PRP Issues

[Wolf]

My only regret is that I couldn't see them: I'm sure they were hysterical.

But, seriously, Andrew, thanks for looking into this. I know we're all busy, and because of that I really appreciate your taking the time to investigate this.

[ErasOmnius]

The 3 posts that Andrew refers to were from Curt. But I have a question Andrew, do you think Wolf baits me? Do you think it's appropriate that he said, "Fuck you" to me?

Sorry everyone, Curt is not me, and I am not him. He went over-board in his zealousness to defend me. I apologize for him, on his behalf. Obviously when he told me of substituting the '#' sign for the letter "h" is his posts, I knew you would be upset, Andrew. I will say to everyone who agrees with me, and we all know who we are, I can defend myself. The great waves of un-love that people send my way, wash over me, and only make me stronger.

The logic of our views cannot be un-done. The adherence of our views to the basic precepts of natural law and the harmony of the universe cannot be un-done, nor can they be un-made. For example, though the rich and the powerful judicial elite have for this generation declared, that people before birth are not people, we shall struggle onward, scorned as we show their ultra-sound pictures. Though soon a majority of 9 people on something called a Supreme Court in Washington, will most likely declare that a man permanently monogamous with one woman; having a multitude of beautiful children, is not a standard for everyone to look up to, and be guided by, we know that we are right. And though the near-absolute power of the Executive corrupts absolutely, we shall always speak out against War everywhere; knowing that our missiles are killing real men, women, and children.

We will deal with the horrible ramifications of Their point of view. The teenage girls with VD who are taught they are 'sexual beings' by leering Kinsey-an men in their 50s and 60s, the alcoholic young men who are taught they are nothing but Slime+Time, and those who were dispossessed cruelly by the Banks of this world. For the first time in weeks, it's time for me to go to the Shelter.

[TheCurtOne]

Wow, that was a good post, EO. I think you summed up the Christian struggle on the Earth pretty well. I don't agree with it all 100%, but close enough by all sorts. I am sorry if anyone read my posts and they were offensive to the rules of this debate/blog/info forum, but I'm always going to stand up for a friend.

[Andrew]

The 3 posts that Andrew refers to were from Curt. But I have a question Andrew, do you think Wolf baits me? Do you think it's appropriate that he said, "Fuck you" to me?

I don't like those words, but I think they were said in this thread. So this is basically a get shit out of your system in this thread and this thread only and if it carries on into other threads I will get pissed.

Because basically lots of rule breaking in this thread, but locking it will only cause to go into other threads, which lordJ was correct about homo thread when I closed it. That was back when I first tried handling the problem of rule breaking.

Got problems, post in this thread. Keep it out of rest of forum/threads. Try to stay within rules (less work for me!).

[Wolf]

The 3 posts that Andrew refers to were from Curt. But I have a question Andrew, do you think Wolf baits me? Do you think it's appropriate that he said, "Fuck you" to me?

You earned it. You lied to my face (and, in so doing, you made a mockery of the very religion you claim to love, FYI). At this point, hundreds of well-researched, highly organized responses to your drivel have been written. You've never composed anything even remotely similar in turn. That's a fact. Everyone, except for you, and your "friends," understand that. So, when you said that we're allowed to "ramble on" without any "support," you lied. At least, I hope you were lying. If you really do believe that, say, Dante's lengthy treatises on evolution, or my lengthy illustrations on rhetoric are "baseless" then you really are an idiot of the highest order. This isn't baiting: it's the truth. You have to admit that you're wrong when you're wrong, Or, at the very least, shut up about it and walk away. That's why I hope you're lying: if you're not just trolling, then you're actually something much more dangerous.

You are a fanatic. A blind, ignorant, and essentially violent being. Whatever God-given reason you once had you have abandoned. There is no logic to your position, do you understand that? Will you ever? I say it's dangerous because, well... actually, I'm going to start a new thread about it. You'll like this one, I promise.

