This subject is very complex...#12 wrote:Mavs wrote:MUTU wrote:German-American, it's ironic you would use the word "persecuted" when it's actually the LGBT community who are on the receiving end in the vast majority of instances. I think not liking the Allianz colours has much to do with the way you interpret the 'stunt' (I hope nobody gets sensitive by this word!): to me it means "hey, there are LGBT around, please show respect". That's all I get as an interpretation.
Let's use another sensitive topic for comparison. There are black people, Africans, who migrate to traditionally-Caucasian countries. Some people don't want them in their country. They're called racists (just like anti-gays are called homophobes). However nobody bats an eyelid when FIFA put slogans like "let's kick racism out of football". It's basically similar to them saying "let's accept gays".
It's only similar if a) the moral dimension is removed and we all universally agree that there is nothing morally wrong about homosexuality (which people don't agree on) and b) if being homosexual is as innate and inherent as the color of someone's skin.
Those are two highly questionable assumptions. So no, it's not the same.
No they're not...
Maybe #2 is, I don't think being homosexual is DNA based either...
ramsej84 wrote:No, I think it is a natural thing...
Girls play with dolls cause of their maternal instinct ...
On the other hand boys are tough and even the way they play is different; they push, climb, run, make more dangerous stunts etc.
#12 wrote:Maybe #2 is, I don't think being homosexual is DNA based either...
ramsej84 wrote:This subject is very complex...
I believe that there are two types of homosexuality.
1. Genetical, I know of three families that have more than one child who is gay/lesbian...
2. Psychological. Those who were exposed to a sexual abuse by a pig...
They become traumatized and they will grow to believe that is the only sexual activity which suits them...
FCBayernMunchen wrote:ramsej84 wrote:No, I think it is a natural thing...
Girls play with dolls cause of their maternal instinct ...
On the other hand boys are tough and even the way they play is different; they push, climb, run, make more dangerous stunts etc.
But what about pink/blue for instance?
MUTU wrote:Weird thing about pink and blue is that a while back the colours were inverted: pink was considered masculine while blue was considered feminine. Apparently it was the French who switched them around to what is currently considered the norm of pink for girls and blue for boys.
FCBayernMunchen wrote:I think I've read something about this before but can't recall at the moment.
MUTU wrote:FCBayernMunchen wrote:ramsej84 wrote:No, I think it is a natural thing...
Girls play with dolls cause of their maternal instinct ...
On the other hand boys are tough and even the way they play is different; they push, climb, run, make more dangerous stunts etc.
But what about pink/blue for instance?
Weird thing about pink and blue is that a while back the colours were inverted: pink was considered masculine while blue was considered feminine. Apparently it was the French who switched them around to what is currently considered the norm of pink for girls and blue for boys.
FCBayernMunchen wrote:MUTU wrote:Weird thing about pink and blue is that a while back the colours were inverted: pink was considered masculine while blue was considered feminine. Apparently it was the French who switched them around to what is currently considered the norm of pink for girls and blue for boys.
I think I've read something about this before but can't recall at the moment.
P.S. Pink is actually one of my favourite colours, in all of its shades but especially light pink. Heck, my phone is "rose gold" (aka let's not kid anyone, it's pink).
MUTU wrote:FCBayernMunchen wrote:ramsej84 wrote:No, I think it is a natural thing...
Girls play with dolls cause of their maternal instinct ...
On the other hand boys are tough and even the way they play is different; they push, climb, run, make more dangerous stunts etc.
But what about pink/blue for instance?
Weird thing about pink and blue is that a while back the colours were inverted: pink was considered masculine while blue was considered feminine. Apparently it was the French who switched them around to what is currently considered the norm of pink for girls and blue for boys.
MUTU wrote:Disagree on both.Mavs wrote:MUTU wrote:German-American, it's ironic you would use the word "persecuted" when it's actually the LGBT community who are on the receiving end in the vast majority of instances. I think not liking the Allianz colours has much to do with the way you interpret the 'stunt' (I hope nobody gets sensitive by this word!): to me it means "hey, there are LGBT around, please show respect". That's all I get as an interpretation.
Let's use another sensitive topic for comparison. There are black people, Africans, who migrate to traditionally-Caucasian countries. Some people don't want them in their country. They're called racists (just like anti-gays are called homophobes). However nobody bats an eyelid when FIFA put slogans like "let's kick racism out of football". It's basically similar to them saying "let's accept gays".
It's only similar if a) the moral dimension is removed and we all universally agree that there is nothing morally wrong about homosexuality (which people don't agree on) and b) if being homosexual is as innate and inherent as the color of someone's skin.
Those are two highly questionable assumptions. So no, it's not the same.
In (a) you assume that nobody believes some races are better than others. If that was the case then we wouldn't be talking about racism as it would be a non-issue.
In (b) you claim homosexuality is not innate and yet several studies claim the exact opposite. People may be born gay just like they may be born black.
FCBayernMunchen wrote:#12 wrote:Maybe #2 is, I don't think being homosexual is DNA based either...
I might get some hate for this (not from you, you probably agree), but let's say it's not biological at all. Let's say being gay/bi/trans is 100% a choice (which I don't believe): so what? So what if it's a choice and not biological? Does that mean you can treat them as inferior or discriminate against them?
Having tattoos is a choice, and unfortunately many hold biases against tattooed people, which I disagree with entirely. To me it would be almost the same thing.
ramsej84 wrote:No, I think it is a natural thing...
Girls play with dolls cause of their maternal instinct ...
On the other hand boys are tough and even the way they play is different; they push, climb, run, make more dangerous stunts etc.
Return to General Bayern Discussion
Users browsing this forum: aterford and 5 guests