|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 13, 2010 21:08:24 GMT
the point is that heterosexuals do NOT have the right to take someone of the same sex to the prom. obviously, neither do homosexuals. as i said, the whole gay trip is in trying to get rights that normal people don't have You're confusing it all by making up 'rights' surrounding petty details that make up the habits of proms. There are no such 'rights'. The only thing approaching a right is the right for two lesbian students to attend their own school prom, together, without having to pretend they are not lesbians. And it seems that there is no law against what these two women are trying to do, merely a subjective little distaste on the side of a principal and her misguided posse. Had the school made no issue of it, just live and let live etc, what would the problem be? NO ONE has a "right" to go to the prom. it is a privilege. where the hell do you come up with the lunatical notion that there is some special "right" for lesbians to attend the prom as lesbians, and make an issue of it? the FACT is, had this dyke not made an issue of it, just live and let live etc, there would be NO problem at all.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 13, 2010 21:10:49 GMT
the point is that heterosexuals do NOT have the right to take someone of the same sex to the prom. obviously, neither do homosexuals. as i said, the whole gay trip is in trying to get rights that normal people don't have You seem to be very certain that gays not only want the option to take a same-sex partner but also want this new choice to not be offered to heterosexuals. Which is the only way the current equality could be changed to an inequality. Even if some actually do want the situation to be as you describe, that is just them - they do not speak on behalf of all homosexuals and I'm sure plenty would not want the new choice to be unequally restricted to gays only. you miss the point. the FACT is that gays already have the same rights, and whether or not heterosexuals would choose to avail themselves of a superior right conferred on gays is irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 13, 2010 21:12:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 13, 2010 21:13:23 GMT
by the way, contrary to what some folks here would have you believe, i really am the nicest guy in the world You should show it more then!! Listening to other peoples' viewpoints might be a start! i surely do. and i certainly listen to everyone's viewpoint. of course, accepting something that i know to be false would NOT be nice. everyone is entitled to their opinion, but, no one, including me, is entitled to have it accepted
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 13, 2010 21:16:36 GMT
because, as you said, it is tradition, and tradition trumps the stupidity of the nutjobs who try to change it Tradition doesn't make something automatically right. Whatever it is may well be not wrong, but if it isn't then it isn't because it is traditional. not having a rational or legitimate reason for wanting to change tradition makes wanting the change wrong. since the ONLY argument for changing tradition is purely emotional, that, in and of itself, makes it wrong. emotion has NO place in anything other than personal relationships
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 13, 2010 21:19:53 GMT
Tradition doesn't make something automatically right. Whatever it is may well be not wrong, but if it isn't then it isn't because it is traditional. not having a rational or legitimate reason for wanting to change tradition makes wanting the change wrong. since the ONLY argument for changing tradition is purely emotional, that, in and of itself, makes it wrong. emotion has NO place in anything other than personal relationships But, as the 'Fiddler on the Roof' extract I have posted makes clear in the form of song, 'tradition' is, in itself, purely emotional.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 13, 2010 21:20:01 GMT
because, as you said, it is tradition, and tradition trumps the stupidity of the nutjobs who try to change it "Tradition" You sound like the guy in 'Fiddler on the Roof'. Adapt or die. Just because your grandmother went to the prom in a frilly dress, it doesn't give any - ANY - inherit merit in you doing the same. of course it does. what's right NEVER changes, regardless of how much you would like it to
|
|
|
Post by june on Mar 13, 2010 21:21:31 GMT
But homosexuals don't have the same rights do they - you have made that point yourself. It's like saying before women had the vote they had the same rights as men if they changed into men. Or blacks had the same rights as whites if they changed skin colour. At the prom I doubt very much those without a date would be barred from going or a woman in a trouser suit would have been barred. The ONLY issue here is the school did not want an openly gay couple at the prom. I am unclear why the girl sought permission on what to wear or who to take though, I would have just turned up. But I am like that
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 13, 2010 21:22:01 GMT
"Tradition" You sound like the guy in 'Fiddler on the Roof'. Adapt or die. Just because your grandmother went to the prom in a frilly dress, it doesn't give any - ANY - inherit merit in you doing the same. of course it does. what's right NEVER changes, regardless of how much you would like it to Sorry, but reason trumps tradition every time.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 13, 2010 21:25:32 GMT
I am unclear why the girl sought permission on what to wear or who to take though, I would have just turned up. But I am like that And good for you. And good for all the people out there in the history of the world who said 'why can't I do that', and kept saying 'why can't I do that' until they got an answer as to why their personal freedom should be limited.