PS: Does anyone else find it weird that Eras just happened to catch the 3 posts that Curt wrote before they were deleted? I mean, I check here pretty often, but I guess Eras must just check that much more. Once again, come on. Not to mention this:

Wow, that was a good post, EO. I think you summed up the Christian struggle on the Earth pretty well. I don't agree with it all 100%, but close enough by all sorts. I am sorry if anyone read my posts and they were offensive to the rules of this debate/blog/info forum, but I'm always going to stand up for a friend.

Patting Eras on the back about the only thing Eras cares about? Yet "making sure" that there's some "disagreement" without ever actually mentioning it? What do you disagree with in this statement, Sockpuppet?

[ErasOmnius]

Wolf, CurtF and I are best friends. Bestest friends. Does it surprise you that I know what some of what he posted? Do you need a 'best friend'? I will be your friend if you want Wolf.

As far as this burden of proof goes, we'll use our favorite issue as an example. I see no proof that Dante nor you has given any at all. Certainly not your 'friend', Dragoon, he's just good with the insults. Anyway, no proof whatsoever, none. Just the same ol' Stephen Jay Gould re-gurgitation that I can find anywhere on the Internet. I could also go to any 7th grader and read the same thing that Dante has given as so-called proof. For example, I am interested where homosexuality stands in the "survival of the species". What exactly is occurring to cause this homosexual mating pattern to happen. What causes in Evolutionary terms the strong desire to place the fluid of male reproduction, sperm; inside the waste canal, the rectum? Don't you get it? I am not interested in the "Oh well, the House of Commons says we can do it", or "6 people on the Supreme Court say it's OK". Proof, from evolutionary standards. Don't even pretend that such proof has been given.

If it would be more accurate to say of male/male anal intercourse, "Well, two or three males produce pleasurable friction together, so stop thinking about it, and just let us do it. Society will have to work out the ramifications of our activities later." And if that phrase is the most accurate way of describing male homosexuality, then so be it. But don't start getting emotional -- like calling me names. Don't start getting petty -- like saying, "Oh, ErasOmnius, you over-use the hyphen". Don't start getting bitchy, and asking for me to be banned. But whatever you do, don't even or ever pretend that you have ever offered anything resembling proof about this issue, because you nor Dante have ever offered proof or any type of logic on this issue.

But don't start swearing, or cussing, or crying that I'm too single-issue focused. Don't sic your friend Dragoon on me and have him say he wants to ruin my life when the argument doesn't go your way. Don't infer that I simply must be a closeted male-lover simply because I am using a wedge issue successfully against you. Your whole proof argument is riddled with holes. Don't say that everyone on the evolutionary-tending Dune-book oriented Thread hates me, because I understand that not everyone is going to like what I say.

For example, if I bring up Pride Parades, address them. Why do male homosexuals have to walk down our Main Streets near naked, with some cross dressing, some simulating sex acts, etc? Why? If I want to read some old diatribe how they should have 'one day' because we have '364', I can read that crap anywhere. Is there something genetic that causes this cross-dressing? Is there something genetic that causes these men to sashay and ganter around near-nude for 3-4 hours? What scientifically is going on? Because let me tell you this, it's not because of Public Relations that they do this. I work in Public Relations, and Pride Parades are a PR nightmare.

Address my questions accurately, with scientific data -- not emotion. Data, not accusations -- for once.

[Andrew]

Wolf, CurtF and I are best friends. Bestest friends. Does it surprise you that I know what some of what he posted? Do you need a 'best friend'? I will be your friend if you want Wolf.

Don't talk about being friends with them. Clearly they don't want to be. This has been gone over enough.

