Pageant contestant disqualified over strange circumstances. - Page 7

AstroFool · 2012-03-29, 07:24 PM

I'm an oldschool Planetside player and I just found these forums. I am very excited about Planetside 2. I saw some interesting discussions with some intelligent posting and decided to sign up. I am also bi-sexual AND European (judging by the latest republican party elections, I'm not sure anymore which is worse), so I thought I'd chip in.

Sexuality is 100% genetic (bold to start off with, right?). Engaging in homosexual acts is a choice, but it's a choice that's completely natural if you're born gay. The only reason why so many feel held back about it is because they know they'll be negatively judged by some. All you need to think of is the last time you were in love with a girl (or guy, if you're a girl). To homosexuals it feels the same, except with the same sex. To deny people the right to act on these emotions would be intensely cruel.

Conservatives often claim they're fine with it, just so long as "they do it behind closed doors". What they mean is that they're actually not fine with it, but that it's easier to ignore when they don't see it. I find this hypocritical because most of the time they're completely fine with heterosexuals showing affection in public as well. You can't claim you're fine with people being gay and then condemn every act that actually defines them as such. It's like saying you don't like salads, but then don't want anyone else to eat them either (even though salads are entirely harmless). When you confront them with it, they often refer to gay pride parades, as if that somehow sums up all that homosexuals are and do. I keep having to explain that gays are naturally more extravagant due to the slight differences in brain structure and hormone levels, and that they're just acting out because they've felt discriminated for so long, but it doesn't seem to matter. Some people just don't want to understand.

There are also still plenty of fears going around, such as that it's somehow infectious. If we tolerate gays, it'll become a trend and we'll soon have men kissing each other and annoying old people with it all over the place. This is of course extreme nonsense. There's also still the fear that somehow HIV is a "gay thing", just because it was first discovered in a homosexual man in the early 80's. Of course it's already been shown over and over that this is not the case, but the fear still remains. Another fear is that of rampant liberalism in general. Tolerance of homosexuality is often guilty by association it seems. It's symptomatic of a divided culture. It's part of the ideology of that 'other group', which is the group we're supposed to hate, so therefor it must be wrong.

These fears are irrational, so they cannot be fought with rational arguments. You cannot 'enlighten' a devout conservative about these issues. The only way to make it happen seems by force, but always with a smile. In the end they will grow used to it.

TheBladeRoden · 2012-03-31, 01:05 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

Jesus instructs us to owe no man anything but to love him.

But.. loving men is gay!

But back on topic, I think all cosmetic surgery should be banned from beauty pageants anyway. Tired of everyone parading out with the same damn implants.

Traak · 2012-03-31, 01:17 AM

Originally Posted by Quovatis

hate

Name-calling and hate, Quovatis?

I don't know your friends. The gays I know have all said it was a choice. You can't just wave a hate wand and make that go away. Do you want to track them down and kill them because they don't toe the party line?

AstroFool · 2012-03-31, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by Traak

Name-calling and hate, Quovatis?

I don't know your friends. The gays I know have all said it was a choice. You can't just wave a hate wand and make that go away. Do you want to track them down and kill them because they don't toe the party line?

By "it", did they mean engaging in sexual acts, or the feeling of attraction towards the same sex? Cause if that feeling is absent, then the choice would have to be a rational one, which I find pretty hard to believe.

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-03-31, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by AstroFool

I'm an oldschool Planetside player and I just found these forums. I am very excited about Planetside 2. I saw some interesting discussions with some intelligent posting and decided to sign up. I am also bi-sexual AND European (judging by the latest republican party elections, I'm not sure anymore which is worse), so I thought I'd chip in.

Sexuality is 100% genetic (bold to start off with, right?). Engaging in homosexual acts is a choice, but it's a choice that's completely natural if you're born gay. The only reason why so many feel held back about it is because they know they'll be negatively judged by some. All you need to think of is the last time you were in love with a girl (or guy, if you're a girl). To homosexuals it feels the same, except with the same sex. To deny people the right to act on these emotions would be intensely cruel.

