Getting Along - A Guide to Forum Communication

[Anatta]

Kia Ora,

"You can please some of the people some of the time  but not all of the people all of the time  "

I'd just like to say "You're all doing a good job mods and also most members here do seem to be policing themselves quite well !"

Metta Zenda

[Gabby]

The words straight and queer by their very existence make a dichotomy that does not exist.  Using those words and I do believe you Del completely you just used the word straight as it's the word you just assumed identified you.  I don't like either word it's making a false dichtomy.  People use the word queer or straight as both these people using these bs words have issues about fitting in, they don't think they do.

Can there be a legitimate use of a word like straight with it's connotations of truth?  Or queer, deviating from the 'norm'?  Neither is true when you look we are individuals it's about time people literally grew up and took control of their own lives.

Thank you. 

[tekla]

So, should I lie then?


P.S.  I'm real good at it.  Watch.

You look great!

[Arch]

The words straight and queer by their very existence make a dichotomy that does not exist...People use the word queer or straight as both these people using these bs words have issues about fitting in, they don't think they do.

I could say a lot about this post, but I'll keep it brief. Frankly, I think you're setting up a false dichotomy yourself. I've known a couple of straight queer people...the two terms are not mutually exclusive, you know.

I should also add that quite a lot of people, including folks on this site, self-identify using the labels "straight" or "queer" or even both. Calling these words "bs" is essentially a personal attack on such people. Please stop. We all have the right to label ourselves any way we want; and on this site, we all have the right to expect that people will not define our labels as "bs."

[Gabby]

I could say a lot about this post, but I'll keep it brief.

It's called a reaction.  I find myself reacting to you but I contain it I'll try and explain.

Frankly, I think you're setting up a false dichotomy yourself. I've known a couple of straight queer people...the two terms are not mutually exclusive, you know.

Thank you you've proved my point it's a false dichtomy everyone is equally strange and average, maybe if you read some of my other posts you'd see that, especially at least 3 posts after this one in other places on the site.  The word 'straight' has connotations, and it's the same for the word 'queer', so I think we should get past the superior because I'm square, don't deny it's the default position, and superior because I'm more different.  Using a word as a means of superiority.

But of course there's money to be made defending words.  Rather than labeling me as an outsider, I'd never do such a thing that is exactly the problem Arch.  Explain why these words are fine to use?  Rather than think it's fine to perpetuate a war.

So do you understand what I'm saying now?  Nowt queer as folk  Folk everyone everyone [/b] Arch.

I should also add that quite a lot of people, including folks on this site, self-identify using the labels "straight" or "queer" or even both. Calling these words "bs" is essentially a personal attack on such people. Please stop. We all have the right to label ourselves any way we want; and on this site, we all have the right to expect that people will not define our labels as "bs."

Those labels are everyones, don't ever forget that.  I like the words vanilla, chocolate, mint choc chip, far better than that supremicist crap.

[Sephirah]

Considering the thread title, it's ironic what I'm about to say, but could we tone it down a bit?

[Arch]

Lexia, one of my points was that you seemed to be falling into the same trap that you accuse others of falling into. You seem to think that people make a false dichotomy by using the terms "straight" and "queer" as opposites, but a lot of people, including me and practically all of my close friends, do not use those terms as polar opposites. For those of us who do that (and, in my travels, I've encountered quite a few of us), there is no dichotomy. I think perhaps you have misunderstood how a great many people use those terms.

I enjoy discussion about controversial subjects, including people's labeling systems or lack of them. However, as a moderator, I draw the line at invective, personal attacks, and negative judgments on how people self-label and self-identify. People have a right to come to Susan's and label themselves as straight or queer or whatever, without having someone else call those labels "BS."

[Gabby]

I'm not even going to read your replies

It's not acceptable for anyone to use those words like pooftah and queer.  Consider this my last post.

[tekla]

It's not acceptable for anyone to use those words like pooftah and queer.

People over here use queer to self-ID all the time.  Who are you to tell them they can't?  Pooftah sounds like a Monty Python type word.  Never hear that one.

[ativan]

Those little puffs behind cartoon characters when they are moving fast. Pooftahs. 
How did this thread just turn into whatever it is? 

[Arch]

Those little puffs behind cartoon characters when they are moving fast. Pooftahs. 
How did this thread just turn into whatever it is? 

It was a discussion about "straight" that turned into a discussion of "straight vs queer" and then turned into...uh, you got me.

"I say, Ernest, why can't we all be chums?"

[V M]

Give a monkey a wrench... Sit back and see what happens 

Sorry, I'm terrible

[Sabriel Facrin]

So since we're on the topic, how exactly would be appropriate for disarming a brewing argument about terminologies and groupings?  It'd be a mouthful to lay a full explanation that agreeing to many standards simultaneously can't pan out every time... ;.;

[Padma]

I think people just have to accept that definitions are subjective, not objective. Any two people who use the same term to describe themselves will mean slightly-to-very different things by it. So using any term as a "group definer" is always going to be less than ideal, but we make do, because we're social animals, and we like and need tribal identities as well as personal ones.

I think of labels as being like models (like a blueprint, or a psychological model for example) - where the model is an attempt to describe an experience in a useful way for a particular context. It doesn't necessarily work outside of that context, and it's no substitute for the actual experience. So I think the best we can do is ask each other "how is it for you?" and broaden our horizons. Once people start using labels to draw inclusion-exclusion lines, it gets bloody.

If someone uses a term to describe themselves, and uses it in a very different way from me, it's healthier for me to be interested than feel threatened. I'm fascinated by how many widely different interpretations there are of the basic terms that get used here to describe gender perception, and how upset people (including myself, occasionally) can get about that.

Of course, that's just my take on it .

[tekla]

Everyone desperately trying to find a group to be a part of so they can express their individuality.  Got it.

[Julie Marie]

So since we're on the topic, how exactly would be appropriate for disarming a brewing argument about terminologies and groupings?  It'd be a mouthful to lay a full explanation that agreeing to many standards simultaneously can't pan out every time... ;.;

YOU can't disarm it, only the people engaged in the dispute can by accepting the fact we all have our own ideas and opinions and the concept of trying to get everyone to agree on one thing is doomed to fail every time. 

There's a simple way to avoid becoming involved in an imbroglio, acceptance.  You don't have to agree or disagree.  If you want to state your opinion, do so and just leave it.  What others do with it has no effect on you... unless you let it.

[Padma]

Everyone desperately trying to find a group to be a part of so they can express their individuality.  Got it.

Oh, totally - I know loads of people what are card-carrying members of the tribe of people who don't belong to tribes .

[tekla]

I tell people all the time that I could get 10K people out in SF to have a protest march protesting protest marches.

the concept of trying to get everyone to agree on one thing is doomed to fail every time
Oh dictionaries seemed to work well for people for a long time, until the internet and everyone started writing their own dictionary while living in their own private Idaho with there own personal facts.

[Padma]

I stopped taking all this too seriously when I came across the term "pomosexual", looked it up and discovered it stands for post-modern-sexual, and is only used by the around 20 people who coined it in the first place. Yawn. May non-existent deities protect us from term-coiners with agendas.

[tekla]

is only used by the around 20 people who coined it in the first place

None of whom had ever had sex, nor will they ever - at least sex with another partner.