We're Queer!

[Vanje]

We're Here.

Get used to it.

[Marrah_G]

1. Okay- done- now what?

[yardwork]

2. I like your sig line.

I'm here and queer.

[racaulk]

3. +1

[wake.up.america]

6. Queer - So what?

You're queer
You're here
We're not
We're here
So what?

[Vanje]

10. So!

That noise you've been hearing since the Warren thing broke, is not likely to muffle any time soon.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

4. +2

[xchrom]

5. +3

[YOY]

7. I'm used to it. Been so for a while.

Perhaps you should focus this chant at places where people aren't.

[Deja Q]

22. But that might actually do some good!

Or maybe not.

[NJmaverick]

8. and?

:shrug:

[Vanje]

9. And!

not likely to shut up.
Finding my voice.
You may not like it, but brother, its not likely to go away.

[NJmaverick]

11. Frankly, I don't care what your sexual orientation is

I consider the facts and reasons behind the opinions. Those are my criteria, I use before deciding to agree or disagree. As for people, I look at what they say and do, not who they are attracted to. In other words I stongly believe in the golden rule. I want my opinions to be considered by the argument I lay out, in to support them, and I personally want to be judged by my words and actions, not my race, religions, gender or sexual orientation.


The odd part is I thought this was a universal desire at DU. Instead, I am finding that is not the case. That there are many threads, like this one, that seem to indicate group affiliation is the most important thing.

[Two Americas]

34. false

This simply false that taking a stand for one group of people here is somehow harming solidarity. This argument is repeated again and again and again on thread after thread, in some sort of war of attrition in an attempt at making something seem true by repeating it endlessly. I think that the opposite of what you are saying is true.

It is too much work chasing these threads all over DU, and I think we need to have a discussion about this issue of solidarity, rather than seeing thread after thread day after day of nothing but dueling talking points.

On another thread, I made what I believe to be a credible argument that standing strongly with the GLBTQ folks here is the path to solidarity, not a distraction or divisive or destructive and I am going to post an excerpt below. I think it is at least worthy of consideration and discussion, and we cannot have calm and rational discussions so long as we are barraged by the same talking point over and over again - unsupported and undefended, but merely posted again and again.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4712823

I had always thought the issue was this - do you or do you not support gay rights? I think that is the wrong question now. That implies that "they" - some group, different and other than "us" - have some "agenda" that is separate and different, and that we either say we favor that or we say that we don't. Since I say that I do support the cause, therefore I am "good" on this issue, and there is nothing more to think about or say.

Instead, I asked myself this - do I or do I not oppose the agenda of the religious right? And what is that agenda? It is to portray some group of people as separate and different, with an agenda they are trying to impose on us, all done in order to pander to people's fears and prejudices, to spread hatred and intolerance for the sake of enriching themselves and grabbing for power and influence.

There isn't a "gay agenda" we need to support, but there most definitely is an agenda of hatred and bigotry coming from the religious right that we need to oppose - we must oppose. There is not some group of "them" that we need to give bland and tenuous and conditional support to, but rather we are talking about human beings, people, outcast and judged, persecuted and terrorized - all in the service of an evil and hateful agenda that threatens all of us.

There is an ongoing effort to divide people into groups, and to then isolate and marginalize them. We have "the poor" over there, and "the homeless" over here, and "the gays" are over there in their corner, Union workers have their little niche, immigrants another, each group with "their agenda." So many causes, so little time. What is a good little "liberal" to do? Sigh. "Don't get me wrong, I support you, BUT..."

These ideas should have no place in our thinking, as it is the foundation of the right wing hate campaign. Once people are separated, identified, labeled, isolated, they are then fair game for attacks and abuse.

But we are all at risk of falling into poverty, of becoming homeless. We are all in danger of falling ill, and being unable to find care and healing. We are all fighting for justice and fair treatment in the workplace. We are all eating the contaminated food, adulterated for the sake of satisfying the greed of the few, and distributed to the public while our officials look the other way, we are all being judged by the bigots who have perverted and corrupted the simple message of love and compassion preached by a humble, poor and despised man.

"Whatever you do to the least of my people, that you do unto me."

So long as any among us are persecuted, we are all persecuted.

We are all poor.

We are all homeless.

We are all hungry.

We are all persecuted and abused.

We are all marginalized and dismissed.

We are all sick, and lame and crippled.

We are all elderly, alone and forgotten.

We are all fighting for rights in the workplace.

We are all fighting for justice and equality for all.

We are all suffering from environmental degradation.

The only position that we can now take - the only position that is intellectually honest, morally unambiguous, and politically powerful is this:

We are all gay.

