No. If they are against people being gay, against the LGBT community getting married, etc. When I was a teenagers and out in HS. I had a BFF named Lynette. We were inseparable I'd hang at her house watch"Beaches" a million times(Her Fav Movie). I would massage her away her cramps when it was that time of the month. The thing with her is that before meeting she decided to get religion and become Catholic. We had genuine affection and love for each other. However, her beliefs would come up and we would have an argument and then agree to disagree. One argument was a knock down drag out fight in McDonalds. It was not pretty, it started because I wanted to take a guy to prom and she was giving me reasons as to why the wasn't gonna happen.
Ultimately, she had a transgendered friend who told her I was taking shit about here behind her back and that caused a rift that was never mended. She moved away and we never connected again. At 15, I rationalized being friends with people who thought my being gay was not natural and went with it. I learned that people who say the are your friend and yet find it disgusting , is in fact saying I am. If you cannot be truly accepted by your friends and family...ALL of you then it's not a healthy relationship and accepting there treatment of you as lesser then they are and not right, then for me it's time to let you go and do your thing somewhere else and not around me.
It's a hard lesson and it's tough, but you have to respect yourself and someone saying the love you , but how can you be gay? Dude, that's disgusting , but I don't judge. When they are judging.
Now, I have no time for them. I do not want them over my house, at my table, hanging out in the club. NOTHING. I an do bad all by myself.
For Your Consideration.
Found on Jerry Mahoney's blog Mommy Man -Adventures of a Gay Super Dad.
I won’t be your gay friend if…
- You’ll let me cater your wedding but not have one of my own.
- You don’t think I should be able to adopt children because I might be “attracted” to them.
- You think merely saying you love everyone is equivalent to actually demonstrating that love.
- You use your religion both as a basis to attack me and as a shield to defend yourself from my rebuttal.
- You would treat your gay child with anything less than complete acceptance, unconditional love and a raging desire to kick the ass of anyone who made life hard for them.
- You joke in some movie that electric cars are “gay” and expect me to laugh.
- You still wish Will & Grace had hooked up at the end.
If any of those apply to you, that’s fine. You have every right to be exactly as horrible and wrong-headed as you want to be. As I said, though, don’t expect me to be your gay friend.
Now that that’s out of the way, I’d like to address those people who actually are my friends, because clearly we’re giving those other guys the wrong impression.
So here’s what I propose:
If you see Kirk Cameron, Sarah Palin or any other blatant homophobe, don’t be nice to them. It confuses them.
Don’t shake their hand. Don’t style their hair or do their interior design or perform “Rent” for them. And for the love of God, don’t play your 1970s classic rock hits at their wedding, Elton.
Just cut them off and say, “Sorry, I only do that for friends.”
It’s not polite and it’s not subtle, but I’m afraid it’s the best course of action from here on out. Sometimes the only way to get through to these people is to be a complete douchebag.
You know, like them.
There are people I would define with the word "friend" in the title, such as work-friends or school-friends or Facebook-friends, who I do not count as actual friends, people with whom I do not share the emotional bond of true friendship. They're just people I know in a particular place who, when I leave that particular place, I will not keep in touch. And as such, I don't really care about their beliefs (unless they're particularly vocal about them).
Like the definition of love, the definition of friendship has degrees. You love an actor or musician in an entirely different way than you love your boyfriend, which in turn is entirely different from the way you love your mother. If you're counting everyone you know as a friend, then of course you're going to come up with a much more open and egalitarian set of rules to govern how you react to their behavior, just as your reactions to the actor's or musician's behavior will be considerably less emotional than your reactions to your boyfriend's behavior.
I further define being "against" something as hostility--I can't imagine anything I would consider myself "against" that I am not hostile toward. I disapprove of things (like socks with sandals) or am annoyed by things (like reproducing facile definitions of complex ideas), and can certainly overlook minor or personal-preference differences in terms of friendship; but something I am against would have to be something that I believe is bad (like hurting other people). It follows that someone who embraces or exemplifies something I believe is bad would have to be considered a bad person--not in toto, there's no such thing as a purely evil person, but for purposes of friendship.
Finally, a great deal of the hostility you're perceiving toward your stance is not based solely in your own words: many points of this conversation have come up before, and certain patterns developed in those conversations that put people's backs up when they hear something similar. The debate has been going on for a long time, and lines were drawn in the sand before you arrived here. And anything that smacks of self-loathing or internalized homophobia is like a red cape waving around in front of a bull. Anything that sounds like giving people permission to think you're a bad person will sound, to many of us, like you share the belief that you're a bad person.