As far as this burden of proof goes, we'll use our favorite issue as an example. I see no proof that Dante nor you has given any at all. Certainly not your 'friend', Dragoon, he's just good with the insults. Anyway, no proof whatsoever, none. Just the same ol' Stephen Jay Gould re-gurgitation that I can find anywhere on the Internet. I could also go to any 7th grader and read the same thing that Dante has given as so-called proof. For example, I am interested where homosexuality stands in the "survival of the species". What exactly is occurring to cause this homosexual mating pattern to happen. What causes in Evolutionary terms the strong desire to place the fluid of male reproduction, sperm; inside the waste canal, the rectum? Don't you get it? I am not interested in the "Oh well, the House of Commons says we can do it", or "6 people on the Supreme Court say it's OK". Proof, from evolutionary standards. Don't even pretend that such proof has been given.

I don't suggest bringing up homosexuality... again... lots of species have homosexuality. Unless you think that since humans are by far smartest animals out there and that homosexuals should for some reason look at the logicality of how not possible to reproduce and therefor should not be homosexuals (but since so smart we have overcome it with adoption and other methods to have "offspring").

For example, if I bring up Pride Parades, address them. Why do male homosexuals have to walk down our Main Streets near naked, with some cross dressing, some simulating sex acts, etc? Why? If I want to read some old diatribe how they should have 'one day' because we have '364', I can read that crap anywhere. Is there something genetic that causes this cross-dressing? Is there something genetic that causes these men to sashay and ganter around near-nude for 3-4 hours? What scientifically is going on? Because let me tell you this, it's not because of Public Relations that they do this. I work in Public Relations, and Pride Parades are a PR nightmare.

Address my questions accurately, with scientific data -- not emotion. Data, not accusations -- for once.

While the odd time I'd agree about pride parades, think of them as back in early 1900s when women held rallies for equal rights (right to work/vote, socially acceptable), or 1960s when blacks had rallies for equal rights. Hopefully in 20 years pride parades go away because they are not needed because by then homosexuals will be fully integrated as women and blacks are now. But as long as there are people against gay marriage and homosexuality in general (and publicly denounce it and vote for measures against homosexuality), then I suppose they need their parades (for awareness), just like women and blacks did.

[TheCurtOne]

I just wanted to say that this is a much different posting of what was originally posted by me yesterday. Hopefully, my subdued spirit will help me as I type. I feel somewhat attacked because I don't believe "all the way" on moral issues. Maybe it's in my mind, maybe it's not. I get attacked by EO because I try to welcome gays and lesbians into our church, but he and the pastors takes the hard stand from the Bible. I feel like I get attacked here because I won't go all the way and just accept everything that comes with gay's rights. I guess that's how it is in the mushy middle.

I understand things better now. There is no reconciling EO and other people, and I probably have to choose sides. Obviously, I'm never going to talk about the issue like EO does. Who can? Who does? Who would? Not me. But that's the breaks.

[ErasOmnius]

Obviously, I'm never going to talk about the issue like EO does. Who can? Who does? Who would? Not me.

Then what would you do? What would you do, Curt? Tell me what. What would you do about always being called names here? What would you do when you try to have a debate with a brilliant kid writer, but all he wants to do is talk about 'dead puppies' and put downs? Is that fair? When there no evidence presented, but plenty of emotions thrown about. Lots of insults, not alot of substance.

Yeah, and you know what happens to people in the mushy middle? They don't have friends on the left or the right, but find themselves alone.

[TheCurtOne]

Not answering you cell phone. Okay, here it goes. You know what my life is like down at the plant. I don't have the luxury like you do, responsible and accountable to nobody. I have to get along with people on the assembly line. Black, white, Asian, gay, lesbian, in between, everyone. If I don't bolt a seat onto the chassis, then the whole line stops, and no Mustangs get assembled. That's how life is, I put in the seat or the mirror, someone else puts in the dash, someone else the back seat, you name it. That's how it is with all people. We all have to get along, and the car gets built. If someone gets mad at me, then the line slows down, or stops, and the foreman and the computer line tech comes over And wants to know why.