That is now we win over people from the other side, that is how we "reach out," that is how we build solidarity and consensus, and that is how we move the country forward. Not by embracing, "tolerating," accepting or apologizing for a perversion and corruption of the message of love and compassion, and not by pandering to those corrupted and selfish leaders of the religious right who use religion to attain wealth and power and influence, and who gain support by fanning the fames of prejudice and fear and spread hatred and bigotry.

[NJmaverick]

56. No you are wrong

Judging people by any subgrouping is wrong and intellectually dishonest. The ideals, of people and ideas being judged by their merit, is solid and sound. There is nothing good or healthy that comes from sticking people into camps based on any arbitrary grouping, be it sexual orientation, sex, age, religion, region of the Country, weight, gender, skin color, language etc.

[Two Americas]

64. that is funny

I am not sticking people into camps. Quite to the contrary, I am saying that we are all in the same camp.

How did you get the exact opposite idea from what I wrote?

[NJmaverick]

83. Well you get the opposite opinion when you say that my urging people

not be be stuck into camps were false. Go back and read what I wrote (perhaps for the first time). Then note you claimed what I stated was false.

[Two Americas]

85. OK

I have read your post.

First you say this:

"Frankly, I don't care what your sexual orientation is. I consider the facts and reasons behind the opinions. Those are my criteria, I use before deciding to agree or disagree. As for people, I look at what they say and do, not who they are attracted to. In other words I strongly believe in the golden rule. I want my opinions to be considered by the argument I lay out, in to support them, and I personally want to be judged by my words and actions, not my race, religions, gender or sexual orientation."

Then you say this:

"The odd part is I thought this was a universal desire at DU. Instead, I am finding that is not the case. That there are many threads, like this one, that seem to indicate group affiliation is the most important thing."

It is false that the OP "indicates group affiliation is more important" than "consider(ing) the facts and reasons behind the opinions" or "(using that) criteria (for) deciding to agree or disagree" or "look(ing) at what they say and do, not who they are attracted to" or "believ(ing) in the golden rule" or "want(ing) (one's) opinions to be considered by the argument (they) lay out" or "wanting to be judged by (their) words and actions, not (their) race, religions, gender or sexual orientation."

You have not made that case, but have merely asserted it. Make the case and defend and support your assertion, if you can.

The OP did not toss away the golden rule, judge people, or do any of the rest of the things that you have (cleverly and obliquely) accused them of doing, for the sake of group affiliation.

[bridgit]

12. Here's one thing I'll seldom get used to: the drama!!

Two of our dear friends are 'positive' (not only two but the two who's stories are related here), a 3rd wants in on 'the gig' cause he's older, nearly 60, very fem, and burnt his lover of 27 years out of his mother's house he inherited, gone, and now being frail...into a nursing home that he never visits which is a better thing cause other members of the community are caring for him now. Well, not actually 'burnt' but burnt in the sense he had him put him on all his accounts, learned his PIN's, and began taking out mortgages and buying spendy stuff he didn't tell his lover about and poof! It was all soon gone. Does this bother him? It does not seem to, as he's back down at the saloon sucking up everyone else's booze like there is no tomorrow, so...

Our two positive friends are trying to reconcile after their back & forth; the one slashing the bike tires of the other that works from home rending him without transportation (we all live downtown within services, etc); and the other having friends over for companionship yes, but the effect is just as easily read by 'the one' as rubbing his nose in it and there may be something to that who can say for sure but to suggest that...

The other then begins, under the guise of friendly reconciliation; to introduce companions to the one (the work from homer, nice, pleasant, 30-ish+, already survived the Bronx) one that then made copies of his house keys and had sneaked back in under influences of meth, held knives to his neck, split his lip, and blackened his eye, now, as...

The original other, the first guy, picks up from the saloon we all drink at; but then takes a rough rider back to his 98 year old mom's house then leaves him there to go cop some stuff...comes back and mom's on the floor, the rider has whipped his rescue pup into a whimpering mess, and is sitting in the back of a police cruiser, cuffed, and on his way back to Reno cause it turns out he's on parole for being a violent offender and not to have left Nevada. Do these things only happen in the community? Of course not. People that are fearful are fearful of a good many things i.e. young black males walking both sides of the street, yummy little white prostitutes w/anti gravity boobs leaning into their car windows at stop lights asking with sparkly eyes & milky teeth, "Want to party?", bearded Muslims, even crazier whiter tattooed skin-meth-heads with AK47's, so it's not just you the weak minded are afraid of, they're afraid of their shadows

But yeah, you're here you're queer. And it isn't a matter of my getting used to it. After 4 years of HIV/AIDS counseling in LA, I have shed & sobbed tears and been broken into two whole pieces while sitting in the hospitals rooms of dying gay friends as I begged...BEGGED THROUGH MY OWN TEARS!! -- the parents of these their children to just speak with them in that they would be gone in mere days of not hours and do you know what? They would not speak to their own dying children. Similarly, I've seen too many graves filled with too many similar tears.