I am peculiarly liable to this, I find. The merest implication that anyone has the right to think ill of me for my sexuality instantly sends my blood-pressure through the roof. Whether or not some random anonymous person thinks ill of me for being gay isn't really of interest, I can't control that and I don't want to; but someone defending that person will automatically piss me off. I'm not Jesus, nor even one of his followers: I do not turn the other cheek.
Last edited by Swellegant; April 26th, 2013 at 08:28 AM.
On the other hand, just because someone is gay or gay-friendly is not grounds for friendship, either.
Everyone wants to be heard. No one wants to listen.
I had someone who told me a few weeks ago that I couldn't be friends with anyone straight. This was just in a casual conversation with someone I was barely acquainted with, so... I said my friends are awesome and it doesn't matter who's gay or straight and called it a night
Author of Lost in a Dream. If you want to make me smile, read it and tell me what you think.
My opinion, which isn't written in concrete, keeps wavering from one side to another depending on the eloquence and logic of some different posters's points of view.
No, maybe. I've been in academia from the get-go, and around the excessively liberal (Cheering for Palestinian statehood? Please). I haven't been in a position where I would have a homophobic friend. I live downtown Toronto, not small town Montana. I am surrounded by secular humanists and atheists, mostly to the point I've grown intolerant of the religious.
My best friend, however, is a country-boy-tradesman and we have nothing in common aside from personality quirks. I wouldn't have met him if I didn't work with his girlfriend (now fiancee, yay how time flies) while I was in high school. He's accepting since his aunt is a lesbian, and doesn't care where my penis goes...he would just prefer to not talk about it.
Now, being all old and foreign and unhip and all, I'm not sure whether that is what you kids call "shade". He's nailed his colours to the mast, which I appreciate, and his position is crystal clear.
So... a genuine question, not intended to bait and with no malice of forethought, to all of you: if you were in my position getting this from your friend, would you end the friendship? For the record, we didn't; nothing changed between us. I will also say I've never heard any anti-gay sentiment from him, nor anything derogatory about the gay guys in his social and work circles, either before or after I came out.
They have baptists in south africa?
Two journalists killed during live broadcasts by madman smothering them with pillows. Because remember, guns don't kill people....
^Granddad is a Scot, but my mate and his dad were born here in .za.
But yes, we have Baptists.
That said, I don't think I would be able to be friends with someone who adhered so closely to any religion's interpretation of scripture, or of reality. I find people who cling too closely to any religion's tenets are lacking something, if they require an irrational and miraculous construct on which to build their morality. I can be friendly with such a person, I can be civil to him, I might even enjoy his company; but I wouldn't consider him a friend. There would be things we couldn't discuss, and I feel very strongly that I should be able to discuss anything with my friends; there would be things in which we could not support each other, and mutual support is another very important facet of friendship to me.
I have a problem with my grandmother's religious beliefs for exactly that reason: she thinks that the Bible is the one and only source of right and wrong, and that people who do not believe in her religion do not know right from wrong. She doesn't grasp that people can usually figure out right and wrong without revealed religion...usually faster than those with it. If you have to be enticed with heaven and threatened with hell to behave well, there's something fundamentally wrong with you. I am pretty sure that, had she not been raised with her religion, she'd be an even nicer person than she already is.
But I give my grandmother a lot of latitude that I wouldn't give anyone else.
Thats a tough question..I wouldn't automatically say "I won't stay friends". It would depend on the person & how homophobic they were & etc
But I'd also say that it would make being friends more difficult.
Since I once was actively religious pentecostal,they are coming from there..at least couple of them woukld still get bullet instead of me,and I was able to shake at least some of their typical stereotypies about gays..."You?? manliest man of all!",I said,that we all,if almost none,would carry a pink purse.
(='.'=) <= This is Bunny.Copy Him to your signature.Now.
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.
Martin Luther King Jr.
It very may seem perverse, but dudes who are homophobic tend to turn me on as LONG as they are not too physically violent about it.
I think that it would all depend on the situation, I personally wouldn't be friends with anyone who would tell me that I'm going to hell, or that they think that I'm disgusting, they hate me etc. BUT I can see myself being friends with someone who isn't entirely comfortable with homosexuality.
For instance, I am not an effeminate male so therefore people who just barely meet me will probably not know that I am gay. I won't lie if someone asks me but if it never comes up i could care less.