But you are different. You co own your own company. It's just you and your wife's family. Inherited, married into. You have the ability to have your own views here, anonymously. But do your multi million dollar clients know your views are so skewed to the right? Do they honestly? Or do they want to keep on doing business with you, who is <so and so's> son-in-law, or <so and so's> husband? If you're so righteous in these views, tell some of your clients your views. The gays and lesbian ones. Tell them. Then see what "the family", as you call them, see what they do to you, when those same clients tell your brother-in-law or mother-in-law they are insulted by your views, and are dropping your company. But until you have the guts to tell your clients your views, you should not hide behind the anonymity of this debating forum. Because no one talks like you do about these issues. No one. You got that. No one.

[ErasOmnius]

'You too, Brutus?'

I'm not having that debate about MY company here. MY company. The Son of God + me = Majority. End of debate.

[TheCurtOne]

Taking your marbles and going home? No debate? Not very much like you LKG. Oh, the first ticks of non-anonymity, your initials. Not much fun if people were to know the very basics of who you are. I'll stop there LK, because I am your friend, and I'll won't put you through it. But it's loads of fun to hide behind Erasmus & Omnius, two charcters from the Butlerian Jihyad, and to be all brave. Not too much fun if you had to be so uncompromising in your beliefs out in the open.

Here's some more food for thought, LK, since you said you+Jesus=majority. Would Christ spend every day after day for a year on a scifi forum? Why don't you really take a month off, without looking, without posting?

[Dante]

Gentlemen. Allow me.

Andrew, this isn't just about eras indulging his favourite hobby again. The issue is not so much, if I might summarise, "gays and gayness;' the crux of the matter in this case is skill. eras was accused of being a laughably poor debator for, among other reasons, failing to provide a shred of evidence to support anything he says, and in classic "rumbled! quick, distract them!" mode, his reply was essentially a great big extended version of "NO U." This was not, then, a philosophical attack on a point of view, but a personal attack on our collective ability to debate, reason and present argument. Also it was incredibly hypocritical, but that's par for the course really.

Point the first: just because something can be found on the internet does not mean that it's wrong. If you want us to present evidence that's found nowhere else in the cosmos (a bit like yours, which is found nowhere in the cosmos) then you'll be waiting for quite some time.

Point the second: Nobody ever tried to use governmental approval to justify homosexuality. You're attempting to rebut arguments that nobody has made, which is amusing but pointless.

Point the third: Regurgitation is a single word.

Point the fourth: There is no evolutionary drive towards anal sex, just as there is no evolutionary drive towards fasting. People do it anyway. Funny thing, eras, our behaviour isn't governed by natural selection, not in any meaningful terms. If it were, the population crisis would be a great deal more urgent.

Point the fifth: What exactly is a "homosexual mating pattern?"

Point the sixth: learn to seperate love and sex already, your conflation of the two is really quite tragic.

Point the seventh: Aww, is the widdle diddums sore? Did we hurt his widdle feewings? Poor baby.

Point the eighth: I didn't say everyone hates you, I said you have no friends here except the ones you brought with you. In other words, you have failed to make a positive impression on anyone, with the possible exception of ath and even then only maybe. It's kind of hard to tell what planet he's on week to week.

Point the ninth: "successfully?" Oh eras, you card.

Point the tenth: You do realise that asking for a scientfic explanation of Pride is like asking for a scientific explanation of string? I mean it can be done, but it's in terms so broad as to be nearly pointless. What the heck, I'll do it anyway, though psychology is really more Lord J's department (and I encourage you to join in, Lord J).

Point the eleventh: Humans are, by and large, a communal species. We have our loners and our hermits, but most people find that they like having other people around. People tend to build communities. Part of what Pride is about is a feeling of community. Of togetherness and, less obviously but lurking beneath, shared protection. It's about reaffirming social ties and acknowledgement of what one is - both healthy behaviours. And it's wrapped up in celebration because as a species we like to celebrate when we find joy. Basically, it's the same spirit that drove Saturnalia, céilidhs...

