Dear LGBTQA..a genuine request..

[esme]

I'd say there's still a way to go, especially when there are petitions like this one

 

https://go.allout.org/en/a/judge-scandal/

 

Full story here - http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/20/argentine-judges-dismiss-rape-of-6-year-old-because-child-is-gay.html

 

OK that's Argentina and not the UK, but not long ago we had members of political parties saying gay marriage caused floods, there are people on this very forum who are vehemently anti gay and have expressed the opinion that homosexuality is a perversion quite recently.

 

So until LGBTQIA people stop being treated as second class citizens, I'd say there's still a ways to go.

 

If the question "are we there yet" is still being asked, then we're not.

 

It's not a case of giving LGBTQIA people extra rights, it's a case of giving them the same rights as everyone else and ensuring those rights are respected by everyone because not everyone will respect them voluntarily.

 

There are centuries of prejudice to be overcome and until no one is bothered by someone elses gender or sexuality, then the journey is not complete.

 

So the fact that you are asking this question at all, the fact that you are bothered by it, means that LGBTQIA people can't stop fighting for their rights.

Edited May 30, 2015 by esme
added a few extra thoughts

[Alan Ladd]

I'd say there's still a way to go, especially when there are petitions like this one

 

https://go.allout.org/en/a/judge-scandal/

 

Full story here - http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/20/argentine-judges-dismiss-rape-of-6-year-old-because-child-is-gay.html

 

OK that's Argentina and not the UK, but not long ago we had members of political parties saying gay marriage caused floods, there are people on this very forum who are vehemently anti gay and have expressed the opinion that homosexuality is a perversion quite recently.

 

So until LGBTQIA people stop being treated as second class citizens, I'd say there's still a ways to go.

 

If the question "are we there yet" is still being asked, then we're not.

 

It's not a case of giving LGBTQIA people extra rights, it's a case of giving them the same rights as everyone else and ensuring those rights are respected by everyone because not everyone will respect them voluntarily.

 

There are centuries of prejudice to be overcome and until no one is bothered by someone elses gender or sexuality, then the journey is not complete.

 

So the fact that you are asking this question at all, the fact that you are bothered by it, means that LGBTQIA people can't stop fighting for their rights.

 

You state "centuries of prejudice to be overcome". Are you totally confident that these prejudices are unfounded?

 

It seems to me that the sexual act is designed for procreation. Although humans have developed differently to the rest of the animal kingdom and like Bonobo can use sex as a recreation/bonding process/activity we are somewhat out of step with most other animals.

 

The prejudices you rightly mention are of long standing and seem to go back beyond monotheism and other intolerant belief systems.

 

The feminisation of men and the masculinisation of women can be seen daily on our streets, certainly this was not the case when I was young (50 years ago). Although this openness is a sign of a tolerant and mature society I do wonder if this process is progressive, if, like the Roman empire it eventually impacts on birth rates and the ability for the nation to defend itself.

 

Old fashioned thinking? probably, but not based on hate or unkindness, history shows us the downside of sexual liberty, we should proceed cautiously.

[tzijlstra]

You state "centuries of prejudice to be overcome". Are you totally confident that these prejudices are unfounded?

 

It seems to me that the sexual act is designed for procreation. Although humans have developed differently to the rest of the animal kingdom and like Bonobo can use sex as a recreation/bonding process/activity we are somewhat out of step with most other animals.

 

The prejudices you rightly mention are of long standing and seem to go back beyond monotheism and other intolerant belief systems.

 

The feminisation of men and the masculinisation of women can be seen daily on our streets, certainly this was not the case when I was young (50 years ago). Although this openness is a sign of a tolerant and mature society I do wonder if this process is progressive, if, like the Roman empire it eventually impacts on birth rates and the ability for the nation to defend itself.

 

Old fashioned thinking? probably, but not based on hate or unkindness, history shows us the downside of sexual liberty, we should proceed cautiously.

 

You are aware that the Romans, Vikings, Greeks, Egyptians etc. etc. etc. all didn't bat an eyelid when it came to home sexuality I take it? The fact that it is frowned on now is a result of the institutionalisation of marriage by the church.

[woodmally]

The people who ask these questions are the ones to be worried about.

 

Well no the people that ask these questions dont care what gender, race or sexuality you are which is where we should be going.

 

Positive discrimination is just that discrimination. People should be employed becuase of a simple criteria. Will they be any good at the job.

[SnailyBoy]

You state "centuries of prejudice to be overcome". Are you totally confident that these prejudices are unfounded?

 

It seems to me that the sexual act is designed for procreation. Although humans have developed differently to the rest of the animal kingdom and like Bonobo can use sex as a recreation/bonding process/activity we are somewhat out of step with most other animals.

 

The prejudices you rightly mention are of long standing and seem to go back beyond monotheism and other intolerant belief systems.

 

The feminisation of men and the masculinisation of women can be seen daily on our streets, certainly this was not the case when I was young (50 years ago). Although this openness is a sign of a tolerant and mature society I do wonder if this process is progressive, if, like the Roman empire it eventually impacts on birth rates and the ability for the nation to defend itself.

 

Old fashioned thinking? probably, but not based on hate or unkindness, history shows us the downside of sexual liberty, we should proceed cautiously.

