Genetic "fix" for Gays

[nmainguy]

I agree, his "Logic" is flawed, because trying to play God, makes you a sinner also. My guess would be that his logic chooses the lesser of two evils in his opinion.

So by his "logic" there would be degrees of sin...

I should be proud of my straightness, my maleness, and my whiteness. Perhaps I should organize a white pride parade through downtown Houston so that all who share my particular genetic similarities can join together in unity and make our voices heard!

Go for it, Nichy! Embrace your straight, white maleness!

But how can you have a parade of one since all the other straight white males will be busy running the world?

[Guest Marty]

(The above quote is in reference to HtownWxBoy's avatar of two shirtless men.)

Of course it's not accidental. It's a matter of good composition. To deliberately cut the image at the hips for the sole purpose of showing that they are in fact clothed would be to value a weird sort of prudishness over art.

On the other hand, the photograph on Trae's avatar was deliberately framed/cropped to accentuate only the buttocks. Even the subject's head has been excluded; the woman has been deliberately objectified. The intent seems to be to titillate. (I may be mistaken; perhaps it was intended to serve as advertising for a proctologist.)

People assign meaning to images whatever way they choose. Imagine if Rodin's "The Thinker" was called instead "The Horror of Constipation".

I bet people would rally to have it removed from public view!

If that's way it's going to be i would suggest my account be removed from this forum NOW!

Have a good day

[Montrose1100]

....hallmarks of todays homosexual are providing for one's own well being, not procreating and avoiding conflict at all costs.

avoiding conflicts at all cost? I'm confused bach, Maybe I never took notice or maybe it just means I don't fit the sterotype, but I always like to adress problems upfront & settles 'disputes'. Or maybe you were being sarcastic? I dunno, nice post though, but hint hint, I always thought you where *ahem*.

[TheNiche]

(The above quote is in reference to HtownWxBoy's avatar of two shirtless men.)

Of course it's not accidental. It's a matter of good composition. To deliberately cut the image at the hips for the sole purpose of showing that they are in fact clothed would be to value a weird sort of prudishness over art.

Of course it's good composition. That's not in question.

...although, I think that if they had deliberately shown the two models as wearing briefs, it would've been much more poignant. But even then, there are more interesting ways to make that point, oh one with a clothed horse for an avatar! I've always liked yours.

On the other hand, the photograph on Trae's avatar was deliberately framed/cropped to accentuate only the buttocks. Even the subject's head has been excluded; the woman has been deliberately objectified. The intent seems to be to titillate. (I may be mistaken; perhaps it was intended to serve as advertising for a proctologist.)

I would liken an appreciation for the girl's clothed butt to an appreciation for classic cars. There is no objective reason to like them. They (the cars) are less reliable and get poorer mileage, yet there are people who sincerely treasure every facet of the vintage car body's curvature. The butt fat may cause reliability problems down the road, too, and probably contributes to a higher use of calories per mile walked--but that last bit is besides the point.

The human form has long been a subject for tasteful artists. I could put things in an avatar that would be far more revealing, yet suggestive of nothing. ...but such an avatar would probably be removed because it would unashamedly lay bare the human form. It would reveal a universally-known set of secrets. Every wrinkle, every fold of fat, every hair on every surface, every protrusion, and every orifice. It would be banned for content, I'm sure. But the image of the two nude men embracing at the hip would be permitted, even though it is pretty evident what the photographer's intent is.

I think it was George Carlin who said that there are no dirty words, just dirty thoughts. I think that "dirty words" might easily be replaced with "human curves". They are very similar in their treatment. The statement applies very well in principle.

[TheNiche]

I already explain it, it just doesn't feel the same for unoppressed groups. The voice doesn't match the reality. go look at positions of power from government to small businesses and everything else in this country, they are all tilt towards the straight white male as you describe, very unbalanced when we look at the demographics of the country. Nothing wrong with that imo, but when a defined group of folks still hold that much power, it does make other folks a little skeptical of their true intentions when that group go around voicing pride. You could take that as a compliment.

Consider that gay folks are in the minority. Right off the bat, that would indicate to me that you probably shouldn't expect too many gays to hold political power and that gays will probably never hold a majority. That doesn't mean that you aren't represented or that you lack the power to vote. There are no Jim Crow laws for gays. Sufferage isn't the issue. Neither is turnout.