Conservatives often claim they're fine with it, just so long as "they do it behind closed doors". What they mean is that they're actually not fine with it, but that it's easier to ignore when they don't see it. I find this hypocritical because most of the time they're completely fine with heterosexuals showing affection in public as well. You can't claim you're fine with people being gay and then condemn every act that actually defines them as such. It's like saying you don't like salads, but then don't want anyone else to eat them either (even though salads are entirely harmless). When you confront them with it, they often refer to gay pride parades, as if that somehow sums up all that homosexuals are and do. I keep having to explain that gays are naturally more extravagant due to the slight differences in brain structure and hormone levels, and that they're just acting out because they've felt discriminated for so long, but it doesn't seem to matter. Some people just don't want to understand.

There are also still plenty of fears going around, such as that it's somehow infectious. If we tolerate gays, it'll become a trend and we'll soon have men kissing each other and annoying old people with it all over the place. This is of course extreme nonsense. There's also still the fear that somehow HIV is a "gay thing", just because it was first discovered in a homosexual man in the early 80's. Of course it's already been shown over and over that this is not the case, but the fear still remains. Another fear is that of rampant liberalism in general. Tolerance of homosexuality is often guilty by association it seems. It's symptomatic of a divided culture. It's part of the ideology of that 'other group', which is the group we're supposed to hate, so therefor it must be wrong.

These fears are irrational, so they cannot be fought with rational arguments. You cannot 'enlighten' a devout conservative about these issues. The only way to make it happen seems by force, but always with a smile. In the end they will grow used to it.

Hey Astro!

First off, welcome ;0)

Secondly, I'm a voting conservative in America...and I'm all for gay marriage.

Shocked?

It's simple really. I sat down and thought about it, because I'm not a gay man. What if the roles were reversed? What if being straight were somehow seen as "immoral" or "bad"....wouldn't I feel exactly the way gay people feel right now?

So I think applying a little empathy to this situation is ultimately what will make it stop being such an issue.

But I want you to digest the fact that not all so called "religious right wingers" are against gay rights.

Christ said in the bible to love all men and treat them all as you would your brother. Not all Christians follow this, sadly...and they are mistaken. Also, in the bible...it doesn't say anywhere IMPLICITLY that being gay is wrong.

In my world....my God is a loving God....and all men were created in his image (Not the body..the soul) so does that exlude gays? Nah, not in my world. God loves us all, gay, straight, he even loves Figment...for some unknown reason. hehehe

Also, I think your statement of:

"The only way to make it happen seems by force, but always with a smile."

That's alarming to me in many ways. Before I elaborate as to why, I would ask you to elaborate as to the meaning of this statement. Expand your thought for me so I can see if you're saying what I think you're saying.

Thanks bud!

Vash02 · 2012-03-31, 07:40 PM

Well, making it a crime worthy of the death penalty pretty much infers that its wrong.

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-03-31, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Vash02

Well, making it a crime worthy of the death penalty pretty much infers that its wrong.

What?

Where is it worthy of the death penalty?

AstroFool · 2012-03-31, 09:35 PM

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

That's alarming to me in many ways. Before I elaborate as to why, I would ask you to elaborate as to the meaning of this statement. Expand your thought for me so I can see if you're saying what I think you're saying.

Thanks bud!

I guess I should have elaborated on that. I don't mean "force" as in violent force. What I mean is being confrontational without violence, because apparently rational argumentation doesn't work. We figured out by now that 'free will' is at best a limited dimension, and we figured out that sexual urges are almost, if not entirely genetically determined, and so as long as nobody suffers as a result, it should be easy to conclude that there's nothing immoral about it. Hence if you are able to accept reason as at least a guideline to moral principles, I think you cannot be able to 'hate' people for their sexuality. Yet some do, so there must be another way to make it so that they at least don't discriminate politically.

I have to admit that I don't have any concrete examples of how to go about this, but think of the following situation: If 99% of the population of a country was opposed to for example gay marriage, and politicians decided that it was going to be allowed anyway, it wouldn't be democratic at all, yet it would, at least by my own definitions, be the right way to go. I think you could call that an act of force.

Vash02 · 2012-04-01, 05:09 AM

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

What?

Where is it worthy of the death penalty?

