Catholic priest calls for end to gay homicide defence

3rdHeaven said:

Murder is wrong unless in self defense. But there should be laws protecting str8 people from gay advances.

Click to expand...

There already are: it is known as the criminal code, specifically the rape and sexual harassment sections.

Incariol said:

There already are: it is known as the criminal code, specifically the rape and sexual harassment sections.

Click to expand...

But...but those don't count! This is special! Don't you get it? We need *special* laws to protect the poor widdle straight men's! Those laws are just about normal, everyday rape and harassment--that barely counts as a crime, you know? Women are naturally equipped to deal with being assaulted by men. It's in their genes or something. Men don't know how to deal with it, so they need special laws to protect them when they have to beat a gay dude's face in because he smiled wrong.

Mling said:

But...but those don't count! This is special! Don't you get it? We need *special* laws to protect the poor widdle straight men's! Those laws are just about normal, everyday rape and harassment--that barely counts as a crime, you know? Women are naturally equipped to deal with being assaulted by men. It's in their genes or something. Men don't know how to deal with it, so they need special laws to protect them when they have to beat a gay dude's face in because he smiled wrong.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's that, exactly.

I think it's more a case of "well the system just hates straight white men, so obviously there are no laws against that kind of thing for them".

Except....

simonpeter said:

Why are straight folks offended if hit on by gay men? Shouldn't they be flattered?

Click to expand...

Homosexual activity is a perversion. Being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with another male, to me, is no different than being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with a small child, an animal, or a corpse---turns my stomach. I have enough problems without adding sexual deviancies to the list.

TheDag said:

i even think Wolseley's response was over the top. A simple sorry if I gave you the wrong impression but I'm not gay is good enough. Showing aggression almost never makes a situation better.

Click to expand...

It worked quite well that time.

Mling said:

Why not just say "thanks, but no," like the vast majority of people who get unwanted advances from men? What made you think threats of violence were necessary?

Click to expand...

He was aggressive. I fought fire with fire.

If you think I was bad, I heard about an incident in the same bar about two weeks later, involving one of the guys from my shop; we'll call him "Bob" (this was in the Air Force---it was an off-duty hangout) and (perhaps the same?) homosexual; he hit on Bob, and Bob wrapped one hand around the guy's throat and jerked his head back with the other, and said, "You leave me alone, or I'll show you how we're taught to break necks in hand-to-hand combat training." (Extreme profanity deleted.)

I just wanted to be left alone; Bob wanted to kill the guy. I also heard later that the bartender started barring access to those types, because they were driving the Air Force business away, and he was making a heckuva lot more money from the airmen than he was from the homosexuals.

corvus_corax said:

YES!
YES!
YES!
The perfect Catholic response! Because you know, that's what Jesus would totally do!
Double up his fist and snarl "Beat it".
........

Oh, wait, no not so much.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and when He went into the Temple, He said to the moneychangers, "Aw gee, fellas, don't do that in here---that's not showing the proper respect for a house of God. Can I impress on you to do business outside, and not in here? Pretty please, with sugar on top? Pleeeeeeeeze???"

Oh, wait, no, not so much.

I realize people have this concept that "having the proper Christian response" means to lay down and let people use you as a doormat, but it's an erroneous concept.

corvus_corax said:

Sorry, still laughing at your inherently violent response to getting hit on.

Click to expand...

Whatever. If it doesn't work for you, then don't do it. I had not been back long from a nasty tour overseas, and I was not in the mood to be harassed by an aggressive homosexual pervert. I wanted to be rid of him, and the method I used worked extremely well.

The opposite of being a violent, bigoted thug is not being a doormat.

Not exactly rocket science.

Do we really need to start teaching men to say no?

To get violent over something like this is appalling.

What so the only available options wolseley´s type of christian know of are..

A. Lay down and be a doormat
or
B. Violence or the threat there of.

This actually explains a lot. (Such as the seemingly irresistible urge to threaten with hell.)

Course I suppose its hard to apply moderation when you´re a fanatic.

Wolseley said:

Homosexual activity is a perversion. Being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with another male, to me, is no different than being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with a small child, an animal, or a corpse---turns my stomach. I have enough problems without adding sexual deviancies to the list.

Click to expand...

Is your masculinity really so fragile that it can't handle a come-on by another guy? Are you so close to switching teams that the mere opportunity to do so has you squirming?

Wolseley said:

Homosexual activity is a perversion. Being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with another male, to me, is no different than being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with a small child, an animal, or a corpse---turns my stomach. I have enough problems without adding sexual deviancies to the list.

Click to expand...

Being propositioned for censentual sexual activity has nothing incoming with being asked to participate in child rape, animal rape nor corpse defilement I am sorry that your religious thinking has some how conflated them.

He's not bigoted, he just feels the need to lash out violently to people he finds irrationally disgusting.

It's kind of how some people I know in Indiana feel about mixed race couples.