Actually, you know, while I was looking at Wikipedia I had a look at the article on festivals. I found the following passage, which rather neatly summarises my point:

Festivals, of many types, serve to meet specific needs, as well as to provide entertainment. These times of celebration offer a sense of belonging for religious, social, or geographical groups. Modern festivals that focus on cultural or ethnic topics seek to inform members of their traditions. In past times, festivals were times when the elderly shared stories and transferred certain knowledge to the next generation. Historic feasts often provided a means for unity among families and for people to find mates. Select anniversaries have annual festivals to commemorate previous significant occurrences.

That's pretty much it. Pride is all of the above, a festival crafted to meet the needs of a social group. Needs such as communal spirit, feeling safe, feeling unjudged, feeling free. Time was, and still is for some people, that these needs were not something that could be taken for granted. But psychologically, it's something most people desire. And that's how they could get it.

Having said all that, I don't actually hold with analysing human behaviour in terms of absolutes. It's kinda ridiculous. What you want to explan behaviour is a psychologist, and I ain't one.

But I do, out of interest, have another take on the matter. Following this post I'll quote an alternative viewpoint on Pride from someone who's actually been to one. No, I haven't. Not that interested.

Point the twelfth:

Point the thirteenth: Once again eras, if you want to poke holes in natural selection then you really need to say what they are.

Point the fourteenth: spermatozoa are actually just the little tailed cells carrying genetic info. Refering to ejaculate as "sperm" is technically incorrect, as it's actually comprised of sperm swimming in semen. Way to show off your intimate knowledge of the subject.

Point the fifteenth: Stating that we have never provided proof for our argument is empirically false. As evidence I submit this mini-explanation I gave on kin selection. You want data? Here.

rB>C, bitches.

Point the sixteenth: eras, the sheer levels of irony here are such that the English language lacks words to describe them. I'm the scientist here, I understand the principles at work, and I generally do what I can to explain them. You? Who are you to demand hard data? You who provide none and actively resist that of others. You haven't posted scientific evidence in your life, which I heavily suspect is because you just don't understand it.

Point the seventeenth: you refer to people at 24 years old as kids? Alright, whatever floats your boat.

Point the eighteenth: I had actually planned to do a great big lecture on evolution here, but to be honest, I can't be bothered. And it's not like it would have any more effect than talking to the wall. If eras wants proof, he can go look at the fossil record.

Dead puppy count: 47. Those poor puppies.

Appendix 1, Andrew:

We don't "have" homosexuality, we are homosexuals. Unless of course you'd also refer to black people or Jews as though they have some sort of condition? Probably not intentional, but thought I'd mention it.

Appendix 2: The last few posts? Interesting.

[Dante]

The following is from this blog, which I should probably clarify I am not in any way affiliated with. I'll also go ahead and state that while I generally agree with the blogger's point of view, we do differ on some details. Me, I'd rather not be on a carnival float. But I think it's great that others do.

Watching The Defectives

Last Sunday at 12:30pm, I was in position on Christopher Street with Terrence, his glamor boys, and touring UK bloggers Dave and Darren. The Pride parade was due to round the corner any minute, but I tore off in search of a bodega, crossing my fingers that my desperate need for a soda wouldn't cause me to miss Dykes On Bikes. Half a block away, I found a little place and ducked in, weaving through the customers clogging the aisles on rushed missions like mine. I was third in line, two bottles of Sprite under my arm, when the man in front of me spotted a friend entering the store.

"David! Sweetie! Where are you watching from? Come hang out with us on Allen's balcony!"

David, a bookish looking middle-aged man, destroyed the festive mood in the little store in an instant. "Absolutely not. Those defectives and freaks?" he spat, indicating the colorful crowd outside the store, "They have nothing to do with MY life, thank you very much. This parade has as much dignity as a carnival freak show. It's no wonder the whole country hates us."

