|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 5:54 pm Post subject: ... |
 |
|
For the record, all I've asked is for Gopher to include his comments on feminism.
I ask that because they follow nicely with his Santorum-esque characterization here of the "homosexual agenda".
Now, tell us about the women getting pregnant just to have an abortion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher, how come when it's the PC police criticizing the Lion King and the Roadrunner for sexism and violence that's foolish. When it's right wing homophobes, cultural elites if you will, its perfectly acceptable. Is that what you're saying? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Grimalkin wrote: |
Adventure wrote
| Quote: |
| Why was that book written for children? Who put it in the library? Obviously, it is to condition children in a certain way. |
I am quite sure that the book is intended to arm children in some way against the idiotic belief that homosexuals choose a lifestyle that is a deliberate and sinful rejection of God's plan. When they are introduced to such a hateful idea later on they may perhaps remember the true story of the two male penguins that loved each other and realise that homosexuality occurs in animals as well and not just sinful humans. As for your idea that one of the penguins has chosen the other to be his 'biatch' as male prisoners do in the absense of the opposite sex, male homosexuality amongst penguins is well documented in the presence of other (and I'm sure extremely attractive in their own right) female penguins as well. |
I agree with moldy on this one. There was no female around, so you are making an assumption about those penguins. Anyway, wolves eat certain things we don't eat. Cows don't eat cows like we do. Saying we should engage in something because animals do is not an argument I would render, though I understand it. If someone can prove that it is simply part of the human DNA and they produce the scientific data for that with plenty of peer studies, then you can argue that it is part of our species. Yes, I know some apes engage in that behaviour. I have heard it happens around chimpanzees.
I have heard of homosexuality practiced among penguins. In this case, however, there was no female present. You can practice homosexuality while preferring women. The book by not presenting penguins who practice homosexuality in the presence of other females is trying hoist a certain agenda and putting it in a children's book to have them see male on male love is normal among humans, because it is normal among penguins. It is, perhaps, to create an anthropomorphic effect in the minds' of the children, so they can translate it to human beings. That is pretty clear. As far as my opinion, it is one thing to put something like that in a middle school or high school library. They are not yet mature enough, when they are five, to discuss sexuality.
Of course, opposition to homosexuals came historically from the Abrahamic faiths and traditional Buddhist society. I don't know what
Hindus think of that subject, but I think they are liberal on the subject. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grimalkin
Joined: 22 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| There was no female around, so you are making an assumption about those penguins. |
Way to twist things Adventurer 
There are no female penguins around so you are the one assuming that the situation would be different if there were.......not me!!!
| Quote: |
| Saying we should engage in something because animals do is not an argument I would render, though I understand it. |
WHAT???
You think I'm saying we should engage in homosexuality because animals do???
I'm saying nothing of the sort.
I'm saying that because other animals exhibit homosexual tendencies it makes it difficult to ascribe homosexuality in humans to a sinful choice to
reject God's plan.
Make some effort to understand an argument before you try to counter it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grimalkin
Joined: 22 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Ananova:
Zoo tempts gay penguins to go straight
A German zoo has imported four female penguins from Sweden in an effort to tempt its gay penguins to go straight.
The four Swedish females were dispatched to the Bremerhaven Zoo in Bremen after it was found that three of the zoo's five penguin pairs were homosexual.
Keepers at the zoo ordered DNA tests to be carried out on the penguins after they had been mating for years without producing any chicks.
It was only then they realised that six of the birds were living in homosexual partnerships.
Director Heike Kueck said that the zoo hoped to see some baby penguins in the coming months.
She said that the birds had been mating for years and one couple even adopted a stone that they protected like an egg.
Kueck said that the project has the support of the European Endangered Species Programme because the penguins, which are native to South America, are an endangered species.
A biologist will be on hand to monitor the experiment.
But introducing the Bremerhaven penguins to their new Swedish friends may not be as successful as hoped after earlier experiments revealed great difficulties in separating homosexual couples.
In case they show no interest, the zoo has also flown in two new male penguins "so that the ladies don't miss out altogether", Kueck added.
|
From here: http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1275591.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Yes, really.
