This upsets me

[sarod]

wowee!

Sounds like its time to go to college! I'd be the gay guys room mate! And then some!

 

[ManLooking]

Okay, this is the part I don't understand. I have no idea how these two sentences go together. Wouldn't an undersexed male be more likely to visit an adult bookstore? This is where I got confused.




A person does not choose what day he is born. A person does not choose his skin color. A person does not choose his sexuality. When a person believes these things, morality is not relevant when considering sexuality.

To consider sexuality a moral issue is to be a homophobe and a hater. There are a lot of them. Plenty of queer people even wrestle with the issue themselves. To be a homophobe and a hater is to de-humanize the gays; it is to refuse to see the human spark that is within. To understand that homosexuality has nothing to do with morality and to understand that homosexuality is not a choice is to recognize and affirm human fucking dignity.

This is not news in the queer community.

Wow, that is an extremely judgmental, stereotyping generalization. You make GW Bush and his people look downright progressive and open!

So in other words, everyone that doesn't agree with you is a "hater"??? that's very simplistic. I hope you don't ever form the majority government, because i could easily predict the ensuing persecution of all "haters" in the name of morality. Goodbye freedom of speech and religion.

 

[ManLooking]

I can see the viewpoint even if I don't understand it. As said, in my case, I can, and did, indeed choose. Mayhaps sexuality is not always as chemically induced as you would make it out to be. I have no doubt in many cases it is, but I refuse to believe sexuality is as intractable as nationality or date of birth.

I can also see that you personally have issue with this subject. I think you're letting your personal issues cloud your view of the topic. The topic is that a boy is being painted as a bad person for choosing to ask for a change of rooms. For asking for something anyone can ask for for any reason. The reason this is news worthy at all is that the gay community has chosen to take affront to it.

I can't speak for the majority of Christians seeing as I am not one myself, but many branches of that faith take exception to homosexuality and always have. Isn't Christianity supposed to be a faith of peace? And what about the Muslim faith? A faith that has existed for centuries? What is their stand on homosexuality?

We pagans are one of the few faiths that doesn't really take a stance on it. I don't speak for the rest of my faith either. I speak for myself and myself alone.

Would this have been different if a black or Latino kid had asked to be moved because his room mate was a southern white kid who's face book page said he had leanings towards the KKK? Would it be different if a Latino kid wasn't comfortable with a black room mate? Are we all supposed to be of the same mold? Has individuality and freedom of choice been suspended? From many reactions here they have been.

Well - i for one was raised in a very open home - my mother is a life member of NOW, my gramma was a dyke before it was cool to be, and then my closest sis who started out straight, became bi, them lesbian. then she discovered she was a man in a woman's body. What was interesting is this - sis and i always talked, and as teens all she talked about was men, even though it was very acceptable in our world to be anything. then she later told me that sex with men hurt, and that was why she was bi. later she dropped men altogether, but told me she couldn't say she was born gay, but that it was just better. now, ten years later, she says she was born that way.

I still love my sis - always have always will, but i have learned that one of the least tolerant groups on the planet are the GLBT people - you can believe anything you want as long as it agrees with them. I found out something interesting in the lesbian circles too - i learned that there were those who felt attracted to women and there were those who hated men. Don't bother telling me this isn't true - my sis has dated both types and the man haters were militant. Don't bother arguing - this is my experience, and I'm sticking to it. When straight people don't agree or believe the same, they are haters... when GLBT hate, they are enlightened.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Wow, that is an extremely judgmental, stereotyping generalization. You make GW Bush and his people look downright progressive and open!

So in other words, everyone that doesn't agree with you is a "hater"??? that's very simplistic. I hope you don't ever form the majority government, because i could easily predict the ensuing persecution of all "haters" in the name of morality. Goodbye freedom of speech and religion.

...i have learned that one of the least tolerant groups on the planet are the GLBT people - you can believe anything you want as long as it agrees with them. I found out something interesting in the lesbian circles too - i learned that there were those who felt attracted to women and there were those who hated men. Don't bother telling me this isn't true - my sis has dated both types and the man haters were militant. Don't bother arguing - this is my experience, and I'm sticking to it. When straight people don't agree or believe the same, they are haters... when GLBT hate, they are enlightened.

ummmm, dude? I think your hipocracy is showing...



P.S. Your mom being in NOW and your granny being a dyke are their creds, not yours.

P.P.S. and yeah, I MUST be one of them "man haters". I'm sure there are a couple of other misogynic asshats around here who will agree with me on that. Oh, and nice homophobia, princess

 

[ImOnIt]

People fuck people off. Of all varieties. For all reasons.

I find it interesting that no one has addressed my question. How is "I don't want a gay roommate" morally defensible when "I don't want a black roommate" is (presumably) not?

There are plenty of dudes and girls i wouldnt want to room with. Some are certainly gay, some are certainly black skinned (to use your example).

It is interesting just how accepting people are. Tolerance is a two way street, and fuckwits are everywhere. Why? You want to stay with people you get along with. If someone leaving home is unable/ doesnt want to handle staying with a dude, FINE. It is entirely his choice.

There are plenty of meatheads who i might not like to room with.

It is interesting just how accepting people are. Tolerance is a two way street.

If im staying with someoen i dont like, i would be pissed off if they dont replace lightbulbs/fuck loudly / other things. Gayness does not a make or break a desirable room-mate for me. Trait != behaviour. That someone has a trait, they can still be an insensitive fuckwad.

PRO TIP: Reference to trait can be an example of insensitive fuckwadness. Here is a dialogue.

Heinrich Aww man you just hate me because X. X, X, X I AM X AND YOU HATE ME FOR IT
Michael What?
Heinrich You bigot you hate me because X id better let people know! GUYS SHUN MICHAEL HE IS A BIGOT
Henrich *Self righteous shit eating grin*

OR

Justin Hey bro, i noticed you were maybe uncomfortable with X
Michael *inner dialogue* Yes a little, what the fuck do i do now?
Michael Out loud: Yeah man i guess *confused face*
Justin All good. Lets continue as we were without this tomfoolery.

Heinrich is someone i may want to bludgeon to death. Sometimes Heinrich would find the toilet paper depleted. Justin, I would share food with and be friends with.

 

[none2_none2]

Well - i for one was raised in a very open home - my mother is a life member of NOW, my gramma was a dyke before it was cool to be, and then my closest sis who started out straight, became bi, them lesbian. then she discovered she was a man in a woman's body. What was interesting is this - sis and i always talked, and as teens all she talked about was men, even though it was very acceptable in our world to be anything. then she later told me that sex with men hurt, and that was why she was bi. later she dropped men altogether, but told me she couldn't say she was born gay, but that it was just better. now, ten years later, she says she was born that way.

I still love my sis - always have always will, but i have learned that one of the least tolerant groups on the planet are the GLBT people - you can believe anything you want as long as it agrees with them. I found out something interesting in the lesbian circles too - i learned that there were those who felt attracted to women and there were those who hated men. Don't bother telling me this isn't true - my sis has dated both types and the man haters were militant. Don't bother arguing - this is my experience, and I'm sticking to it. When straight people don't agree or believe the same, they are haters... when GLBT hate, they are enlightened.

Your post makes little sense...

If someone wants to restrict your rights without any logical reason and without even knowing you personally, you don't consider that hateful?

So you met some lesbians that hate men and someone called them enlightened. How can you jump from that to making a bold generalization that all/most GLBT would think man haters are enlightened or that all/most GLBT's are intolerant?

I've met some wonderful lesbians at MCC, in AIDS volunteer organizations, at pot lucks. I even once was in Provincetown during some Wyomyn's festival where there were HUNDREDS of lesbians. Lesbians were every where I turned. Not once did I ever feel like any of them wished me harm, wanted to restrict my rights to marry, raise kids, or whatever. I'm sure there are exceptions; I just never encountered them. In the particular case of Provincetown, I did meet one hateful person. It was a Chinese tourist who had no idea what was going on. He stated that the women in Provincetown were disgusting and sick. (He probably assumed that I was a straight man and thus would sympathize.) I supposed based on the fact that he stated that I should (base on you logic) assume that most Chinese men hate lesbians. However, I won't jump to that generalization.

Personally, I frequently am at odds with the gay community on politics, because I view things much differently. For instance, I don't need a genetic reason to love another man, have sex with another man, want to marry another man, or whatever. Regardless if one day I'm proven right or wrong, the fact is if someone wants to deny my rights to be with my adult, mentally competent partner without any LOGICAL reason, then yes in deed such a person is a hater and in this case also a sexist. That fact holds whether the person who wants to restrict my rights is male, female, straight, bi, gay, transgendered, asexual, Christian, muslim, atheist, black, white, red, yellow, or pink & purple poky dotted.

If you want our rights restricted, then accept your own intolerance instead of throwing some illusive example of some lesbians who didn't bend over backwards to server you milk and cookies.

 

[ManLooking]

ummmm, dude? I think your hipocracy is showing...



P.S. Your mom being in NOW and your granny being a dyke are their creds, not yours.

P.P.S. and yeah, I MUST be one of them "man haters". I'm sure there are a couple of other misogynic asshats around here who will agree with me on that. Oh, and nice homophobia, princess

Who'se talking about credentials? I am talking about life experience - this was mine. I grew up in a house that was very tolerant long before it was politically correct. I am not talking about anyone else's reality - I am talking about mine - what i personally experienced. I happen to have/had many aquantences and friends who were gay, lesbian, transgendered, etc, I have never had a problem with gay people, but I have seen extreme intolerance from within the GLBT community. For instance, it wasn't enough that I believed they had the right to live their lives anyway without persecution - but I had to believe they were born that way. Sorry - rights? no problem... genetics? still waiting for the proof.

 

[ManLooking]

Your post makes little sense...

If someone wants to restrict your rights without any logical reason and without even knowing you personally, you don't consider that hateful?

So you met some lesbians that hate men and someone called them enlightened. How can you jump from that to making a bold generalization that all/most GLBT would think man haters are enlightened or that all/most GLBT's are intolerant?

I've met some wonderful lesbians at MCC, in AIDS volunteer organizations, at pot lucks. I even once was in Provincetown during some Wyomyn's festival where there were HUNDREDS of lesbians. Lesbians were every where I turned. Not once did I ever feel like any of them wished me harm, wanted to restrict my rights to marry, raise kids, or whatever. I'm sure there are exceptions; I just never encountered them. In the particular case of Provincetown, I did meet one hateful person. It was a Chinese tourist who had no idea what was going on. He stated that the women in Provincetown were disgusting and sick. (He probably assumed that I was a straight man and thus would sympathize.) I supposed based on the fact that he stated that I should (base on you logic) assume that most Chinese men hate lesbians. However, I won't jump to that generalization.

Personally, I frequently am at odds with the gay community on politics, because I view things much differently. For instance, I don't need a genetic reason to love another man, have sex with another man, want to marry another man, or whatever. Regardless if one day I'm proven right or wrong, the fact is if someone wants to deny my rights to be with my adult, mentally competent partner without any LOGICAL reason, then yes in deed such a person is a hater and in this case also a sexist. That fact holds whether the person who wants to restrict my rights is male, female, straight, bi, gay, transgendered, asexual, Christian, muslim, atheist, black, white, red, yellow, or pink & purple poky dotted.

If you want our rights restricted, then accept your own intolerance instead of throwing some illusive example of some lesbians who didn't bend over backwards to server you milk and cookies.

Who ever mentioned restrictig someone's rights? the straight guy is the one seeking his rights... the right to room with someone that he feels comfortable with. how does this restrict the gay boy's rights?

 

[none2_none2]

Who ever mentioned restrictig someone's rights? the straight guy is the one seeking his rights... the right to room with someone that he feels comfortable with. how does this restrict the gay boy's rights?

Sorry, but this thread has strayed so far away from the original topic, that I didn't see the relevance to that initial topic.

I don't think anybody should be forced to live with someone they would be uncomfortable with. However, I do think it is a double standard to say that there are certain ways of classifying people where you cannot have that choice and others where you can. Does this straight boy think his body or personality are so desirable that the gay boy cannot keep his hands to himself? Or does he think that the gay boy will be so out of control that he'll be having sex in the dorm room all the time? I would never want to live with some classifications. For instance, I wouldn't room with someone who was a recreational drug user. However, I wouldn't consider one's sexuality on the same level as that. No one has to do recreational drugs where as most people do have a sexuality other than asexual.

Personally, I put up with crap from some roommates when I was young and in college, and it had nothing to do with their sexuality but more their lack of respect for me.

1) I had a straight roommate that locked me out so he could sleep with his girlfriend. He didn't even have the courtesy to let me know in advance.

2) I had a bisexual roommate who would lock me out every time his young high school teacher was in town and wanted to have sex. I know he was bisexual as several mornings he would come over to my side of the room to look out the window which was right near the head of my bed. I can understand that part. However, he was always buck naked and hard. He also tried to pretend to call out my name in his sleep. Straight guys simply don't behave the way he did.

3) I had an obnoxious roommate who had to have been gay.

The rest of my roommates were fine. I am simply pointing out that I experienced the gamut in my 6 years in college group living. (It was six years because I kind of had to start over from Jr College to a University.) The best guys that I roomed with simply were respectful -- regardless of what they did in their sex lives.

As to "born that way", I am not one of those who pushes for a genetic reason. I do think that our desires are not quite a blank slate from birth where we could end up with any sexuality. I was a loner and thus never experimented in my youth with anybody else -- no boys, no girls, no adults, nota... For whatever reason, I had a longing to be closer to adult men. I do remember being attracted to hairy handsome men from as early as 4.5 years of age. I would have been about 8 or 9 when Robert Conrad caught my fancy from the Wild Wild West TV show. Though I was attracted to adult men, note that even to this day I have never really been turned on by penises. I remember peeing over an outside stair railing with 4 or so other boys when I was about 8, and I don't remember anything sexual about it or staring at their penises.

As I move into puberty, I thought a lot about adult guys sexually. On a blue moon I might think of a girl, but it wasn't as urgent a feeling. Then finally at the age of 21.5 I gave in and tried gay sex. For the next two years I did a lot of gay sex, and not once can I say I enjoyed it at all. I felt really confused and thought maybe I was a closet straight who had issues with male abandonment because my dad was an uber-heterosexual asshole, my grandpa who I lived with died when I was seven, etc... However, one day about 2 or 3 years into my journey down the "gay path", a guy let me fuck him. (Up until then, I was brainwashed to believe that you could only top if you were hung like a horse.) Anyway, it was awesome to put it mildly. While I continued to be versatile for a few more years, being a top seemed to be my nature. Since around 1985 I have been only a top, and I don't seem to feel like I'm missing anything.

My point is, that sex also isn't quite like a toy shop. It wasn't just a matter of do I want to play with a penis or a vagina. It would have made no sense to have fantasies for my own gender just for the hell of it when all the pressure around me (religion, society, etc) was against such thoughts. Rather, there was always a component of longing for a man's love.

I've been happily and monogamously partnered for 7+ years to a wonderful guy. I still don't crave penises. I don't crave cum. I'm not a selfish asshole, I will play with his privates. However, it is because I love HIM -- not his body parts. I enjoy knowing that he gets satisfied. What matters is that something inside me gets mushy when I hear him tell me he loves me or if he just hugs me.

Sure I look at porn, but I have no desire to stray. It isn't because we have sex nightly which keeps me drained. To be honest, sometimes it can be 2 or 3 weeks in between us getting it on. Rather, it is because of all those intangible things that come with loving and being loved. When we cuddle at night, I feel like all is ok with the world outside and more importantly the mental world inside of me. Sappy, but that is what I feel.

 

[dkak001]

I rarely read the local newspaper and today I caught a glimpse of it; more specifically, I caught a glimpse of the syndicated column "Ask Amy." She was taking a response for an earlier letter about a kid going away to college and finding out that his roommate is gay, and wanting out of the assignment, but the college wouldn't immediately let him. Amy basically responded that the kid and the roomie would figure it out, either deal with it, or request to change rooms after the mandatory waiting period.

What upsets me is that the parent was so proud that the other siblings who had lived in a dorm prior to this child had successfully roomed with people of other creeds and cultures and races than themselves, but it seemed to be just fine to discrimate against the gay kid without even getting to know him first.

What if the upset student was a young girl, who was placed with a male in the same dorm room... ...very similar situation, no?

Just food for thought. I can see why one might be upset.

-Dan

 

[Etoile]

What if the upset student was a young girl, who was placed with a male in the same dorm room... ...very similar situation, no?

Just food for thought. I can see why one might be upset.

-Dan

Nope, not a similar situation at all. Not sure how you came up with that.

 

[none2_none2]

Nope, not a similar situation at all. Not sure how you came up with that.

Etoile, I guess I would have to come in somewhere in the middle. Isn't sexism the next wall to tackle? What if that young girl was the first girl to break the barrier of an all male institution? Should she be denied unless there is another girl she could choose room with? Like homophobia, the majority tends to give into sexism as if the alternative is unacceptable. I am sure it would be scary especially if she is just 18 and was warned about boys. However, as long as we tolerate sexism how can we not expect homophobia?

A bit off topic, but I remember some examples of such behavior. I remember on a flight to Europe, that an elderly Indian woman wanted to swap seats saying that in her religion she couldn't sit next to a man. Well I am 6'2" and I seriously doubt she was even 5'. That aisle seat was really comfortable for my umpteen hour flight. Plus, from my experiences with Hindu co-workers, I don't recall any mandated sex segregation. I think she just wanted an aisle seat. I think she wanted to use sexism to her advantage. She didn't give me enough of a reason to merit swaping, so I didn't.

Another example, I remember was years ago when I was camping with a gay friend. Most of his friends were lesbians who were also there camping. He and I really needed to shower as well as a lesbian friend of his. The regular showers were out because it was located in the lower areas of the lake where the water had gotten t bit too high. Well there was a garden hose available to use. Part of me said I just couldn't do that. She was a lesbian and I was a gay man. It had that weird, twilight-zone factor. However, I decided to see all three of us as human beings in need of a bath and not as body parts that might be visible. All three of us did just fine. She didn't freak out and/or scream; I didn't freak out and/or scream; Our mutual friend handled it the same way. I'm not saying that communal bathing (especially between gays and lesbians) is some how therapeutic and should be practiced on a regular basis. I'm just saying that it was one more silly taboo that I had in "MY" head.

 

[A_Kefka]

Nope, not a similar situation at all. Not sure how you came up with that.

There are similiarities. I can only think of two reasons to be against rooming men and women together. One is that you think he might force himself on her just because she is there giving him easy access. The other is for the comfort of both in that they may not want to be seen in states of undress or seen sleeping by someone that has a likelihood of being attracted to them. Both of these issues have the same rate of happening between a man and a woman as they do between 2 men if one is gay (or women if one is a lesbian). So unless you have another good reason to seperate genders that has nothing at all to do with sex then it is similar enough.

 

[none2_none2]

There are similiarities. I can only think of two reasons to be against rooming men and women together. One is that you think he might force himself on her just because she is there giving him easy access. The other is for the comfort of both in that they may not want to be seen in states of undress or seen sleeping by someone that has a likelihood of being attracted to them. Both of these issues have the same rate of happening between a man and a woman as they do between 2 men if one is gay (or women if one is a lesbian). So unless you have another good reason to separate genders that has nothing at all to do with sex then it is similar enough.

I think the uncomfortability with girl/boy or gay guy/boy has its roots in sexism. The idea that a male cannot control his urges. He will go after the object of his attraction. There are some people who have no self control, but I hope that is a small group. This attitude also brings up another issue. if sexual preference means an individual cannot live with the gender of their attraction, then what does that say for group living. We could say that straight men can live together. Any other permutation with a gay guy has problems:

1) gay guy living with str8 guy -- sexual tension
2) gay guy living with bi-guy -- part time sexual tension.
3) gay guy living with gay guy -- get out the chastity belts!
4) gay guy living with str8 gal -- tension for the str8 gal
5) gay guy living with bi gal -- tension part time for the bi gal
6) gay guy living with gay gal -- tension free
-- However for this last scenario, if you tried to expand one room to a house of cohabitation (ie a co-ed gay frat house) tension comes back maybe not in the same room, but for the entire hall.

What is even worse, is think of the bi-guy? In the permutations above if you substitute the gay guy with the bi guy, he cannot even room with a lesbian as there may be some attraction.

Moral of the story is either we buy into this idea that we are out of control and thus have to be segregated. Or we get past it and start showing respect for other people regardless if there could be some attraction.

 

[Etoile]

There is a widely perceived fundamental difference between men and women. No college would ever have co-ed ROOMS. I haven't even heard of co-ed floors, but maybe they exist. I think the real root of it comes from protecting women from men...men are supposed to be driven by their sex drive. So we separate them.

But to say that gay people - male or female - are driven by their sex drive is not part of culture, it's just an assumption. The point is that gays are no MORE driven by their sex drive than straight people.

Hence, it is acceptable to separate the sexes, but to separate gay and straight students implies that gay people are more sex-crazed fiends than straight people. No, I don't see the similarity at all...

 

[Safe_Bet]

There is a widely perceived fundamental difference between men and women. No college would ever have co-ed ROOMS. I haven't even heard of co-ed floors, but maybe they exist. I think the real root of it comes from protecting women from men...men are supposed to be driven by their sex drive. So we separate them.

But to say that gay people - male or female - are driven by their sex drive is not part of culture, it's just an assumption. The point is that gays are no MORE driven by their sex drive than straight people.

Hence, it is acceptable to separate the sexes, but to separate gay and straight students implies that gay people are more sex-crazed fiends than straight people. No, I don't see the similarity at all...

You mean gays and lesbians are EXACTLY THE FREAK'IN SAME AS EVERYBODY ELSE? Nah. How can we be the evil, devil worshiping spawns of Satan if we are the same as everybody else.

 

[Etoile]

You mean gays and lesbians are EXACTLY THE FREAK'IN SAME AS EVERYBODY ELSE? Nah. How can we be the evil, devil worshiping spawns of Satan if we are the same as everybody else.

Oh lord, have you been reading Foucault too?

 

[A_Kefka]

I never said that gay men are more sex crazed than straight men. But if straight men are a threat to women just by being there then gay men carry the same threat but directed towards men. I really dont' think there is any threat in most cases of either, but I do see it as similar.

 

[none2_none2]

There is a widely perceived fundamental difference between men and women. No college would ever have co-ed ROOMS. I haven't even heard of co-ed floors, but maybe they exist. I think the real root of it comes from protecting women from men...men are supposed to be driven by their sex drive. So we separate them.

But to say that gay people - male or female - are driven by their sex drive is not part of culture, it's just an assumption. The point is that gays are no MORE driven by their sex drive than straight people.

Hence, it is acceptable to separate the sexes, but to separate gay and straight students implies that gay people are more sex-crazed fiends than straight people. No, I don't see the similarity at all...

Etoile,
You state: "...men are supposed to be driven by their sex drive. So we separate them..."

I know you used the word "supposed". However, if you truly believe that portion of your statement that I quoted, then how is that attitude any different than that of a straight guy who states that he cannot room with a gay guy?

You may state that the idea that a gay person (male or female) with sex controling their behavior is only an assumption. However, the fact remains that a gay guy is both a male and a gay. So if males are driven by their sex drive, then how would that be any different if the male is gay or straight?

The fact is that the sex drive is indeed a huge impulse especially during those years where the hormones are raging. However, humans were given the brains to control it. If the gay guy can control his urges towards a male roommate, then we have to assume that a straight roommate can do the same towards a female. Otherwise, we are being the very hypocrites that some accuse GLBT's of being.

In my own experiences, the big sexual impulse was body hair. Sure if I would have had a roommate who was extremely hairy, I would have thought about
him -- even if it was something as trivial as tuffs of hair at the wrists sticking out from a long sleeve shirt. However, with such people, once I took the time to know the individual as a human being, I would have looked past the objectification. The way I specifically dealt with attractive men back in my college days was to cause friction. Most of the guys I was attracted to found me aloof or somewhat hostile as that was MY way of making sure I left them alone.

My best friend at the university was a good man, but it helped that he was physically not attractive. He had the misfortune to have a VERY severe case of horrible oily skin which caused him to have pimples all over his face, chest, and back. It was so bad that he had to wear pajamas to avoid getting his sheets dirty from broken pimples that would happen occasionally. On the other hand, there was a hairy, bearded, muscular, tanned, masculine hunk who was my type. We never got along -- not because I tried to make passes at him, but because I caused friction so that we kept apart. In all fairness we had nothing in common, but we would have gotten along better had he not been my type.

On the heterosexual front, I remember my French teacher who was of that mind set that men were walking hormones always on the verge of loosing control. Back then halter tops were very popular with women, but she was convinced that men seeing female underarms, shoulders, etc would be in a fantasy world instead of learning French, so she had a dress code for the women. She wasn't expecting them to come to class dressed as Amish women, but she did insist on no bare shoulders, no cleavage, and no pants/skirts/dresses above the knee. Thought I was not straight, I thought it was pretty primitive to assume that men couldn't concentrate around objects of their attraction. If that was the case, I never should have graduated with highest distinction.

Anyway, the fact is that I live in dormitory situations for 6 years and had ZERO sexual encounters with not only my roommates, but the guys in my buildings. I knew better than to sh%(*t in my own back yard so to speak. It was my brains that controlled my actions, not my gender nor sexuality.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Oh lord, have you been reading Foucault too?

Read him in college! It's all about the "control"...

 

[Safe_Bet]

I know you used the word "supposed". However,

Nice trick, but there are a lot of writers on this site and, I for one, am not going to let you get away with this...

As I HOPE you know, using "However" in this manner negates the prior clause or sentence. You effectively negated "supposedly" and then went on to use Etoile's "amended" comments as a springboard for your argument.

Sorry, that's not gonna fly, princess! I'm sure you didn't intend it that way... BUT, it's not ethically correct to do things like that.

 

[Etoile]

Etoile,
You state: "...men are supposed to be driven by their sex drive. So we separate them..."

I know you used the word "supposed". However, if you truly believe that portion of your statement that I quoted, then how is that attitude any different than that of a straight guy who states that he cannot room with a gay guy?

I genuinely apologize for not being clear. I should have used the phrase "men are supposedly driven by their sex drive" which is a more clear statement of my feelings.

 

[Shywong]

I don't really want to get into this debate. But one comment has me curious.

4) gay guy living with str8 gal -- tension for the str8 gal

What kind of tension would that be?

 

[dkak001]

The fact is that the sex drive is indeed a huge impulse especially during those years where the hormones are raging. However, humans were given the brains to control it. If the gay guy can control his urges towards a male roommate, then we have to assume that a straight roommate can do the same towards a female. Otherwise, we are being the very hypocrites that some accuse GLBT's of being.

Exactly! Lets not forget that not many 18yr olds are not very good at controlling their urges (gay, lesbian, straight, bi, or what ever). The level of maturity isn't there.

But to say that gay people - male or female - are driven by their sex drive is not part of culture, it's just an assumption. The point is that gays are no MORE driven by their sex drive than straight people.

Hence, it is acceptable to separate the sexes, but to separate gay and straight students implies that gay people are more sex-crazed fiends than straight people. No, I don't see the similarity at all...

I see I struck a nerve somewhere, and you are starting appear to me as much less enlightened than you have previously. Relax, my intent was not to upset. It was simply to stimulate conversation.

Anyway, you seem to have missed my point.
It has nothing to do with the potential of a sex-crazed fiend. Rather it has everything to do with one person perceiving they are a potential target of objectification, and being uncomfortable with that. (This is the exact reason we don't have coed dorm rooms) The point is that one person would be uncomfortable, not that the gay guy was a sexual predator. (Don't make the mistake of automatically assuming everyone is against the gay person)

What if the two people being placed together had been a self admitted 240 lb gay basher, and the gay guy was a little pencil neck geek? (I suspect the university would have allowed the gay guy to change rooms early.)

My point is there are hundreds of scenarios. And the problem here is that we're so hypersensitive about everything and inflexible that as a society we're becoming unable to function without fighting about everything. Live and let live, or Judge thee lest thee be judged, etc. It goes for both sides of the debate, gay or straight. Way too much energy was wasted fighting over this issue.

We really need to learn to bend a little and accept that occasionally one straight person might not want to room with a gay person and let them switch rooms when the situation arises. If we just did this, no one would be making a big deal out of it.

Dan

P.S. What if some college had accidentally placed a girl with a boy in a dorm room. Would they have made her wait the mandatory waiting period before switching rooms?

 

[Etoile]

I see I struck a nerve somewhere, and you are starting appear to me as much less enlightened than you have previously. Relax, my intent was not to upset. It was simply to stimulate conversation.

Actually, I was just having conversation myself. I'm sorry if you thought I was upset or that you had struck a nerve. Trust me, I have conversations just like this with my classmates all the time - I can get passionate about a topic without being upset!

As for "less enlightened" - I appreciate the sideways compliment, but I never pretended to be anything more than I am.