Luckily for David, the Asshole Killer mind ray I've been working on is not yet operational. I settled for pushing him a little, just a tiny bit, just to get by him in that narrow aisle, of course. I returned to my sweaty little group and tried to put what I'd heard out of my mind for the remainder of the day, because I knew that by the next morning, the thousands of Davids of the world, the ones who have media access anyway, would all issue their now familiar day-after-Pride rant. The one where they decry the drag queens on all those newspaper front pages. The one where they beat their chests and lament, "Why don't the papers ever show the NORMAL gay people? Where are the bankers and lawyers? Why must all the coverage be drag queens and leather freaks in assless chaps?"

And every year, the logical answer is that bankers and lawyers are boring to look at and that pictures of marching Gap employees don't sell newspapers. There's no sinister media agenda intent on making gay people look ridiculous, no fag-hating cabal behind the annual front page explosion of sequins and feathers. It's just good copy. Drag queens are interesting. Even the bad ones. Especially the bad ones.

Yet right on cue, the day after Pride, the Davids of the blogosphere dished out their heavy-handed dissections of parades around the country. Only this year, there was a palpably nastier tone to an already traditionally nasty annual debate. Blame the election, blame the recent avalanche of anti-gay legislation, but this year, the usual assimilationist arguments went beyond the hypothetical speculations that maybe our Pride parades were too outlandish, that maybe we weren't doing the movement any favors by showing the country a face that happened to be wearing 6-inch long false eyelashes. This year there was some actual discussion about HOW we were going to "fix" Pride parades. Of how we might go about "discouraging" certain "elements" from taking part in the parades.

This is the part of the story where I have my annual post-Pride apoplectic attack. This is the part of the story where the swelling volume of Nazi analogies overwhelm my ability to speak and all I can do is twitch and bark out little nonsensical bits. This is where I always forget the name given to the Jews who went to work for the Nazis, helping load the trains. "Because that's what you are asking us to do, you assholes!" Then I always ask, "Who are we going to sacrifice to 'save' ourselves? Which child will it be, Sophie?" And this is the part of the story where my friends accuse me of being a hyperbole-laden drama queen, wasting spiritual energy on a non-crisis, and of co-opting the Holocaust as well. More on that later.

These people that want to "fix" Pride don't understand the role that Pride parades have come to play. Initially, the gay parade was about visibility. It was about safety in numbers, and more importantly, "normalcy" in numbers. It was about the idea that if only straight America could see us, could just SEE US, that they'd love us. And accept us. That if we'd mass and march by the righteous millions, the sheer unstoppable force of our collective image would topple bigotry. Would right wrongs. Would stop hate.

Of course, that didn't happen then and it doesn't happen now.

What DOES happen, is that Pride parades, at least in the big cities, have become nothing more significant to straight America than an annual traffic nightmare. As a tool of the gay movement, the Pride parade is now merely a walking photo op for politicians and perhaps not much more. A couple of years ago, the ultimate arbiter of America's cultural zeitgeist, The Simpsons, made note of this:

(The gay pride parade is going past the Simpson house.)

Chanting marchers: "We're here! We're queer! Get used to it!"

Lisa Simpson: "You're here every year. We ARE used to it."

What does all of this mean to the Davids of the world, the gay assimilationists that want to, wish they could, somebody do something, there's gotta be a way we can, Dignify This Parade? The ones begging: "Can't we get our people to at least DRESS respectfully for one lousy day? Is that too much to ask of our people? "

Yes, yes it is.

Because you are kidding yourself if you think Pride parades, in any form, will EVER change the minds of homophobes. The straight people who show up to see Pride parades are already largely convinced. We're parading to the choir, Jesse. Those straight people love our freaks, bless them.