 

Can you give a past example of the "downside of sexual liberty"?

[crookedspire]

is the LGBT lifestyle generally accepted now - it seems to me that society has come a long way towards this. If not, what else needs to be done?

Over the last ten years or so gay rights have changed beyond recognition. The lifting of the ban in the armed forces was a big milestone more recently gay marriage. Their is a few areas still to go. As generations move on been gay will be seen as no different from been straight the laws can be changed but it takes longer for some people to accept change.

[Alan Ladd]

You are aware that the Romans, Vikings, Greeks, Egyptians etc. etc. etc. all didn't bat an eyelid when it came to home sexuality I take it? The fact that it is frowned on now is a result of the institutionalisation of marriage by the church.

 

The Romans certainly "batted eyelids" as did the other societies you mention at different times in their history. But I concede this has (pardon the pun) swung both ways throughout history.

 

The Romans infertility in the 2nd/3rd century has been put down to sexual diversification from the norm.

 

My point us, that in accepting diversity are we doing the right thing? If so why?

 

---------- Post added 02-06-2015 at 14:19 ----------

 

Can you give a past example of the "downside of sexual liberty"?

 

 

Difficult to answer specifically, I could bang on about population decline in Italy in the 2nd 3rd centuries and its subsequent ramifications but wont.

 

I think the answer to your question is that we have,it seems to me, developed a culture of self gratification largely based on the sexual revolution of the 60s.

 

This self gratification now shows itself financially, in the 60s powerful men made money, but they would not dream of taking 500% more than the people who work for them as happens frequently now.

 

Sex outside marraige was shameful, a concept we seem to have abandoned in any context. So was outrageous or unusual clothing, divorce was shocking. Greed as well as homosexuality was a love that dare not speak its name.

 

"do your own thing" today smacks to me as being "every man for himself" was 50 years ago when it was considered wrong.

 

The downside of sexual liberty is a anything goes attitude to sex, cultural coarseness and multiculturalism. All bad things if you are on the right.

 

If you are on the left this extended liberty that started with the sexual revolution has extended to banking speculation, relocating your factory overseas, and in America the right to bear arms anywhere at any time.

 

So, to answer your question, if we restrict the answer to sex, maybe not much, but overall, the sexual revolution of the 60s has had lead to huge changes that we still are dealing with.

[SnailyBoy]

The Romans certainly "batted eyelids" as did the other societies you mention at different times in their history. But I concede this has (pardon the pun) swung both ways throughout history.

 

The Romans infertility in the 2nd/3rd century has been put down to sexual diversification from the norm.

 

My point us, that in accepting diversity are we doing the right thing? If so why?

 

---------- Post added 02-06-2015 at 14:19 ----------

 

 

 

Difficult to answer specifically, I could bang on about population decline in Italy in the 2nd 3rd centuries and its subsequent ramifications but wont.

 

I think the answer to your question is that we have,it seems to me, developed a culture of self gratification largely based on the sexual revolution of the 60s.

 

This self gratification now shows itself financially, in the 60s powerful men made money, but they would not dream of taking 500% more than the people who work for them as happens frequently now.

 

Sex outside marraige was shameful, a concept we seem to have abandoned in any context. So was outrageous or unusual clothing, divorce was shocking. Greed as well as homosexuality was a love that dare not speak its name.

 

"do your own thing" today smacks to me as being "every man for himself" was 50 years ago when it was considered wrong.

 

The downside of sexual liberty is a anything goes attitude to sex, cultural coarseness and multiculturalism. All bad things if you are on the right.

 

If you are on the left this extended liberty that started with the sexual revolution has extended to banking speculation, relocating your factory overseas, and in America the right to bear arms anywhere at any time.

 

So, to answer your question, if we restrict the answer to sex, maybe not much, but overall, the sexual revolution of the 60s has had lead to huge changes that we still are dealing with.

 

Wow, that's some claim of coloration. The only 'revolution' I can think of in the 60's is giving women access to effective birth control. Not sure how that translates into the example you're given. if anything it sounds pretty bizarre.

Edited June 2, 2015 by SnailyBoy

[Alan Ladd]

Wow, that's some claim of coloration. The only 'revolution' I can think of in the 60's is giving women access to effective birth control. Not sure how that translates into the example you're given. if anything it sounds pretty bizarre.

 

I was there, maybe you were, maybe you are forgetting how radically things changed.

 

I think the pill became available in 1963? certainly that lead to the sexual liberation of women.

 

I suggest liberation opened the door to many positive things but inevitably some not so positive, drugs started to become a problem shortly after, we also so a huge attack on deference, Beatles, Peter Cook, Cassius Clay, and many others refused to adhere to the polite deference that had been the norm. A good thing in many ways, but that's also the time good manners declined.

 

The LGBTQA campaigners of today owe their very existence to what happened in the 60s. But so do the people who now travel all around the world freely, some to go on holiday and to travel, others to join ISIS.

 

My only concern is to be aware that all is not positive, doesn't mean stop, means be careful.

[esme]

...My point us, that in accepting diversity are we doing the right thing? If so why?...

LBGQTIA people make valuable contributions to society, when they are not constrained by prejudice.

 

Your gender and sexuality do not affect your ability or talent, however prejudice from other people certainly does.

 

So by not accepting diversity this contribution is discarded.