In any case, I have voiced my objections, which are informed by my own reading of the contemporary theoretical literature on "sexuality." I know what it is and I know where it is heading (or trying to, at least). I have reported this here. As always, you may take it or leave it. I can easily predict which one that will be, by the way. You and the others who refuse to listen to what I am saying (or what Elliston has said, as I cited her above) out of ideological slant, object violently -- or simply ridicule just for the sake of ridiculing, like my friend Nowhere Man. You just know what is so and you can Google any op-ed you want to prove it. That is, unfortunately, the extent of your knowledge on this and other issues. |
Are you talking to me? I haven't said anything here that would warrant that veiw.
| Quote: |
And by the way, regarding Grimalkin's assertion/lecture on "people do not choose their sexuality": I agree. However, and for the last time, the cutting-edge of feminism, women's studies, and sexuality theory does not. They believe this is something than can and should be tweaked. They are indeed aiming to do just that -- that is, recondition the species. So you should be sure you know who you are arguing for or against here. |
I'm not entirely ignorant of these people and thier ideas. I took a feminism course at uni, and also encountered post modern and deconstructionist theories in my English Literature major. I have to admit that it was ten years ago, and I'm rather shady on the details at this stage. But let me make it perfectly plain, I remember dissagreeing with these ideas when I came across them at the time. I think these far left intellectuals are extremely disshonest and dangerous and have a very negative and unhelpful agenda. To me they are freaks and I find them equally as repulsive as the far right extremists. What I'm for is very simple, to live in a world where it's perfectly fine to be gay, straight, bisexual, or asexual. In the ideal world we would not give this sort of thing a second thought. That's all I'm about. I don't support these freaks who want to say that "all heterosexual sex is rape", or that "heterosexuality is unnatural", or any of that crap. I'm not entirely convinced as to how this punguin book fits into all that. I haven't made up my mind yet. But please refrain from assigning positions to me that are not supported by what I've said here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slep
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You can practice homosexuality while preferring women |
like it doesn;t count if you're receiving?
But for serious, i'm convinced more people would be bi if we weren't conditioned our entire lives that strict gender roles exist.
God willing, inshallah, what have you, in 50 years we'll all be fucking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
| Gopher, how come when it's the PC police criticizing the Lion King and the Roadrunner for sexism and violence that's foolish. When it's right wing homophobes, cultural elites if you will, its perfectly acceptable. Is that what you're saying? |
Octavius: I'll exchange views with you on this.
First, do you trust me that I am not a homophobe? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| What I'm for is very simple, to live in a world where it's perfectly fine to be gay, straight, bisexual, or asexual. In the ideal world we would not give this sort of thing a second thought. That's all I'm about. I don't support these freaks who want to say that "all heterosexual sex is rape", or that "heterosexuality is unnatural", or any of that crap. I'm not entirely convinced as to how this p[e]nguin book fits into all that. I haven't made up my mind yet. |
Here, then, we would seem to agree. I think, though, that those parents on the ground who are objecting to this have a pretty good instinctive feel for what is going on with this book, and my only point is that their views, too, ought to be respected, especially as we are discussing their children. People should have a right to veto this kind of indoctrination...
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
canuckistan
Mod Team
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Location: Training future GS competitors.....
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
People should have a right to veto this kind of indoctrination...
|
Right. God forbid we should teach our children tolerance for those who have been born different! Wasn't too long ago in this country you could replace the word "gay" with "black" in the law books.
Better our children grow up with the status quo...you know, the other kind of "indoctrination" in this country where gays are still fair game to be beaten until they're maimed for life or dead. Kinda like the blacks--geez, they're still getting dragged to death behind the odd pickup truck by those nice white folks hey.
Bravo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Qinella
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Location: the crib
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So it's a book about two male penguins raising a baby penguin. What on earth is the big deal? Some people are overanalyzing BIG time.
If it had been about a male and a female penguin, no one would be crying that someone is trying to uphold the heterosexist hegemony in American society, and it would not spark a debate about the defintions, or necessity of definitins at all, of sexuality.
It is simply preposterous to waste intelligence on such an obviously misconstrued issue.
