General Forum > Open Forum

An experiment to see how well the notion of a Gay nation would be taken

<< < (2/3) > >>

Mogul:
Ah, friend Mykel just has managed to insert three of the usual prejudices into his first short reply:


--- Quote ---Surely you jest! [..] If your little separatist fantasy pays for itself and it's on private property, perhaps you can make a case for it.
--- End quote ---

=> Doesn't take the idea seriously, pushing you into the playchild corner.


--- Quote ---You should know by now that I'd vehemently condemn such a mockery of secular, integrated Democracy, just as I do a Jewish Israel. Of course, I am inclined to let the Neocons who run Israel do what they will, so long as it's on their dime and not mine, nor any non-Jew's.
--- End quote ---

=> He wasn't asked about Israel, but he unconsciously slides into airing his views on Zionism and Israel. Interestingly, the 6 millions of dead European Jews never enter such discussions -- despite the fact that most of them probably could be saved if Israel came into existence some 20 years earlier.


--- Quote ---As a gay man, too, however, I don't think it will help the Movement.
--- End quote ---

=> This is the usual notion that resistance to assimilationists' efforts is somehow damaging to the "fight for equality". Not a single one of them would feel offended by Gays fleeing to US and Europe (and being deported), but Gays fleeing to the Gay State would behave "counterproductive" and "damage the Movement"...

One thing wich I think is important in these up-hill battles is the fact that ideas have certain power of their own, even if this is not so obvious at first. Those who are fiercefully rejecting the idea of a Gay State, even the idea of Gays being a people as such -- all those folks can not change their minds back into total innocence. Once they have the idea in their minds, it does not go away. With time their attitudes will likely change more in favour of the Gay State, especially when there will be some evidence of persecuted Gay individuals being really rescued from this or other country. Methinks, one huge problem is actually that many of our fellow Gay folks in the West somehow manage to exclude every thought of their less happy brethreigns from their minds. Jumping into their faces with some uncomfortable truth is often perceived with indignation, but it also makes them think, this much is sure.


--- Quote from: Athrael on Tue, May 08, 2007, 22:21 ---Based on the little data I have now I would judge the waters to be very skeptical of a Gay Nation.  Instead of having the resource of a majority of the GLBT community I suspect we would only have a mere fraction to work with.
--- End quote ---

The more people know about the idea, the more suitable individuals will become interested. The slow ones will still have the chance to further develope their views, though. Thus, the more people get informed, the better. We are, of course, in charge of presenting something really substantial to the sceptics. Providing sound replies to their recurrent objections (they are really not more than 10) is among them.


--- Quote from: Feral on Wed, May 09, 2007, 00:51 ---The one objection to the idea of a Gay state that I cannot overcome is one of the ones I hear the most often: "I could never live with just gay people." Whatever can you say to that? You can do what you can do and you cannot do what you cannot. It bothers me a great deal though what this objection seems to really mean -- that a great many Gay people are so profoundly homophobic that they cannot bear the company of their own kind for any length of time.
--- End quote ---

Yes, this particular objection -- sometimes expressed even by some of the "gay activists" -- is so profoundly disheartening that by times I could tear my hairs from my head from despair over some Gay folks. The only way to deal with it is to reply in making them clear that they are, in their heart, still ugly little homophobes. Self-hatred does not go away by itself, it must be purged -- if necessary, with a couple of unkind, but clear words. It is a friend's service, after all, to liberate a Gay person from homophobic attitudes.


--- Quote from: Feral on Wed, May 09, 2007, 00:51 ---The piece of madness that most sets my teeth on edge is the idea that any proposal for a gay state must necessarily be large -- too large to be reasonably negotiated. After all, there are quite likely 246,000,000 Gays in the world. Were ALL the Gay people to move to a gay state, it would be (if I remember correctly) the fourth most populous nation on Earth.
--- End quote ---

The genuine nations of North and South America and Australia all started with hords of emigrants (and convicted criminals) who set to new shores in a hope of a better life, taking away territories from other genuine peoples who owned the territories. Nothing of the like is intended for the Gay people - though it would be possible, if Gays were as reckless as the straights often are. No, we wouldl agree to take a decently small area suitable to accomodate a densely buil City-State -- plus the political network including the communities in diaspora. The genuine Republic of San Marino was formed by Christian refugees hundreds of years ago, in our times there is a semi-autonomous monk republic in Greece (Athos), and last not least there is the Vatican. I also fail to see how the existence of the Order of Malta has damaged the Christian movement -- on contrary, I am inclined to acknowledge that this entity has done much good to the Christians and to humanity at large.