Wolseley said:

Homosexual activity is a perversion. Being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with another male, to me, is no different than being offered the opportunity to get flirtatious with a small child, an animal, or a corpse---turns my stomach. I have enough problems without adding sexual deviancies to the list.



It worked quite well that time.



He was aggressive. I fought fire with fire.

If you think I was bad, I heard about an incident in the same bar about two weeks later, involving one of the guys from my shop; we'll call him "Bob" (this was in the Air Force---it was an off-duty hangout) and (perhaps the same?) homosexual; he hit on Bob, and Bob wrapped one hand around the guy's throat and jerked his head back with the other, and said, "You leave me alone, or I'll show you how we're taught to break necks in hand-to-hand combat training." (Extreme profanity deleted.)

I just wanted to be left alone; Bob wanted to kill the guy. I also heard later that the bartender started barring access to those types, because they were driving the Air Force business away, and he was making a heckuva lot more money from the airmen than he was from the homosexuals.



Yeah, and when He went into the Temple, He said to the moneychangers, "Aw gee, fellas, don't do that in here---that's not showing the proper respect for a house of God. Can I impress on you to do business outside, and not in here? Pretty please, with sugar on top? Pleeeeeeeeze???"

Oh, wait, no, not so much.

I realize people have this concept that "having the proper Christian response" means to lay down and let people use you as a doormat, but it's an erroneous concept.



Whatever. If it doesn't work for you, then don't do it. I had not been back long from a nasty tour overseas, and I was not in the mood to be harassed by an aggressive homosexual pervert. I wanted to be rid of him, and the method I used worked extremely well.

Click to expand...

I'm actually quite curious what you would define as "aggressive" in that situation. Would you mind elaborating so I can get a better judgement of your situation?

1000Flames said:

I'm actually quite curious what you would define as "aggressive" in that situation. Would you mind elaborating so I can get a better judgement of your situation?

Click to expand...

No. I am not going to discuss a trivial incident that happened 30 years ago simply so you can ascertain how "backwards" I am in my thinking. If you want to dissect somebody's mental processes, go get a degree in psychiatry. As for me, I don't need to be analyzed. You've all had enough amusement in this thread, so I am retiring from it. It is impossible for you to penetrate my viewpoint or to understand my stance on this issue; you don't possess the development or the training for it, so we will simply have to agree to disagree. As with so many things, you will simply have to remain within your sphere and me in mine.

Wolseley said:

I was propositioned in a bar in Syracuse, New York, one night.

I doubled my fist, turned, faced the guy, and snarled, "Beat it!"

He didn't bother me further.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing all u had to tell him,your not interested,leave right.I think most gays aren't going to harrass someone that bad,that u would have to fight him or beat him to death.

Wolseley said:

No. I am not going to discuss a trivial incident that happened 30 years ago simply so you can ascertain how "backwards" I am in my thinking. If you want to dissect somebody's mental processes, go get a degree in psychiatry. As for me, I don't need to be analyzed. You've all had enough amusement in this thread, so I am retiring from it. It is impossible for you to penetrate my viewpoint or to understand my stance on this issue; you don't possess the development or the training for it, so we will simply have to agree to disagree. As with so many things, you will simply have to remain within your sphere and me in mine.

Click to expand...

In what sphere is it respectable to threaten violence for something that could not possibly harm you?
.

Cabal said:

I don't think it's that, exactly.

I think it's more a case of "well the system just hates straight white men, so obviously there are no laws against that kind of thing for them".

Except....

Click to expand...

Well, I was deliberately exaggerating in a somewhat uncharitable way (we are talking about people who would beat me to death for existing, after all, so I don't feel *too* bad treating them with less than perfect charity).

Backing down and talking seriously for a moment, I really would argue that what's going on in the minds of people who would make that argument (straight men need protection from gay men) is closer to my post than not. I exaggerated, but I didnt invent.

The way I see it, it starts with the theater that surrounds gender. In mainstream portrayals, gender is defined largely by what it *isn't.* Being feminine entails not really being human: for example, it isn't ladylike to smell as if you have a human body, but it ruins the illusion if your boyfriend sees you putting on deoderant or brushing your teeth (I'm taking tips from cosmo, here), and heaven forbid you ever excrete gas from any orifice!

Being masculine or male does allow for having bodily functions, but it's largely defined by being *not female.* Manly men shouldn't carry bags because they look like feminine purses. They shouldn't have anything to do with flowers. You might not *have* to be able to fix a car, but you definitely shouldn't know how to opperate a sewing machine. It's ok for women to wear blue, but it isnt manly for men to wear pink--you get the idea.

So, a lot of people think those social conventions are outdated, and are able to maintain w male identity while doing things that are often considered feminine. These guys can usually handle it when a gay guy asks them out.

But then you have the people.who *do* define their masculinity, their maleness, by their actions instead of their identity. They cling to the theater. They are manly men--not just because they look in the mirror and say, "Yup, I'm a dude!" but because they do the things that men are supoosed to do, and they don't do the things that women are supposed to do.