Oh, you could test run a "defective" free parade. You could form urban anti-drag squads and go around to all the gayborhoods on the morning of the parade and give all the drag queens 50% off coupons for Loehmann's, offer good during the parade only. And they'd GO, of course, cuz hey, those girls love a bargain. But the resultant bland, humorless, "normal" gay parade wouldn't change the course of the gay movement one bit. The part of straight America that is repulsed by drag queens is quite possibly even more terrified by the so-called "normal" gays, because "those clever calculating creatures look JUST LIKE US, and can infiltrate and get access to our precious children. And that's been their disgusting plan all along, of course."

So where does that leave us? Are we post-Pride? Is the parade just a colossally long waste of a miserably hot summer day? Is the Pride parade just an event that does a better job of moving chicken-on-a-stick than it does of moving hearts? I'd say that, yes, as an effective tool of the gay movement, Pride's usefulness has largely waned in many U.S. cities. So do we even need to keep having these parades, since they no longer seem to have much of an impact on the state of the movement? No, we don't.

But...YES, WE DO.

Because even if Pride doesn't change many minds in the outside world, it's our PARTY, darlings. It's our Christmas, our New Year's, our Carnival. It's the one day of the year that all the crazy contingents of the gay world actually come face to face on the street and blow each other air kisses. And wish each other "Happy Pride!" Saying "Happy Pride!" is really just a shorter, easier way of saying "Congratulations on not being driven completely batshit insane! Way to go for not taking a rifle into a tower and taking out half the town! Well done, being YOURSELF!"

I'm not worried what the outside world thinks about the drag queens, the topless bulldaggers, or the nearly naked leatherfolk. It's OUR party, bitches. If you think that straight America would finally pull its homokinder to its star-spangled bosom once we put down that glitter gun, then you are seriously deluding yourself. Next year, if one of the Christian camera crews that show up to film our "debauched" celebrations happen to train their cameras on you, stop dancing. And start PRANCING.

All you suburban, lawn mowing, corpo-droid homos out there, hiding behind your picket fences, the ones wringing your hands and worrying that Pride ruins YOUR personal rep, listen up. Do you think that straight Americans worry that Mardi Gras damages international perception of American culture? America, land of the free, home of "Show Us Your Tits!"? They don't and neither should we. Our Pride celebrations are just our own unique version of Mardi Gras, only instead of throwing beads, we throw shade. No one has to ask US to show our tits. We've already got 'em out there, baby. And some of them are real.

A co-worker of mine heard me discussing my Pride plans last weekend and said, "I really don't understand what it is you are proud about. I mean, you all say that you are born that way, so it's not like you accomplished anything." She wasn't being mean, just genuinely curious, and I think that a lot of gay people probably feel the same way. On this subject, I can only speak for myself.

I'm proud because I'm a middle-aged gay man who has more dead friends than living ones and yet I'm not completely insane. I've lived through a personal Holocaust (here we go again) in which my friends and lovers have been mowed down as thoroughly and randomly as the S.S guards moved down the line of Jews. You, dead. You, to the factory. And you, you, you, and you, dead. I am inexplicably alive and I am proud that I keep the memories of my friends alive. I am proud of my people, the ACT-UPers, the Quilt makers, the Larry Kramers, the Harvey Fiersteins. I'm proud that I'm not constantly curled up into a ball on my bed, clutching photo albums and sobbing. And that happens sometimes, believe it.

And outside of my personal experiences, I am proud of my tribe as a group. Sometimes I think that gay people are more creative, more empathic, more intuitive, more generous, and more selfless than anybody else on the planet. Sometimes I think that if an alien culture were surveying our planet from light years away, they might classify gay people as an entirely separate species of humans. It's easy to spot us because of our better haircuts.

But sometimes I think we are the worst people in the entire world when it comes to standing up for each other. The gay people who'd like to soothe their personal image problems by selectively culling some of our children from Pride events? They disgust me. They appall me. They embarrass me. To them I say: The very road that YOU now have the privilege of swaggering upon was paved by those very queens and leather freaks that you complain about as you practice your "masculine" and give us butch face. If you want to live in the house that THEY BUILT, you better act like you fucking know it. United we stand, you snide bitches. America's kulturkampf ain't gonna be solved by making flamboyant people go away.