--- Quote from: Feral on Wed, May 09, 2007, 00:51 ---Gay nationalism does not, I think, have anything to do with the sort of class struggles dreamed up by the Marxists and their ilk.
--- End quote ---

Though there are many Gays who indeed are heavily involved into Marxism and all sort of other more or less sensible ideologies, they do so at their own expense. Gay Nationalism as such is a movement of its own merit -- a one-issue movement indeed. This does not mean that questions of social justice, clean environment and responsible economy are of no importance to Gay Nationalists. They are important and discussion should be encouraged on such issues -- as long as these issues are put into the context of Gay Nationalism. Discussion about the role of social justice in a Gay society are somewhat different from discussions about how the Gay people can serve the global promotion of this or other ideology.

Feral:

--- Quote ---Feral, you are preaching to the choir here.
--- End quote ---

I realize that, of course, and I apologize. I get all overcome at times by the shear volume of the nonsense.

The one objection to the idea of a Gay state that I cannot overcome is one of the ones I hear the most often: "I could never live with just gay people." Whatever can you say to that? You can do what you can do and you cannot do what you cannot. It bothers me a great deal though what this objection seems to really mean -- that a great many Gay people are so profoundly homophobic that they cannot bear the company of their own kind for any length of time.

The piece of madness that most sets my teeth on edge is the idea that any proposal for a gay state must necessarily be large -- too large to be reasonably negotiated. After all, there are quite likely 246,000,000 Gays in the world. Were ALL the Gay people to move to a gay state, it would be (if I remember correctly) the fourth most populous nation on Earth.

Of course ALL Gay people will never do anything. This is to be quickly understood.

I must admit that it's been a while since I've seen this old chestnut: "the fallacy of Zionism was the notion that no matter what the Jews did or did not do, they would "never" be accepted by the (so called) gentile nations". I fail to see in what way this notion is a fallacy -- it seems true enough on both counts. The Jews have never been accepted and this lack of acceptance is entirely independent of what the Jews might do or might not do. The situation Gays are in is quite similar. I hesitate to say it is the same because I have no real way to compare the two experiences. We are hated, and it has nothing to do with anything but our existence.

Gay nationalism does not, I think, have anything to do with the sort of class struggles dreamed up by the Marxists and their ilk. That's OK. I have little taste for what they dream up for us.

Athrael:
Feral, you are preaching to the choir here.

Logic is rarely understood by most people, even more rare is the application thereof.  Everything you point out is only logical.

I revised my question, making it in more detail at another forum: http://www.debatebothsides.com/showthread.php?p=794506#post794506 I took pains to describe the application there of for those less fortunates who face day to day persecution and potential death. Went so far as to expound on humanitarian good, health care, education, blah.

And still the same wall.

I targeted Mykel for the question for two reasons. 1. He is known on that forum as an out gay. 2. He is very militant when it comes to hetero/homo affairs and should, if he stays true to his nature, view such a move as a positive for the oppressed.

Remarkably enough he didn't take kindly to the question.

I will continue conducting this experiment, finding different ways to word it and explain it to see if there is a combination that would, for at least the GLBT community, be palpable.

Based on the little data I have now I would judge the waters to be very skeptical of a Gay Nation.  Instead of having the resource of a majority of the GLBT community I suspect we would only have a mere fraction to work with.

However I have no doubt that once such a project is up and running and demonstrates that it is possible that more n the GLBT will see it as a logical alternative than to butt heads against the wall.

I note that history demonstrates that revolutions are usually started by one or a few individuals and the rest jump on the bandwagon when that revolution starts making progress. To Quote Samuel Clemens:

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is
a scarce man and brave, and hated and scorned.
When his cause succeeds, the timid join him
for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain

Feral:

--- Quote ---Perhaps the nature of my question the way it was worded is offensive? Or is the mere thought of a "Gay Nation" defined as concentration camp?
--- End quote ---

The question seems quite straight-forward and innocuous to me. The only offence to be found in it would be with the word 'gay.' The very idea that more than a handful of Gay people might do anything at all is abhorrent to a number of people. While it hardly surprises me when straights are of this view (after all, their thoughts rarely stray far from genocide -- the mere matter of our existence is offensive to them), I am surprised at how many Gay people share this view.

This idea that separatism is some kind of prison or concentration camp is really quite absurd. The same line of reasoning would define my own home as a cell. I like my house the way it is, thank-you very much. It is true that I quite heartlessly exclude all manner of people from it, and it's just as true that I do so as a matter of routine. The idea that one country would be a "prison camp" while (for some odd and unexplained reason) all other countries are not is also absurd. Take one example -- the US. If anything, the populace of the remainder of the world is (to a greater or lesser extent, depending on where they live) is displeased with how little the US mimics one. After all, its citizens travel quite freely around the globe, often wearing uniforms and carrying guns. Do Canadians feel unjustly excluded from the political debate in the US? I had not heard that they did, or that they were clamoring for the vote. Never mind that the outcome of the forthcoming elections are a matter of at least some small concern to them. Alas, their opinions will not be solicited, nor will they be much heeded should they be offered. Yes, those Americans surely have locked themselves away in some sort of concentration camp.