And then a man comes along and starts up a male mating ritual. A man who gets his sense of gender from his own identity might be able to shrug this off and just say, "thanks but not my type.". But to somebody who gets their sense of gender from public theater, this is a serious threat. Being on the receiving end of male affection is generally a woman's role, which means that our gay friend here just accidentally implied that the manly.man is no kind of man at all.

Which is where the average manly man would feel the need to overcompensate with some unnecessary show of bravado, probably involving violence, to earn back the manly title.

But my bit of mockery above wasn't just about he violence--it was about somebody who claimed that there needed to be special laws to protect straight men from gay men.

I think that's where the "women can take it, but we can't" aspect gets worked in. Because now, our manly man was--maybe for.the first time in his life--on the receiving end of male affection which carried a kind of threat. And don't women often claim that being hit on by men is bothersome, and sometimes threatening and sexist or downright scary? Most likely, our manly man has hit on women himself or identifies with people who do, and probably has unpleasant things to say about feminists who object to the practice.

(Of course, for women, the threat of unwelcome sexual advances comes from the fact that something like 1/3 women are.sexually assaulted in their lives, not necessarily from being unsexed, but the point is that unwelcome sexual advances are often laced with *some* kind of threat or another.)

So this guy just experienced a similar kind of unpleasantness that he or people he identifies with have probably argued doesn't exist at all. That's a problem. If he's that freaked out by unwelcome sexual advances, because it feels threatening, could.it be that women who've given.him the cold.shoulder were feeling a similar sort of threat, and were justified in treating him unkindly? Could it be that women who.don't like being cat-called in the street *aren't* just ungrateful female dogs?

Naaaah.

They're ungrateful female dogs. He wasn't feeling freaked out because unwanted sexual advances are inherently laced with threat! He was feeling freaked out because *gay men are waaay more threatening!*


TL;DR:

In order to preserve the idea that being targeted by unsolicited sexual attention by men is so threatening *to men* that it warrants violence, *but is still an appropriate role for women,* (which it must be, in order to preserve the feeling that he and his role models are alpha-studs and not just walking rape-threats) he needs to turn gay men into horrifying predators, whose threats are unique and beyond anything that a woman being targeted by a straight man might feel.

Wolseley said:

No. I am not going to discuss a trivial incident that happened 30 years ago simply so you can ascertain how "backwards" I am in my thinking. If you want to dissect somebody's mental processes, go get a degree in psychiatry. As for me, I don't need to be analyzed. You've all had enough amusement in this thread, so I am retiring from it. It is impossible for you to penetrate my viewpoint or to understand my stance on this issue; you don't possess the development or the training for it, so we will simply have to agree to disagree. As with so many things, you will simply have to remain within your sphere and me in mine.

Click to expand...

You are horrible at reading my mind. God forbid I try to get a better understanding of a situation! I don't want to penetrate your viewpoint. I want to understand where you're coming from. If that's something to scoff at, well then, so be it. Doesn't help for discussion. Since you also appear to know what my "sphere" is, I'd like to know as well. What is my sphere that I should remain in?

Maren said:

To repeat the question I asked earlier in the thread: are men really so weak that they can't just say "No", as millions of women do on a daily basis?

Seriously, if men get legal protections from gays hitting on them, women should get legal protection from men hitting on them.

Click to expand...

Isn't it amazing how homophobes don't grasp this double standard? Women have been putting up with a heck of a lot of unwanted advances from womanizing men for thousands of years, and apparently that's no problem, but God forbid a gay guy flirts with a straight guy, and suddenly he has grounds to kill him?

As was already said, it's quite simple. "Sorry, I'm flattered, but I'm straight". Why is that so hard? No one secure with their sexuality would have any issue with a gay guy hitting on them. In fact, consider it a compliment since gay guys usually have good taste.

corvus_corax said:

YES!
YES!
YES!
The perfect Catholic response! Because you know, that's what Jesus would totally do!
Double up his fist and snarl "Beat it".
........

Oh, wait, no not so much.

I've been hit on a handful of times by gay guys. Every single time I said "O really? Wow. Thanks, but sorry though, I'm straight".

As a married guy, I've been hit on by other women.
I totally double up my fist and snarl "beat i......"
Oh wait, I don't do that either.
"Really? Wow. thanks, but sorry though, I'm married"

Never ONCE did I (a non-Christian) even think of threatening violence.


I guess some Catholics are perhaps more inherently violent than some non-Christians. ~shrug~

But hey, if fists and guns and violence (or even the threat of violence) floats your boat, I'm sure your Jesus is totally on your side, amiright?

Amiright?
I'm totally right, right?

Sorry, still laughing at your inherently violent response to getting hit on.

Click to expand...

Were you actually under the impression that Conservatives follow the teachings of Jesus?

Skaloop said:

Is your masculinity really so fragile that it can't handle a come-on by another guy? Are you so close to switching teams that the mere opportunity to do so has you squirming?

Click to expand...

Probably. People with that much hate for gays are usually hiding something.

Homophobic Men Most Aroused by Gay Male inappropriate content | Psychology Today