Anyways one of my friends before he knew i was gay had been talking to me and the issue of gay rights came up. He said that he supports gay rights because he feels that everyone deserves the same rights regardless as to some peoples judgments. Right after that he admitted that gay guys kinda make him uncomfortable, and that he had also said that he was raised to believe that it is wrong but that he sees no logical reason for it and is trying to break the mindset and his instinct.
He is a good guy and I got the impression that he had a few stereotypical notions in his head so I decided that i would have some fun with him. I decided to stay pretty ambiguous about my sexuality I never talked about guys or girls with him, but i continued to hang out with him.
Eventually, one of our friends (who knows that i am gay) started inquiring about my then new boyfriend, but worded it like "how are things going with you and ________?" and my friend looked confused and i was like "Oh yeah thats my boyfriend" and he did a double take and was like "I didn't know that you were gay"
We are still friends and i think that I managed to give him a very different perspective in the process. I still enjoy messing with him, he is not a very touchy feel-y person to begin with so i will try to hug him occasionally solely for the purpose of making him uncomfortable. In that sense Yes I would be friends with someone who is uncomfortable with it, but not someone who is actively against it.
I think sometimes our knee-jerk anti reaction to people who struggle with our sexuality over-simplifies the emotional processes which clash inside their heads. Sure, their are homophobes who are zealots in their quest to deny us equality; but there are also guys like this whose hearts and heads battle it out while they attempt to come to terms with it all. I personally opt to judge each of them as individuals on their merits rather than tar them all with the same "homophobe! Burn him!" brush, but I can see why some of you don't.
Thanks for your honesty nonetheless; I appreciate it, much like I appreciated my friend's when I came out to him and he told me what I told you above - it's not easy for him, either.
And welcome back.
Last edited by blackbeltninja; April 27th, 2013 at 08:09 AM.
Jeeeeeez you guys seriously dragged this out long enough.. it's like you don't even read each other's posts or something.. one guy says 'I define friendship differently than you do' and another goes all 'your friendships are not real'.. freaking hell.. just accept it. some people define friends a certain way and others define friends in a different way. someone might define a friend as a person that accepts every tiny thing about them. another might define a friend as a person they can get along with but don't necessarily have to see eye to eye about EVERYTHING. it isn't up to any of you to define friendships for other people.. just. let. it. go. some people have friends who are not supportive of homosexuality. some people have no time for people like that. that's it. it's over. so let it go.
AWWWW Hell Naw! It may seem perverse? Really???
It is both eye opening and interesting to see how they formulate their arguments to support their opinion.
Obviously there are basically only two definitions to answering the question but by reading the posts of each member one learns a little more about them, their experiences and their outlook on life.
Isn't that what an Internet forum is for.
I wouldn't stay here long if to every question each member answered just "yes" or "no".
Last edited by dpnice; April 27th, 2013 at 11:21 AM. Reason: English!!!!!!
Sure if they keep their opinions to themselves and all the conversations don't center around homosexually.
There are so many factors....and then there is the difference between "friend" and "acquaintance".
I would not accept a friend who was homophobic but an acquaintance?...depends. Alot depends on context.
I have a huge problem if the person is GBLT and homophobic (and I think men who shame feminine men fall into this category as well as most republican gays that I have met) ...not even an acquaintance level will work for me. I think life is to short to subject myself to that.
Before this thread drops dead of its own weight, I have a couple more thoughts on the subject (and yes, I do continue arguing with you all when I'm not here).
Something that has been niggling in the back of my mind are some questions, posed by I do not remember whom, along the lines of: isn't my friend disapproving of my sexuality the same as me disapproving of my friend's girlfriend, or his drug habits?
Here's the difference: you know your friend, you know the girlfriend, you believe based on knowledge and reason that they are a bad mix. You believe based on your knowledge of the individual that the girlfriend is a total cunt and not to be trusted with your friend's happiness. You know from seeing others suffer the effects of drug addiction that your friend's drug use can and most likely will lead to unhappiness, ill health, and death.
Conversely, someone who disapproves of homosexuality has no actual knowledge of the subject: it's because Magic Man in the Sky said so in a bunch of ancient stories translated across dozens of languages and thousands of years. They have no reason to believe that homosexuality is bad, they were simply told so... and do not wish to question it because to do so would call into question other beliefs on which they've based their lives.