The people we need to convince, and believe me when I say this unto you...are out there, in the world. They are the ones that need to get used to it. Many here already know. Many others only think they do.

[Vanje]

13. My point was...

I was responding to many here at DU who have expressed wishes that us gays would give the Warren issue a rest.

Thus my post:
We're queer
We're here, and we're probably not going to be quiet.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm sorry about your trouble, and the trouble in the lives of those you cherish.

[bridgit]

14. Oh, I understood the gist of your post...

The matter is I think that, if you will, life is larger than a bread basket

[Jamastiene]

18. I'm confrused.

Are you talking about the size that holds a loaf or the size that holds several loaves?

[Maven]

28. Hehehe.

:loveya:

[bridgit]

75. Hohoho!!

:spray:

[bridgit]

74. hahahahahaHA! If you aren't privy to the difference...

Then *you* may need to get "used to" the likelihood that other may just be rather quite beyond your, ahem, simplistic over-view :rofl:

[galaxy21]

15. Yeah, that attitude worked out so well for Gavin Newsom

and No on 8.

Like someone said, everyone knows that, we've(happily) gotten used to it.

Your post is, at best, unneccessary and, at worst, obnoxious.

[Unsane]

55. lol

agreed

[HamdenRice]

16. And we're here! We're grownup, realistic strategists! Get used to it! nt

[AntiFascist]

17. Implying that the OP is immature and unrealistic?

On the contrary, the "Act Up" strategy has worked very well in the past, during the worst part of the AIDS epidemic, and recently during the protests following Prop 8. The problem is that critics of this strategy don't understand how effective it is.

[Bluebear]

19. Or not a "real" Democrat:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8034964&mesg_id=8035037

[HamdenRice]

20. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8034971&mesg_id=8035054

[Bluebear]

21. No, I don't realize that "some DU GLBT" people have set up any such websites

Would you like to show us these websites?

[AntiFascist]

73. There are elements of various groups which are always ready to turn against the party...

this is not something new, nor can you get everyone to act in a uniform way. Picking sides and saying that this is us versus them is just one more way to try and get us to shut up and conform. Most of us who supported Obama throughout the campaign simply want him to understand exactly why this is upsetting, even if there is no taking back Warren giving the invocation.

In my mind, this is simply a power play by Obama, a way for him to move toward the center and garner the support of the broadest majority possible. If he marginalizes people who want marriage equality in the process, then there should be hell to pay.

[galaxy21]

25. Starting a thread just to say 'we're here! We're queer! Get used to it!' and not elaborating is

childish and immature. Especially since they're preaching to the converted anyway.

[yardwork]

44. Well, not everyone...

[bunnies]

23. "Queer" ? Is that no longer an insult?

:shrug:

[Bluebear]

24. Some gay people have re-appropriated the term.

The theory is that you take the power out of the word if you use it yourself, and I don't fault anyone for using it when describing themselves: I, on the other hand, still hate the word and don't choose to use it.

[bunnies]

26. So, in essence, its reached n-word status?

ugh. I guess it just makes me think of the days when 'queer' meant the same as the f-slur that makes my blood boil. I'm with you, I wont use it, but if it empowers some - more power to them I 'spose.

[jonnyblitz]

27. so you never heard of the Showtime series "Queer as Folk"?

it ran from 2000 thru 2005 on Showtime. :hi:

http://www.sho.com/site/queer/home.do

[bunnies]

29. (blushes) Nope.

And Ive never seen a single episode of The Sopranos. :blush: We dont bother to get any of the big pay channels. Shoulda known it'd bite us in the ass eventually. :hi:

[jonnyblitz]

31. I was just showing you that the term is accepted enough to be

included in the name of a tv series! I don't even own a tv myself these days though I watch shitloads of movies and things via the internet or dvd. no need to be embarrassed.:D

[bunnies]

38. :). Now youre just trying to make me feel better.

:P Its okay. I actually had to google "west wing" after a DU post. lol.

If I didnt have my Sundance channel or IFC - I think my head would explode... but all the others... not so much. Thanks for the schoolin'. :)

[TheBigotBasher]

61. The UK version was far better.

It was only one series long (plus an extended episode) but said in far fewer words what was represented over many episodes. It is worth watching just to compare lifestyles.

[jonnyblitz]

65. I watched both. I prefered the US version. nt

[alwysdrunk]

30. Is that what the Q in LGBTQ stands for?

Someone (not gay) told me it was "questioning" but I believe it til I googled it. Google is even worse, I've seen "Queen" and "Queenie" as the Q.