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.[1](Leviticus 18:22 KJV)
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.[2](Leviticus 20:13 KJV)

Yeah, theres plenty of fucked up shit in the bible.

oh and before you say "thats old testament", here's Jesus saying the old laws still go.

Matthew
17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.

18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-04-01, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by Vash02

Yeah, theres plenty of fucked up shit in the bible.

oh and before you say "thats old testament", here's Jesus saying the old laws still go.

Meh. It's the bible though Vash. There are human fingerprints all over it.

The bible is a contradiction in and of itself....

There is murder, infanticide, rape, sodomy, theft......incest....the list goes on and on.

I said this on IRC, I am a person that believes in God...but not in religion. I see the bible as a flawed book...and I don't follow its doctrines.

Nothing wrong with gay folks, move along.

GraniteRok · 2012-04-03, 12:18 AM

So, Miss Universe Canada has turned tail and are now allowing this transgender person to run in the pageant. So much for the rule of a "natural born" woman. Looks like it'll become a show of who best has a mindset of a woman with the best paid for surgical looks. And don't think that it isn't only going to be just in Canada. It'll spread like wildfire.

Warborn · 2012-04-03, 01:10 AM

So you think up until this point all beauty pageant contestants have been entirely natural with no surgeries or implants or cosmetic alterations at all? I think you're also scaring yourself over nothing if you think this would affect American beauty pageants. The fact that it Canada did it first would probably be enough to sink it immediately with the way socially regressive conservatism is going in the US.

Hamma · 2012-04-03, 08:45 AM

Sorry Warborn but in this thread you are just simply flat out wrong. You can't change your gender no matter how hard you try. People who are not natural born females should not be able to participate in female pageants.

Rules are rules.

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-04-03, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by Warborn

So you think up until this point all beauty pageant contestants have been entirely natural with no surgeries or implants or cosmetic alterations at all? I think you're also scaring yourself over nothing if you think this would affect American beauty pageants. The fact that it Canada did it first would probably be enough to sink it immediately with the way socially regressive conservatism is going in the US.

Meh, I was in agreement with you for once Warborn until you started bashing America again....

I think that if this woman is disqualified, then women who get breast implants should be disqualified. Same with make-up....and hair-do's. Anything that modifies your NATURAL state of being...should be disqualified.

The point is, even though she used to be a man...something compelled her to become a woman...to take that giant social taboo and tackle it is very brave in my opinion.

I have nothing but respect for this woman for trying to do this...to be who she was born to be...and I think it's a shame that she got disqualified over it.

But that's where it ends for me Warborn. As shitty as it is that she got dq'ed....it's a private pageant. If it were a federally funded pageant...I'd be all over them like stink on shit.

Warborn · 2012-04-03, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by Hamma

Sorry Warborn but in this thread you are just simply flat out wrong. You can't change your gender no matter how hard you try. People who are not natural born females should not be able to participate in female pageants.

Rules are rules.

Rules are rules isn't a good reason though. What if someone had a rule saying gay people couldn't get married? Or black people couldn't sit at the front of a bus? Civil disobedience against unjust laws is what advances societies.

In this case, obviously we're not talking about a law or a situation near as significant as Rosa Parks and her bus ride, but still it's in the same vein. The contest is about being the best looking female. If a guy who took hormone therapy and stuff and had his genitals butchered up a few years prior can pull off the "best looking female" trick enough to get into this Miss Universe Canada business, then I think the results speak for themselves. There's no need to make arbitrary rules keeping someone from participating when, clearly, someone not biologically female can still look good enough as a female to compete.

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

Meh, I was in agreement with you for once Warborn until you started bashing America again....

I am not bashing America. I am stating facts. Americans seeing a change in rules and being told "hey, Canada is doing it this way now, should we do it?" would have predictable results.

I think that if this woman is disqualified, then women who get breast implants should be disqualified. Same with make-up....and hair-do's. Anything that modifies your NATURAL state of being...should be disqualified.

So you want women to get out of bed and shamble out onto stage with no make-up or hair-do's or anything? I actually kind of laughed writing this. That would be a funny pageant, seeing a bunch of grumpy, unkempt women on stage looking all bedraggled and so on.