This is why I have little respect for organized religion and no respect whatever for scriptural absolutism. People who rely on these things have not decided that an action or attitude is good or bad based on rational thought, nor on observation, nor even on instinct: they base it on a need to not die and a terrible fear of going to hell. That's childish, and any belief system that comes out of a book of ancient verse is suspect and inadmissible. Rather than thinking through whether or not something is good or bad, they refer all decisions to someone else who has read the book and supposedly knows what it means.
Though I certainly haven't met everyone in the world, the people I have met who believe in a singular interpretation of an ancient text cannot defend their beliefs, all they can do is say "it's a matter of faith," and I'm supposed to accept their condemnation of me, or some facet of me, based on their irrational faith.
Incidentally, I do believe in the value of faith. I have faith in all sorts of things that I have no rational reason to have faith in... like the existence of an interested and benevolent God. But when people construct elaborate strictures of behavior, and expect other people to follow those strictures, based on an unprovable article of faith, they put themselves in the wrong as far as I'm concerned.
Another thing that's been banging around in the back of my mind was a post comment that suggested I might extend the latitude I grant my grandmother and her irrational faith-based thinking to non-grandmothers (which is a neat turn of phrase). Perhaps, if I were a Christian saint, I might do so. But since I am a rationalist, I refer to a cost-benefit analysis. And in any c/b analysis of my relationship with my grandmother, her distasteful and damaging religious beliefs are heavily outweighed by what she has done for me and for those I love.
OK, Grandmother disapproves of my sexuality, and she doesn't even know why, only that she believes she's supposed to in order to go to heaven. I find that incredibly hurtful. However, I wouldn't be alive right now if it wasn't for her kindness to me... and that kindness was and is regardless of my sexuality, not in spite of it. I've never had to lie to her, in fact she was one of the first people I came out to; and though she said then that she disapproves, she's never once in the last thirty years tried to punish me for it.
She loved me when I was an otherwise unloved child, gave me hope and affection and attention when the other people who were supposed to be caring for me (my parents) were abusing and/or ignoring me. She took me in when I was a teenager and given the choice between living in squalor and hatred and ugliness with one of my real parents or living in a stable home with someone who loved me and cared about me. She took me in when I was a young adult and my drinking had closed so many doors for me that the only choice I had left, besides her, was to turn to prostitution... and not the sex-positive kind, but the degrading, soul-destroying kind.
She helped me through college, she helped me get sober and stay sober, she's given me stability and safety, a place to live and food to eat when others who do accept my sexuality would not have lifted a finger. With all of that in the balance, her undefended disapproval of my sexuality is almost irrelevant, a one-pound turd weighed against a ton of gold.
That same attitude, coming from someone who has done nothing tangible for me and proposes to do nothing tangible for me... well, a one-pound turd is a pretty large and nasty object. Any person coming to my door with a one-pound turd and nothing of greater value than the pleasure of his company to offer in balance will obviously be invited to leave.
Anyway, some thoughts... for what they're worth.
Last edited by Swellegant; April 28th, 2013 at 04:45 PM.
OTOH, I feel like we shouldn't maybe be too hard on people.
I've seen this with my parents, e.g.
I wouldn't say they were "homophobes", but they certainly wern't openly embracing gay people either.
I came out some time ago, and they accepted me 100%
I, however, still struggle with the question in my head "Who was the 'real you' (parent)? The one who didn't like gays, or the one who now suddenly likes gays, because your son is one?"
I confronted them with this issue I had. And I felt that I kinda hurt their feelings, by putting it this way, but they also seemed to understand where I came from.
They told me: "People can change", "personal views and opinions can change based on personal experiences" ...
So maybe the same goes for some friends aswell.
If they are against homosexuality, isn't it most likely that THEY will decide that they don't want anything to do with you, once they find out you're gay?
If they find out you're gay, tell you they have certain reserves about it, yet still keep investing in a friendship, then they are not AGAINST homosexuality. Then they are being your friend, and they could, through friendship, start accepting "homosexuality" in general.
Of course, now we're talking in the hypothesis that a "friend" KNOW you're gay.
If the question is, "would you stay closeted friends with someone who seems anti-gay while he as your friend doesn't know that you're gay?", now that's a whole other story...
Still, I have to admit, one of the things I still struggle with most since coming out: "Why couldn't be these people be so nice about being gay BEFORE I came out? I could have made my life so much easier! Or are they only putting up a sharade because I came out?"
I can and do. But they are few and far between, mainly because to most it is a totally irrelevant issue. As it is to me.
^ Can one be "against homosexually" and still consider it a "totally irrelevant issue"?
