

 

What is it that you are suggesting that GLBTQI folk are shoving "down our throats" that folks of like mind to yourself, find so objectionable? You've been consistently vague about this, other than offering a reductio ad absurdum example (naked FMJ marine corps tribal rituals) as some kind of analogous example.

What in the opposite sex lifestyle, is it that GLBTQI folk seem to be failing to conform to? What in the public display of same sex attraction is it that is unacceptable, but that would be generally considered acceptable in the case of opposite sex couples.

I am surprised that you can make, with a straight face, the claim that you have an inherent right to prance around, performing tribal marine corps chants (presumably in a public space, or at least in public view, while butt naked). Most jurisdictions have laws / ordinances about public lewdness / indecent exposure, which prohibits and penalizes such behavior...regardless of the sexual orientation of the miscreant(s). Indecent Exposure: Laws & Penalties | Criminal Law

Opposite sex couples in most western societies enjoy the generally unquestioned privilege of holding hands, embracing,kissing, and other forms of considerate displays of public affection, without having to be concerned that it is worrisome to others' sensitivities; they can do these things without worrying that what they are doing is shoving anything down anyone else's throat; They can do these things without worrying that casual observers will think that what they are doing is bizarre, offensive or perverted; or that citizens will take it upon themselves to beat up or otherwise harass the embracers, kissers, hand holders, or otherwise affectionate couples, simply because they are of the opposite sex.

Oh man....nice try straw manning me, by making it appear that I was making a broad generalization drawn from a minority viewpoint. I did not quantify heterosexuals who might be concerned, nor did I refer to them as morons. That's on you.

Although a continuation of the original straw man, above, it is irrelevant to the issue of GLBTQI folk, let alone as suitable prepper group members.

This applies as much to heterosexuals as it does to same sex attracted folk. You have been very vague about what falls outside of what is acceptable or appropriate behavior, and similarly, you keep reiterating the objection to having some undefined generic gay (lifestyle) something being shoved down your throat, without explaining what that actually is.

I'm not sure that complimenting me upon apparently being an intelligent guy on one hand, yet associating me with "American Idiocrat snowflake(s)" is other than what it is....attacking me via some kind of inferred guilt by association, without actually explaining why "privilege" bias is BS?

I appreciate that your winking indicates a wry comment, but I have to say that your parting shot is a non sequiteur....


Citing privilege bias, doesn't invalidate being able to comment upon prejudiced views against non-hetero conforming folk. Are American and Australian societies so different that prejudice against GLBTQI folk is significantly different in both cases? The same tired and well worn arguments attacking non hetero conforming folk, seem to be all too common to both nations.

I commend to you the following article.....Privilege Blindness and the Just World Theory | Nirmukta perhaps you might find it enlightening. Although many examples are described in an Indian (subcontinent) social context, more western analogues can be extrapolated.

and further....

 

Chimo no oe said anything about mental illness.

We all have iherent bias based on our beliefs. Our beliefs color how we see the world. If you put a red lense on a camera everything looks red. Beliefs are like a colored lens. Change the belief you Change how you see the world.

Some beliefs are so built into us, we think they are 'the truth' and that is where people argue. Because if what you have believed all your life isn't 'the truth' then your whol life looks like a lie. Which is why people go to war over their beliefs. It's part of being human

 

From your stance n wording chell... guessing no answer will work for you except the one you want...

several have tried to explain but seems they are not sayin what you want to hear...

so why bother... tired of the PC crap anyways...

 

It's funny to see people who are normally reasonable people, that when you hit a belief they hold sacred it's called..... liberal or PC crap.

This is the same thing that liberals do when they are losing an argument or don't understand what is being said.

A dialog is two people engaged in conversation, when you resort to childish name calling there is no longer a dialog nor is there respectful debate.

My request is that if you don't like the thread.... move on and if you are willing to leave name calling at the door then please let's engage in respectful debate.

 

If it is not acceptable by the majority of folks to let someone under the age of consent see tits on tv, or butts, or talk about sex in a general way, OF COURSE they are going to have a problem with a bunch of naked GLXXERFSS sucking one another off and running around in fetishwear in public, especially when they are wagging fake genitalia like confetti.

Other than religious issues, socially unacceptable behavior is unacceptable, regardless of whose what turns you on.

And don't forget that y'all are ideologs on the other side of the aisle, judging by your comments. THAT is your "lense", as y'alls brand of ideolog seems fond of using. If you really want to discuss this without threatening to ban me, I am much more informed and up to date on many of these issues than older members here, and not as easily confused with lawyer talk and weasel words, and false claims of strawman.

 

Axesarebetter there are no weasel words here. There are people with a different view point trying to carry on a conversation.

Please note who is resorting to name calling and who is trying to have a dialogue.

I don't have a conservative view on everything perhaps if I had to label myself I would say I was a libertarian. I don't like the gay community's 'cram it down their throats' approach to acceptance and I agree with you about public displays that are not socially acceptable. However that does not mean I think we should ostracize, or name call people who are different.

Part of the problem with inherent bias due to our beliefs is that when our beliefs are threatened we resort to name calling. Consider something I said triggered one of your beliefs and as a result you defaulted to name calling rather than a discussion

 

Is a pedophile a different type of ''Gay'' ?

 

There are some that say too many seem to be so inclined... but there are fems that prey on young boys...

lot of teachers been busted over the last 10 years or so...

guess when ya look at the facts... there are hetro and homo n lez pedo's?

although the original vag dialog thing that was for women had a part where a 14 year old girl was seduced...

seems there were claims that a lot of the women in attendance would cheer at that part?

My view... don't care what adults do in private... the age thing can be an issue for me...

 

Same here, Wired to a tree and their genitals stuffed down their throat, Give them a minute or so to think about the harm they have done.

 

most of the quears i know have more money then i so i think they can prep better than me so i do not think i have to take care of them and i do not expect others to take care of me and mind

for the life of me.................i can not understand the purpose of this thread