|
|
|
Post by june on Mar 13, 2010 21:26:28 GMT
"Tradition" You sound like the guy in 'Fiddler on the Roof'. Adapt or die. Just because your grandmother went to the prom in a frilly dress, it doesn't give any - ANY - inherit merit in you doing the same. of course it does. what's right NEVER changes, regardless of how much you would like it to Again, another completely barking statement. What is right is just a perception, so by essence it changes. It was 'right' for Ancient Romans to take a young boy lover for sex and companionship as marriage was for procreation and politics. Times have changed and that is no longer thought 'right'.
|
|
|
Post by june on Mar 13, 2010 21:28:02 GMT
But homosexuals don't have the same rights do they - you have made that point yourself. It's like saying before women had the vote they had the same rights as men if they changed into men. Or blacks had the same rights as whites if they changed skin colour. At the prom I doubt very much those without a date would be barred from going or a woman in a trouser suit would have been barred. The ONLY issue here is the school did not want an openly gay couple at the prom. I am unclear why the girl sought permission on what to wear or who to take though, I would have just turned up. But I am like that And good for you. And good for all the people out there in the history of the world who said 'why can't I do that', and kept saying 'why can't I do that' until they got an answer as to why their personal freedom should be limited. I hope she creates a real change. Good on her and great to see supportive parents too!
|
|
|
Post by Synonym on Mar 13, 2010 21:29:59 GMT
not having a rational or legitimate reason for wanting to change tradition makes wanting the change wrong. Do you like wearing trousers? If someone told you that you had to wear a dress would your desire for this not to be the case be 'emotional' and 'irrational'? Still, at least you acknowledge that tradition, in itself, does not confer 'rightness' on anything. That comes from other arguments, if there are any. So what is the argument against allowing women to wear trousers? Or allowing same-sex couples to do the same as opposite-sex ones. Remember, you cannot cite tradition to justify these restrictions.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 13, 2010 21:30:05 GMT
And good for you. And good for all the people out there in the history of the world who said 'why can't I do that', and kept saying 'why can't I do that' until they got an answer as to why their personal freedom should be limited. I hope she creates a real change. Good on her and great to see supportive parents too! I can't see why it's so important to attend a silly event like a Prom. But, on the other hand, if anybody told me I couldn't, I'd probably make a point of it.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 13, 2010 21:46:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Mar 13, 2010 21:50:33 GMT
See, I think the Proms can probably do what they like. It's not my country, who am I to slag it off?
I'm just glad that the country I do live in believes in individual freedom and liberty. Must suck to be American, where they don't.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2010 21:59:16 GMT
because, as you said, it is tradition, and tradition trumps the stupidity of the nutjobs who try to change it "Tradition" You sound like the guy in 'Fiddler on the Roof'. Adapt or die. Just because your grandmother went to the prom in a frilly dress, it doesn't give any - ANY - inherit merit in you doing the same.On the contrary, if Jumbo turned up at a prom in a frilly frock he would go up in my estimation. That would give a whole new meaning to the word "balls".
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 13, 2010 22:13:00 GMT
;D Jumbo, you can't ignore that dare! Would you like Pink to make the girls wink?
|
|
|
Post by june on Mar 13, 2010 22:14:50 GMT
;D Jumbo, you can't ignore that dare! Would you like Pink to make the girls wink? Is there a giant toilet roll under her skirt? ;D
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Mar 14, 2010 6:02:15 GMT
Ok, so I think we've established that there are, by law, no 'women-only' bars in the Uk, and few in the USA. Yet, Anna has suggested their existence is fair compensation for a lesbian being forbidden from bringing her love to the Prom. Dearest Riotgrrl, There are 2 male leather homosexual bars in Stuttgart that don't allow women in. One has a sign posted on the entrance stating this. I've only heard second hand about stuff like "dark rooms" in these bars and i don't want to know anything more. There is at least one male homosexual sauna club too that obviously excludes females as well! I'd be shocked if the UK would force these bars to allow females in! I really can't imagine a female wanting to go in either!
|
|