--- Quote ---1) I am not only gay, I don't want to move to the gay ghetto and isolate myself from the mankind.
--- End quote ---

Fine, then do not. You shall be isolated instead from your fellows. This refusal of what is termed the "ghetto mentality" is telling. It's also patently suicidal. But... we are all as free as we will allow ourselves to be. Go -- dissolve into something you are not. It is one of the tidier ways of killing yourself.


--- Quote ---2) Gays are not a people, because homosexuality is totally unimortant -- like eyecolor.
--- End quote ---

What can I say? The statement is in error.


--- Quote ---3) Gays cannot procreate themeselves, your nation will die out in one generation?
--- End quote ---

And yet we are procreated. Have these people never been exposed to this process? Is the mystery of birth that inscrutable? We are not talking about a colony on Mars. I know where little baby gays come from. I do not pretend that they come from Gays themselves (as much as the straight people seem to think that it is some sort of contagious malady). Many countries whip themselves up into histrionic lathers over the issue of immigration and some bizarre idea that it will "dilute" their native population. A Gay nation would be quite the opposite. Immigration is good. Gay people will continue to be produced in the ancient fashion that they always have. I propose that, thereafter, they move. It's not that difficult a proposition. Put your things in boxes and move.


--- Quote ---4) All the land is already belonging to somebody, there is no free place left anymore for a new country.
--- End quote ---

My patience is exhausted with this particular species of naivete. Apparently the concept of Real Estate eludes a great many people. Land is eternal, ownership is not. Real Estate changes hands many times and in many ways.


--- Quote ---5) Will you persecute straights who lived in this place before you, like Israelis did with Palestinians? This will increase homophobia worldwide, see that Israel is the most-hated nation in the world! People will hate us because of you!!
--- End quote ---

Well, I do not propose to invite any of them. They would certainly be welcome to leave. Additionally, there is an odd notion that in addition to being 'owned,' all land is occupied and inhabited. This is most assuredly not true. There are many places on Earth where one can travel for miles upon miles without encountering even one other human being.

If "persecute" means to subject the straights to the same laws as the Gays, to oblige them to live peaceably with Gays, to restrain them from behaving in an evil manner (especially the long-standing, habitual evil behavior toward Gays that seems almost to be bred into their bone), then yes... I propose to persecute them quite cruelly. The laws of the Gay state should apply equally to all within its jurisdiction.



--- Quote ---6) When a Gay Nation will be created, straights will put a bomb to this place, or they will come and bash us there.
--- End quote ---

If straights really hate the Gay people that much, then what is this mad insistence on living within the bosom of these creatures? Those who make this claim will usually state just as authoritatively that they feel quite safe in their current countries.

Yes, one will often hear remarks from individual straights to this effect (usually in regards to a Pride Parade). In the US, one can hear the suggestion to drop bombs on any number of people. The thing to remember is that the people making these remarks do not possess bombs... they only possess the word 'bomb' and they get some sad little thrill out of imagining actually having the real thing. The governments that, in material reality, are possessed of bombs are fully cognizant of the expense of these items, as well as the expense of transporting them through space and detonating them. Countries go to war fairly frequently but by no means do they do so often. Foreign policy is not quite the same thing as the game "Risk."


--- Quote ---7) Gays will produce children whom will be 90% straight, your nation will turn straight in 3 generations.
--- End quote ---

Yes, I know. My husband and I plan to breed like rabbits... just as soon as we finish arguing over which of us will carry the children. As a rule, Gay men have no children (something about lacking a uterus).

Certainly the basic apparatus of spawning is within the grasp of the Gay people in general. Certainly some of them will exercise their freedom to do so. Why would I or anyone else wish to stop them? One would have to provide birth statistics (data which does not exist) in order to compare them to the immigration statistics (data which also does not exist) before one could sensibly make such claims. This is heterocentric thinking at its worst. Gays are not straight. They are not like straights. They do not do a number of things that straight people do as a matter of course. Whining about immigration would be one of those things, I think. Any number of western countries currently possess doomsayers who pontificate about their own native straight population's inability to spawn sufficient numbers of native-born people to counteract quite limited immigration.  I hardly imagine that the straight offspring of Gay citizens would be inherently more prolific than their counterparts in Canada, Russia, or Poland.


--- Quote ---8) Isn't it better to fight for equality for everybody instead? Gays are not the only ones discriminated against!
--- End quote ---

Nope.

Athrael:
Obviously "gay" is the loaded word. 

there are expectations and ideologies already in place which make the notion of anything "gay" either set to failure or predetermined to be one thing or another.

the word Gay is the problem - Gay and all of its permutations (homo, homosexual, queer, etc) is a "bad" word to use.

I can sell "organic fertilizer" for lawns far easier than "horseshit", people shy from the latter, but all but jump at the chance of anything that sounds "green".

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page