[Sub Atomic]

54. That's why I refer to myself as a fag.

God damn proud of it, too.

[TheBigotBasher]

60. I am queer but I do not care.

I am queer on so many levels that it no longer counts to me.

Edited: Why on earth does it matter here?

[IndianaGreen]

32. But, but, you queers are a threat to the forest, says the Pope!

And you know what big pruning shears he has from his days as a Hitler Jungen.

[Vanje]

33. I'm stunned

that saying, "we're here. We're queer...."
is making people mad.
Really astounded.

[galaxy21]

36. How can you be astounded?

Considering one of the main complaints people have had on here, is the overbearing, obnoxious attitude of certain posters that are looking for a fight, you then start a thread that basically proves their point? And you wonder why they're mad?

I think you were looking for trouble. Especialy since you didn't say anything beyond that and indicate you were looking for a reasonable discussion.

Like I said, it came off as very obnoxious. Especially since it was directed at people who agree with 99% of your viewpoints. I'm not sure if that was your intention, but that's how it seemed.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

57. I don't think she was the one looking for trouble, IMHO

[Two Americas]

63. huh?

How could a person object to that?

There is nothing intrinsically "obnoxious" about the OP. Nothing controversial. Nothing to get angry or offended about.

If people in fact do "agree with 99% of the viewpoints" of the OP, then why would they be offended or upset?

[LostinVA]

67. Sheeptramp was not looking for trouble -- she is a very lowkey poster and always has been

:eyes:

[Clintonista2]

81. Yes, your obnoxious attitude is certainly contributing to the atmosphere of DU

You've got that right.

[cali]

37. It doesn't make me mad at all

but sloganeering is pretty meaningless to me. Your OP is just sort of an empty calorie post.

[Vanje]

50. Its an old slogan. For empty calories

It sure did make some people mad.

[Clintonista2]

62. As opposed to your OP's

which indicate an empty head.

[cali]

69. pathetic, lirwin.

and so petulant, dear. Not to mention patently untrue. but you do make me laugh, bitler.

[YOY]

49. You haven't made anyone mad.

You've just reminded me (and others possibly) of a Jenine Garafalo anecdote of the angry gay screaming that same slogan at a pride parade at a 6'5" dragqueen...talk about preaching to the converted.

[Nia Zuri]

53. You're kinda silly!

[Two Americas]

35. here with you

Not budging.

[cbc5g]

39. Other people are here too

Just sayin'

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

58. We're aware of that

[Brooklyns_Finest]

40. You act like WE are the enemy

We're not. We're on your side, but Warren will give the invocation. Whether you like it or not.

[Vanje]

51. You're reading a lot into this old slogan

[bridgit]

78. Shit! Fuck! We're the enemy!!!! Rat-ta-tat-tat...I guess...

:shrug:

[Name removed]

41. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RandomKoolzip]

42. Kickity!

[Shiver]

43. Okay

You're here, you're queer, and I'm used to it. Been used to it for some time, actually, and have long since moved beyond 'used to it' and into 'giving you whatever help you need in getting others used to it'.

...now what?

[Teaser]

45. most here are quite past "used to it."

I'd venture that most of DU is rather happy about it.

[whistler162]

46. With that and $5 you can buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks....

[kitfalbo]

47. eh

Gay people think I'm strange, odd, queer.....

[EFerrari]

48. Not AGAIN.

LOL

:)

[Name removed]

52. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Danger Mouse]

59. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of DUer's are used to it.

[LostinVA]

66. K&R

[RandomKoolzip]

68. Wow. What dos it say about DU that this simple affirmation can cause such controversy?

Well...

a) Few people here were paying attention during the heyday of ACT-UP. And that's a shame.

b) There's a lot of intolerant people on this liberal website. And that's a damn shame.

[LeftyFingerPop]

70. delete

[LeftyFingerPop]

71. delete

[bridgit]

77. Ding! Fair enough!!

:kick:

[MellowDem]

72. "Get used to it"

Wow, don't treat your friends and allies like shit or anything. Don't alienate those who are working hardest with you. If you do that, how will you ever reach out to those who voted for yes on 8 to change their vote the next time around?

Lecturing to us like we are a bunch of naive people who don't know what a gay person is... that is absolutely childish and obnoxious.

You are looking for a fight. Too bad you can't be more constructive.

[Fearless]

76. Now if we could go elsewhere too and proclaim that...

Now that would be something useful. Elsewise I just get the feeling of a polite wave and smile and nothing gets done.

[eridani]

79. You left out "We're faaaaaaaaabulous!" n/t

[AntiFascist]

80. It's sad that this needs to be said in GD:P K&R n/t

[Hepburn]

82. I'm straight and...

...I don't H8!

:hi: K&R

[Heidi]

84. Kick.

:kick: