P.S. Cerise, you are safe…my first name is John, not Jesus!

I’m so glad you responded. I fretted for several days… and then kind of forgot about it, not wanting to make it… “A Thing.” I just wanted to write my ideas out for my own benefit as much as to make a point.

I’m in a period where I seem to be learning as much from people who don’t share my exact worldview as those who do.

Thanks.

I’ll craft a response, not that there’s really any needed, when I have time. Much love.

First of all, I’m sorry that my lightheartedness did not at all come through in any of my posts. Since I have a thread of anger (at what? you ask. I know not) running though almost everything I say, it’s perceivable in my humor as well, and pretty much drowns the funny out in print, I fear. By no means do I think anybody should have to watch anybody, regardless of race, creed, sexual pref., whatever, give each other outsidey tongues. Right you are, June. I don’t like it, nobody likes it unless they rented it and it’s in their DVD player. And sometimes not even then. I didn’t mean it when I told JC that he had to learn to watch guys tonguing each other until he didn’t flinch any more. I don’t even use the word ‘tolerance’ normally because, as Chad said, it’s a woefully inadequate and darned near inaccurate word. I didn’t mean to imply that you weren’t tolerant, JC my brother (does that stand for Jesus Christ, by the way? If it does I’m in huge trouble. Please don’t smite me). Also, I shouldn’t have compared exposure to gay physical affection to something kind of, well, bad, like violent movies. I didn’t mean to imply a judgment value there.

Here’s what I meant: I mean exposure in the sense of getting used to (not numb to) something unfamiliar. Like if you immersed yourself in another culture - for a while you’d be twitchy and freaked out, not knowing where to look, what to say, what hand motions mean “A-OK” and which mean “Tu Madre”, got me? Then with exposure you’d learn what to say, what not to say, get used to seeing people doing things a different way, etc. You’d get comfortable. To me (and I realize without judgment that not all people here think this way) the LGBT (lesbian gay bisexual transgender) community is another cultural entity, or group (with many subgroups therein, obviously) that us non-gay folks still need time to get used to. Most of them were very, very underground before. Now they are not, and it hasn’t been that long since they all came out. I’m convinced that with more exposure (somebody give me a different word) it’ll get easier and easier to address issues and differences between our groups. Non-gays won’t have to mentally give the sign to ward off evil when they see two men holding hands. I realize that many people think all of gay-dom with its many variations is wrong, aberrant, corrupt, self-indulgent and evil. For some people this will never change and I’m…as OK with those folks as a liberal, pissed-off, holier-than-thou Gen-Exer can possibly be. Which I realize isn’t very. I’m trying. Call me when I’m 40 – they say you mellow.

Chad, I felt you, man. You are a good, good person with a hell of a lot of love to go around. I was as great for Ramon and I to meet and watch you and Erica interact (and sing! Shoo…Walkin’ in Memphis will NEVER be the same for me. In a good way) as it was for you. You also make me laugh out loud, pretty regularly.

I agree with you that tolerance is a shit word for this sort of sorting-out. I agree that many gay persons wish for whole-hearted endorsement of their way of life - perhaps they want all non-homosexuals to end up like Gene Hackman’s character in “The Birdcage” - dressed in drag, kind of loving it, and even complaining that he’s not getting the same amount of attention as that bitch on stage with half his looks. That guy (wasn’t he a Senator in the movie?) ended up ENDORSING the gay (specifically the cross-dressing gay) community. He’ll show up to the Repulican National Committee in a three-piece topped by a pink boa (I exaggerate, I know, but you know what I mean?). That’s endorsement, to my mind, and some gay people want that. Oh, yeah. And I do. I wholeheartedly endorse, support, applaud the gay community at large.

However. In spite of many “we’re here, we’re queer, put on your damned boa” members of the LGBT community, I don’t think most gay people or indeed the community as a whole (if there is such a thing) want endorsement. I think they simply want to be able to live out their lives and romances free as non-gays of legal restriction or interference. For this reason they’re in the world’s face, rallying for change because in their mind they have a lot of fighting to do before they’re treated with equality by the government and by planetary society. And I agree with them. I believe that most of them just want acceptance and equal treatment. I really do.

Unlike you, I don’t have equations or questions about our origins or Natural Order. I don’t care. I don’t mean to imply that it’s wrong to question, brother, I’m saying that I’m not one of The Thinkers like I consider you. I’m more concerned with how things are than how they came to be. Having tasted some freedom, the gay community’s out of the closet. We won’t get rid of them, we won’t convert them, I don’t think Jesus wants to change them. They’re not going away. In my opinion that’s how things are now. I know that in time a compromise WILL be reached, but the birthing process in the meantime makes me grieve. I hurt for hetero parents thinking that their kids need protection from The Gay, I hurt for pastors wondering what the hell they’re supposed to say to their congregations, and I hurt most of all for young people who are being chewed up by this unavoidable cultural and moral meat-grinder. History happens, you know? History chews us all up and spits us out, but it still makes me sad.

Yes, Christianity is becoming increasingly unacceptable, and in a small way that makes me sad, too. But why are Christians surprised? Did they ever think Christianity was going to be universally accepted? For the religion’s sake I hope not.

Anyway, this is terribly long and I’m sorry for that. I hope I haven’t made people who disagree with me feel cheapened, alienated or not-listened-to. I read all of your words many times over. And let’s just say it. I’m saying in 3,000 words or more what Aly already said so succinctly already. Story of my life.

…and if we have any not-hetero readers out there, I hope to god I haven’t been a pain in your ass. I didn’t mean to be a dickhead about the boas or anything - if I’d spoken with perfect P.C.-ness this entry would be a lot longer, and no one wants that.

Cerise

If anything, if I had lived in a different time and place, I would be warning against the over legislation of morality, but going the other direction from the tone of my previous post.

In theory and in practice, I find myself on the “endorsement” side of the question, though I have very strong feelings about not forcing people of faith to an endorsement-cloaked-as-”tolerance.” (I’m talking here about the larger same-sex milieu, not the guys touching tongues issue. ANYBODY touching Gene Simmons-like tongues in my eye line is apt to gain a cringe for their efforts. Ew.) The whole “You’re a prejudiced ass because you don’t want to celebrate bears and leather” line of thinking is ridiculous, just as is the “You’re destroying America because you and your partner of 18 years want to have a kid” argument. There are aspects of Gay culture that I just don’t get — promiscuous sex, bondage couture, recreational meth — but in my experience, these minority activities get a lot of air time while most everyone else in the community just wants to find a good partner and settle down to life. (Pretty much like the rest of us.) It seems to me that sometimes the Gay community asks the non-Gay community to endorse these fringe aspects as a measure of “tolerance,” and I think that’s crazy. And counter-productive.

Might I add that I am new to this site and really appreciate all of the opinions expressed here. As I try to remind my wonderful wife on occasion, I “argue/debate” sometimes not because I believe I am right, but it is my way to begin a process to get to the truth/answer/compromise. In order for that to happen, there has to be at least a two-way conversation. I appreciate your view Cerise and like Chad, think this area of tolerance vs. endorsement (on a lot of different topics)is really important.

I’ve thought hard about what I wanted to say here, and whether or not it’s even worth saying. However, since this is the place where ideas are supposed to be thrown around to see what might stick, here goes nuttin’.

Before I even start, allow me to tell you how glad I am that you’re a roadie. You make me think, and laugh. Out loud. The short amount of time we spent in your physical presence was delightful, and watching you and Ramon interact was a joy. Couples who seem to really respect one another always set my heart at peace. As always, I ask that you might lovingly point out and forgive my straw men if they’re there, hear my heart, and above all, know that I consider every human being to be a fellow pilgrim, in search of truth and peace. I think we’re really, truly, in this thing together.

With that said…

It’s my firm belief that the Gay community, and people such as yourself who seem to have a calling to provoke thought and change in regards to the overall perception and acceptance of homosexuality as a cultural norm, seem to have chosen the wrong word for their battle cry.

Tolerance, according to Webster’s, has four definitions, only two of which (2 and 3) are applicable in this situation.

2 a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one’s own b : the act of allowing something : TOLERATION
3 : the allowable deviation from a standard; especially : the range of variation permitted in maintaining a specified dimension in machining a piece.

Now, as far as I can tell, and as far as my mind can recall, I believe I have given tolerance to homosexuals, both in the sense of the large, amorphous “Gay Community,” and also regarding the regretfully few gay friends that I have had over the years. I tolerate gay people. I tolerate gay people because my conscience compels me to do so. I tolerate gay people because I believe Christ modeled for us a life of love that is not based on whether a person is “in” or “out” of whatever is the accepted group of the day. I believe that homosexuality is an allowable deviation from the standard, and that societies that have, both in the past an in the present, persecuted and outlawed homosexuality are guilty of institutional and chronic sin. I, personally, have berated and admonished Christians and cultural conservatives who use hate-filled, simplistic, ignorant language. I would personally sign and promote some sort of formal apology from the Christian community to the Gay community for our shameful history towards them.

What is frustrating to me, personally, is that I think what the gay community (and people such as yourself) really wants is Endorsement, which I feel is an entirely different animal. Refraining from verbal or physical harassment of gay and lesbian people showing affection for one another is tolerance. Celebrating it is endorsement. Teaching my children to love, accept, and respect people who choose alternative lifestyles is tolerance. A state-funded teacher teaching a curriculum that says homosexuality is the same as heterosexuality is endorsement.

Endorsement means I have to surrender the third definition of the word Tolerance, which is the idea that there is a standard at all. Endorsement means I have to surrender my conscience, and my intellect. It’s the conclusion of my conscience, based on my 30 years of life experience, that a homosexual lifestyle is a deviation from the standard. The standard can come from Father God, or mother earth, or like me… a little of both, depending on your beliefs about how we all got here, or Whom got this ball rolling. I just can’t seem to get any other solution to the equation.

I believe that, both in the present and in the future, tolerance from people such as myself, who have chosen a lifestyle which can be largely defined as “standard,” (wife, kids, mortgage, dog… all the trimmings) will not be acceptable for people who wish to engage in alternative lifestyles. It’s my belief that endorsement will be demanded, and almost certainly not returned.

Christianity is becoming increasingly intolerated, and sadly, sometimes for good reason. I wish I understood why Jesus left his precious gift to such a bunch of douchebags. I am convinced that many of them who claim His name understand nothing about Him. They face their own judgment. The reason I lead with love, or try my best to do so, is out of respect and fear for this passage of Scripture. I pray only that if I show grace, grace will be shown to me.

At the same time, I bristle with the idea that I feel like I’m being asked for one thing in word, but another in context. I would like to believe that we can live in a world where tolerance is the actual goal, but that will mean that at some point in time, a compromise will have to be reached. Thank God we have such brilliant politicians to broker this deal for us all, huh?

Thanks for listening. I look forward to listening myself.

Chad

P.S. At some point in the near future, I have a “Cranked to Eleven” style rant brewing about the contents of that music video that I linked to. I think I’ll save it for when we all need a cathartic “F*** YOU!!!” directed at someone else when this discussion has run it’s course.

:)

Cerise

P.S. JC, that picture stays up until you learn to look at guys tonguing (tongueing?) each other without flinching. Tolerance is key. It’s a brave new world.[/quote]

I flinch at a lot of things I see which is not to say I’m not tolerant. I actually don’t think that overexposing someone to the point of achieving the non-flinch state suggests that a person is tolerant…perhaps they are are just numb to it. I don’t think that is a preferable state.

Schtoop is a new word for me. I think I may incorporate it into my vocab with whatever kind of meaning I feel led to attach to it. But, I’ll never forget reading/hearing it here first.

And Cerise, call me a schtoop, but I just can’t handle seeing any person (male or female) tongue schtoop another person (male or female)any time and if I have to be exposedexposedexposed to such schtoop I will surely scream “SCHTOOP IT!”

I’m almost certain that if you (you meaning anyone) were exposed more often to it it would be less difficult to watch. Just like if I could stop being such a weenie and watch more violence/tragedy/horror in movies I would eventually become less sensitized to it.

I swear I think this is true. Even hippie-granola-you’re-OK-I’m-a-bitch-but-still-OK Cerise had trouble watching the lesbian scene in “The Rose” or “Prey for Rock and Roll”. I also had to get used to watching my gay friends say hello and goodbye to their loves by getting it on a little. Do I think physical affection between persons of the same gender is wrong or unnatural or gross? (say it with me) NOOOOO. Did it still freak me out the first few times I saw it? Oh, yeah. I’m OK now though. Coupla Seattle Pride parades’ll fix you right up. (Conversely, I can’t look down on people who can’t look, truly, because I choose to believe that it’s their lack of - you guessed it - exposure that makes them uncomfortable.)

Exposure exposure exposure.

Cerise

P.S. Sorry for hijacking a lighthearted thread.

And Chad, technically they are not french kissing, it’s just a tongue-touch. If Kirk Hammett wasn’t gay, I wouldn’t even think twice about it. But now I’ve thought twice about it and have to go throw up.

I’ve come up with my own list, “Bands who wear Black” and “Bands who don’t”. As long as I don’t have to compare quality or songwriting or artistic ability.

Nah. Imogen Heap.

listen

I realize that saying this will damage my cred with you, but it has to be said. Seeing men french kissing will never be ok for most straight men. We just can’t deal with it. It literally produces feelings of queasyness in my stomach. Forgive me for using the “other side’s” argument (whatever that means,) but it’s seriously not something I chose. It just… is.

I am actually struggling to come up with an analogy… like… it’s kind of the way I feel about the depiction of knives or stabbing on screen, or the simulated breaking of a bone. It produces a physical, bodily, sub-concious reaction in my gut.

I realize this is terribly unfair…. sorry… seriously. In the sake of fairness, please note that I said most, not all, straight men. There are many more enlightened than me.

Perhaps its the whisker on whisker thing. I think that’s what does it.

For those of you that haven’t read this blog, it’s well worth the time. They just posted an article called “Reader Mail:Safe Band/Gay Band“, it’s so funny, I almost peed my pants. The sad part is that it was inspired by…

I may never be that tolerant. The Metallica picture was even worse. But that’s just me.

I guess I have to toss a lot of my music collection on the bonfire now.

Cerise

P.S. JC, that picture stays up until you learn to look at guys tonguing (tongueing?) each other without flinching. Tolerance is key. It’s a brave new world.

wait- what?

[quote comment="45562"] he’s a pretty super gay, or at least his wife of 25 years and five kids think so.[/quote]

I laughed.[/quote]

Aww. Maybe you just need to Go West, Young Man.

Chad, I hope to hear “How many beautiful women does John Mayer have to schtoop before he’s off the gay list?” in a future Dailies tune.

[quote comment="45562"] he’s a pretty super gay, or at least his wife of 25 years and five kids think so.[/quote]

I laughed.

And as much as I’m cool with making fun of Michael W. Smith’s music and voice, from everything I’ve heard about him, he’s a pretty super guy, or at least his wife of 25 years and five kids think so.

How many beautiful women does John Mayer have to schtoop before he’s off the gay list?

Also, I accept JCs nomination, and am pleased to announce that The Dailies has chosen the late Judy Garland as our running mate.

I would also like to note that I’m only a little gay, and it’s fledgling, like a young fawn. Be tender. I’ve chosen the snappily dressed part of gayness, not so much with the man-on-man sex part.

Oh man, are you wrong.

2. Why is The Gay List about 250% longer than The Safe List?

3. In which parallel universe can Oscar Wilde be considered a “reformed homosexual”?

4. Michael W. Smith? Wrong list.