It's interesting to see how quickly our thoughts/ideas go off in different directions. You can almost date/age each poster by his assessment.
But, I find it wrong to bring up the parent/grandparent bond/situation in this thread. I really don't think that's what Mr. C. Boy is talking about/asking.
I think it would be impossible to duplicate the caregiver/dependant situation, where someone carries baby pictures of you in their wallet for ten or twenty+ years before ever knowing you were gay, in a friendship between two adults.
Acquaintances, maybe. But friends? How would that even work? Not very well!
Staying friends with a homophobe would likely cause stress in our friendship to the point of mutual distancing. It has taken me (still in progress) years to tear down walls about myself that I had put up because I was gay. I don't even know how I was able to communicate with people while I was in the closet, but it wasn't me. So I'm not keen on going back to that.
I've stayed friends with three people and turned them around on it, so yep!
People can change
I make my bed with the stars above my head and dream of a place called home.
That is a good point about changing people's perception...and it brings me to the part I left out earlier but since a few people have brought it up ......
Thing is...I really like men. Not just for sex and romance....I like the company of men. I like who they are. I like to hang around them. I like gay men and straight men...from uber masculine men and uber feminine men and everything in between. I really enjoy and naturally gravitate toward blue collar types of men for friendship and conversation....and I never hide my sexuality but it is a non issue for me and so it is a non issue for them...100 out of 100 times. I can say that these kinds of men actually appreciate having the opportunity to make it a non issue as well...if you give them a chance...and I do.
Yes...I would. As long as they don't denigrate me or make nasty comments about my lifestyle. I mean...there are people who have their reasons to be against homosexuality...be it religious or otherwise...that doesn't make them by definition...homophobic. As long as there is an agreement to disagree (spoken or unspoken) I'm ok. It would be the same as saying someone who has a difference on immigration or isn't a Catholic as I am could not be friends with me. Furthermore, the best discoveries come out of disagreements (in terms of science, math and so on).
I like this topic a lot
A lot of sensible, yet sometimes opposite views by different posters...
My main point is still this: "would people who are against homosexuality want to be friends with YOU?"
My guess would be: "No, unless they didn't know you were gay". If they did, then they'd know that they were (had always been) friends with "a homo" (lol), and therefore "being against homosexuality" is euhm... ridiculous.
Therefor, the point is "mooh", it's like a cow's opinon, it's "mooh"*
* dixit Joey TRIBBIANI
Do you really think that's fair? I don't.
Someone's being "against homosexuality" is, more often than not, just one symptom of a much larger disease/problem, and few people have the time, energy, and/or expertise to 'cure' them.
I'm sure most people have plenty enough problems of their own, and things to get done, these days, without taking on such projects.
Nope ... I don't waste my time being 'friends' with ignorant bigoted cunts.
Also, being anti-gay is usually a symptom of some sort of religious disease.
How is it that you find yourself meeting not only a lot of atheists, but also atheists who are anti-gay?
I'm curious because the few atheists I've known are smart enough, and polite enough, to avoid the usual conflicts and/or hurt feelings.
Where are you meeting them, and how does this information present itself?
What this thread, and those who are keen to cut out the haters, fails to take into account is that it is possible to be uncomfortable with an idea and NOT be of the pitchfork-bearing-angry-mob-baying-for-blood mentality. I do think it's possible to be friends, good friends, with someone and not be in 100% synchronicity with him, even on terrifically important matters. Is that not the very definition of the tolerance we all claim to want? Or is it for yes-men only?
I won't hang out with someone who is hell-bent on persecuting me; that's a no brainer. But that's either the black or the white of the issue, and there are numerous greys in between which too many of us view as deal-breakers.
Is your definition of 'friends with' all about just tolerating people?
I think this would have been a completely different thread had the title been 'Can You Tolerate Someone Who Is Against Homosexuality?'
Anyway, it most certainly is not fair of you to ask anyone to take on the task of educating or converting someone who is 'against homosexuality'. Where do you get off with that? Who do you think you are?
And, I think words like 'pitchfork' and 'angry mob' have nothing to do with simply choosing not to invite someone into our lives.
Lighten up on the drama a bit, please.
^^^ Those living in a glass house best not throw stones
What a fascinating thread for me to come back into from an extended hiatus!
seriooooooooooooooooooous question methinks
is human race out da padded cell?
any world leadurs fig bullshit raise ya foot
centar a butt a centar-cocktail shakar a weedy_