Is it impossible to imagine that the writers of the book saw a story about penguins in the zoo, thought it cute, and wrote a children's book about it? Is it possible to conceive of a homosexual person who does not analyze his or her own sexuality in terms of right and wrong, suversion and submission, any more than a hetero does? Why must the homosexual always been seen as devious, or acting with ulterior motives? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| canuckistan wrote: |
| Right. God forbid...Better our children grow up with the status quo...you know, the other kind of "indoctrination" in this country where gays are still fair game to be beaten until they're maimed for life or dead. Kinda like the blacks--geez, they're still getting dragged to death behind the odd pickup truck by those nice white folks hey. |
That has never been my position, nor is it now, and you know it. Way to introduce hysteria to an already way-too-uptight conversation. I especially like how you brought blacks and lynching into it. What's next? The W. Bush Administration and mass-destruction weapons?
Bravo yourself. These are apples and oranges you have so astutely brought up for emotional effect... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:09 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Way to introduce hysteria to an already way-too-uptight conversation. |
The hysteria was introduced back on page one. Something about a children's book overthrowing heterosexuality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R. S. Refugee
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Location: Shangra La, ROK
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh my God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wish I had read this thread before I went to E-Mart the other day.
Some friends of mine have a 2-year-old BOY who loves penguins. He has a toy penguin.
So, I saw a children's book about penguins. It was wrapped in plastic so you couldn't open it to see what's inside. Not that that would have helped much. The 2-year-old is bilingual and the book I bought him is in Korean! I'm not bilingual, so I wouldn't know what it said even if it weren't plastic-wrapped. And, if it showed 2 penguins how would I know if it was 2 male penguins (homosexual agenda time, obviously), 2 female peguins (lesbian agenda time, obviously), or good ole, heterosexual penguins with all the right protrusions and crevaces matching up in a divinely inspired sort of way (if married; Rev. Ted notwithstanding). I mean, it's not as if the sex of a penguin is readily discernible to the naked eye. (And I'm using the word "naked" only in the most non-sexual way possible.)
This could have a terrifying effect on this 2-year-old that I never thought of at the time. What if he grows up to be gay (not that there's anything wrong with that, of course)? Will the parents BLAME ME for buying him that subversive book?
OK. That does it. I will never buy a present for a child again. The potential dangers are just too overwhelming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Like every neocon in America, (except for a couple of them on this board) is saying these days about the invasion and occupation of Iraq, if I had known then, what I know now, I would have never even considered it!!!!!
(That wily Canuckistan "snuck in" racism and lynching, so I just wanted to balance that out a little with a reference to the Rape of Iraq by the political elites of my home country.)   |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| canuckistan wrote: |
| Quote: |
People should have a right to veto this kind of indoctrination...
|
Right. God forbid we should teach our children tolerance for those who have been born different! Wasn't too long ago in this country you could replace the word "gay" with "black" in the law books.
Better our children grow up with the status quo...you know, the other kind of "indoctrination" in this country where gays are still fair game to be beaten until they're maimed for life or dead. Kinda like the blacks--geez, they're still getting dragged to death behind the odd pickup truck by those nice white folks hey.
Bravo. |
I think we`re all in total agreement that equality for people of all sexualities is a positive ideal, even Gopher seems to be in favour of that. It seems what we are not all sure about is the full motivation of this book. You seem to think its a simple case of teaching tolerance for homosexuality. Gopher seems to think its more far reaching, that they are trying to actually demonise or make abnormal the heterosexual lifestyle. I really dont know. It would take some research.
If Gopher is right that this book is published by the same type of people who fill up women`s studies departments at uni`s and favour post modernist deconstructionism, it is indeed possible that they have more of an agenda than plain old tolerance and equality. I dont trust those people. Im for plain old equality, not deconstructing heterosexuality.
This whole idea that sexuality is socially constructed is rubbish. It`s a huge powerful biological instinctive drive to procreate that makes us want to have heterosexual sex. What gets me is that its not enough for these types to push for acceptance of homosexuality ( which I think is important and valid ) they have to put forward the idea that if it werent for social contructions most of us would not be hetero, and that is rubbish. Its like they are trying to impose the same judgemental predjudice on hetero`s that has been placed on them, but two wrongs dont make a right ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