I'll end this by making one final Jewish reference. Possibly you've heard the Jewish in-joke that sums up the meaning of all Jewish holidays? "They tried to kill us. We won. Let's eat." My Pride version?

They wish we were invisible.

We're not.

Let's dance.

[ErasOmnius]

Ya know, this Thread has just really taken on a mind of its' own. It just too much for me right now. Too much information, too much info, too much confusion and etc, overloaded. So, it's a happy day tomorrow, my birthday. Number 48. I can't be all bad because soon it will be George Michael's birthday, and he's gay, and I think he's a great singer, and he'll be 48, too. Dante, once again, you have given me alot to think about, thanks. Curt, there's alot to reflect on what you have written, thanks for being a good friend. Andrew, I'm glad you're a good moderator.

[Wolf]

Eras, you have never provided evidence for any of your views. We have provided ample evidence. You are lying. I will not debate with you until you (1) acknowledge that you have lied; (2) apologize for lying and; (3) promise you will present some scientific evidence to back up your views.

That's it. There's nothing for me to address in your last series of posts because they were all... well, bullshit. And yes, we get to swear: we're adults. Deal with it. Saying that we haven't provided a "shred" of evidence is, in my opinion, much more offensive.

[Lord J]

In reference to some recent posts:

Also, I just wanted to note that I'm not entirely comfortable with the degree of IRL references we're getting to in this discussion or the PRP board in general. As has been previously noted, there are, for lack of a better word, disturbed people who will seek out posters and... well, who knows? Name initials are probably ok, but really the general trend could prove harmful. I know that in many EUAs, there are specific rules against spreading personal information about other members. Perhaps we should adopt a similar set of principles?

[ErasOmnius]

A great song. Much better than 'True Colors'.

Happy Birthday, George Michael! It's a great time to be 48!

[Wolf]

This is a thread for talking about issues in PRP. It's not a thread for you to spew random crap. I know this is a complaints thread, but can we please have some standards?

And who is George Michael? As in Arrested Development? That would be... mutlilayered.

[ErasOmnius]

Wolf, not spewing random crap. Who is George Michael? You must be too young too remember. He is one of the greatest singer and song-writers ever; and he's from the UK, and we were born on the same weekend 48 years ago. You're talking about the son or grandson on the TV show from a few years ago, played by the same kid who plays all blonde nerds in most teen/early 20s movie now-a-days.

Then there is Cyndi Lauper, a very talented singer from New York City. Lord J pulled out 'True Colors' a few weeks back and posted it, which is a very fine song. Personally, I prefer the honest and accurate 'Money Changes Everything', and prefer this updated version of the song from a few years back.

Personal Info spreading: Could you elaborate?

[Dante]

Wait, this isn't the thread to post Cyndi Lauper videos?

[ErasOmnius]

Surely there must be a Public Service Announcement from George Michael, as well. Wait... I've posted Britney Spears, Cyndi Lauper, Stevie Nicks, Lady Gaga, George Michael. Uh oh... uh oh....

Uh, I'd better start posting some damn fine Van Halen and Gunz n Roses next.

Actually, the artists in the first sentence are talented artists who may be a bit off in their personal lives and personal beliefs, but they sure can write and belt out a tune.

[TheCurtOne]

You asked for Van Halen? Here's the REAL Van Halen, with Sammy Hagar

The personal info issue. Is that something I am doing?

[DenisAtreides]

Van Halen is the true rock oldies band, although I prefer the older stuff with David Lee Roth.

Love that cleavage on Cyndi Lee on that "Money Changes..." video.

[Anathema]

"The final countdown" was locked before I could post; since I have only one thing to say about it I'll post it here:

SORRY I AM NOT GOING TO PLAY IT 'GOOD BOY ' ANYMORE!

That made me laugh. Even more so because he probably doesn't understand what's wrong with this quotation himself.

For how long is he banned?