Comments | slammerkinbabe: (без темы)

slammerkinbabe

(Untitled)

Jul 11, 2006 13:26

Salon has an interesting article on the ex-gay movement. (Yeah, you need to watch a few seconds of an ad to see the article, but it's worth it if you're at all interested in the subject, really.) It treats it both in depth and more fairly than most coverage that I've seen has done. I think it's flawed, but for all that, it's pretty well done ( Read more... )

politics, i am really very gay

Comments 84

peregrin8 July 11 2006, 18:18:49 UTC

Fantastic essay (yours; I haven't read Salon's). You have a gorgeous brain.

slammerkinbabe July 11 2006, 18:23:48 UTC

Thank you so much!!

fanboy_of_zeus July 11 2006, 18:29:34 UTC

I for one would not care to try eating a polyester blend. Shrimp, on the other hand, I'm a big fan of.

:)

fanboy_of_zeus July 11 2006, 18:30:21 UTC

(nice essay, nice thoughts, and, in general, WORD, btw)

slammerkinbabe July 11 2006, 18:38:25 UTC

LOL Oh dear, did I misphrase that? ::goes back to look and probably to change::

fanboy_of_zeus July 11 2006, 18:41:00 UTC

Feel free to leave it as is - it's a very amusing mis-phrasing, and we all know you know better.

silmaril July 11 2006, 18:34:03 UTC

This is rather outside my realm of experience, so I shan't venture an opinion lest I run my mouth off. But I wanted to comment that this ability of yours---looking at things always from multiple angles, instead of the immediate reactionary angle---is part of the reason why I love reading what you write. You are... educational, I think, is the best word here.

slammerkinbabe July 11 2006, 18:45:49 UTC

Thank you so much. I try really hard to do that, to get away from the immediate reactionary angle. It's really good to know that I succeed sometimes and that it's appreciated.

lietya July 11 2006, 18:37:35 UTC

I'll second that that is a lovely and incredibly well-reasoned essay. There are days I wish I knew a shortcut to get you published, because I'd rather read your work than most op-ed pieces out there ( ... )

slammerkinbabe July 11 2006, 18:45:01 UTC

I think the thing about people who don't attempt to hinder or attack gay people is that we just don't hear about them, because, well, because they're not attempting to hinder or attack gay people. ;) I've encountered a few in my random wanderings, several of whom are on LJ and none of whom I want to link to because they've taken a lot of abuse for their choices and I think they prefer to keep a low profile. But, yeah, my understanding is that there are a number of ministries that basically say "here's who we are, here's what we believe, and we sincerely hope that you'll join us because we're here to help you," and then let it go ( ... )

lietya July 11 2006, 18:54:50 UTC

Hey, if they're out there, they are. I don't know any of them, but more power to 'em. (My impression had been that ex-gays did not exist outside of The Movement, and what with the movement being a Movement and all, it automatically came with hindering/attacking. Evidently that impression was wrong, and I'm honestly glad to hear it ( ... )

slammerkinbabe July 11 2006, 19:14:04 UTC

allow one, allow them all, but ban one and you must ban them all.Yeah, that's it exactly ( ... )

Thread 7

(The comment has been removed)

slammerkinbabe July 11 2006, 19:06:54 UTC

See, I see sexuality as a spectrum rather than a binary switch, and if you are in the gay area of the spectrum but have extremely strong motivations for moving to the VERY VERY HETEROSEXUAL part of the spectrum, I don't see how anyone else can say 'but you can't do that'. Yeah, ITA. I got in a large pile of shit earlier this week when I posited in a comment thread in someone else's journal that a. sexuality was a continuum rather than a dichotomy and b. some people do have a choice in their sexuality. It seems to be a fundamental difference of opinion, but it seems to me that a lot of the people who argue that choice is never ever possible do so because they feel that they personally do not and never have had a choice, and so it's both threatening and offensive to them when other people do ( ... )

lietya July 11 2006, 19:29:08 UTC

I've never understood this black-and-white approach to what's a massively nebulous issue. *some* people don't have a choice; some do. *some* people exist on a "continuum" of sexuality such that they can decide to focus on one end of it or the other; some don't. (which is to say, I do believe there are people who are 100% born straight or gay and cannot ever contemplate edging even a tiny bit off of that farthest point of the spectrum. They're probably not as common as society makes it look by penalizing gray-area choices, but I do think they exist ( ... )

slammerkinbabe July 11 2006, 19:36:28 UTC

To be fair WRT (AHAHAHAHA) the shitpile conversation I reference above, I said at the time that I thought virtually everyone was bisexual to some degree. And, honestly, I do believe that if we lived in a different culture, one where bisexuality was the expected norm, almost everyone *would* be bi to some degree. Now, what degree are we talking about here? Some people may be like .00000001% bi. I think the whole question of sexual orientation is pretty confusing anyway because I think there's more crossover between what our society considers "nonsexual" attration and what we consider "sexual" attraction than we like to admit. We like to draw this hard-and-fast line between platonic and sexual attraction, and I really don't think that line needs to be as hard and fast as we make it. Which is not to say that if we were all completely uninhibited we'd be comfortable fucking all of our friends... Maybe I think platonic and sexual attraction also exist on a continuum, rather than being completely separate things. Anyway, I think my ( ... )

Thread 41