For that matter, the average household with a gay householder tends to earn more income than does a straight household. Screw the politicians; you guys should be proud of what you as individuals have made for yourselves and gracious to the extreme social conservatives that they're not allowing folks like yourselves to get married and subject yourself to a higher marginal rate of taxation! I wish I could get away with that, but evidently I as a straight male lack that power.

[webdude]

Consider that gay folks are in the minority. Right off the bat, that would indicate to me that you probably shouldn't expect too many gays to hold political power and that gays will probably never hold a majority. That doesn't mean that you aren't represented or that you lack the power to vote. There are no Jim Crow laws for gays. Sufferage isn't the issue. Neither is turnout.

For that matter, the average household with a gay householder tends to earn more income than does a straight household. Screw the politicians; you guys should be proud of what you as individuals have made for yourselves and gracious to the extreme social conservatives that they're not allowing folks like yourselves to get married and subject yourself to a higher marginal rate of taxation! I wish I could get away with that, but evidently I as a straight male lack that power.

Of course they are in the minority, but the point was to address your concern that you can't rally and not be condemned.

One can't have both power and voice without inviting a little skepticism.

power of voting is moot if it can't seem to break the unequal balance of power in government in terms of demographics. It certainly doesn't have much effect in releasing the power grip held on by mostly only straight white male in all other important places in society.

And to think its should be ok for gays to give up liberty for some tax pocket change, that hardly deserve graciousness.

[musicman]

I personally believe that if parents could "change" their child... make it straight, gay, blonde, a boy, a girl, tall.... I guess they should be allowed to b/c it is their child. BUT... I would definitely look down upon them for their actions. You should love and accept your child for how it is... I can't imagine having a kid and wanting it changed. I would love my child unconditionally.

so you'd call your child an "it?"

[RedScare]

Now, you know where the straight white male group is coming from.

Speak for yourself. Most straight white males that I know have no interest in celebrating their sameness (read blandness). For instance, I am much more proud of my half Lebanese ancestry than my boring English side. And, St. Patrick's Day is not the white male holiday. It is the Irish Catholic one. It does not discriminate on the basis of gender or sexuality. And, being also one quarter Irish, I can safely say we don't mind Protestants or non-Irish celebrating with us. But, what fun is a group comprised of 2/3rds of American males anyway? Groups form to celebrate their uniqueness, not their sameness. But, if you feel so oppressed that you need to band together with your straight white male brothers for comfort and comaraderie, I suggest you get off your duff and form a group. Quit whining about the derision you may incur. If a few insults are the worst you must suffer through, I'd say you have it pretty good. It's not like anyone will burn your house or church, or attack you in the dark of night because of your "group".

Frankly, I have always thought the "why can't white males have a group?" whine is more one of jealousy than one of perceived prejudice. They don't have a unique trait or characteristic that lends itself to group forming. So, go join a frat. That's what they were invented for.

[TJones]

I already explain it, it just doesn't feel the same for unoppressed groups. The voice doesn't match the reality. go look at positions of power from government to small businesses and everything else in this country, they are all tilt towards the straight white male as you describe, very unbalanced when we look at the demographics of the country. Nothing wrong with that imo, but when a defined group of folks still hold that much power, it does make other folks a little skeptical of their true intentions when that group go around voicing pride. You could take that as a compliment.

That's just it webdude, this "group", which I will admit to being part of although I have no "POWER" per say, doesn't go around doing that, we don't flaunt it in your face, we don't have parades, we don't make bumper stickers, we don't have rallys, and we don't have Martyrs. Here is a little secret you may not know, my "group" doesn't EVER get offended by racists comments made toward us, nor do we get upset at being called a "breeder. We laugh it off, not laugh it off then go home and cry about it to our wives or call a lawyer, we shrug and think to ourselves, "what a moron this namecaller is", or we may even call them a moron to the namecaller's face. We simply keep our nose to the grindstone and literally DEAL with everyone else that has a problem with us. It isn't that it just happenes to be tilted towards us, it is that we will work for what we want, which makes it tilted. All these "oppressed" groups you speak of, is there a better place that perhaps are more tolerant to these groups, pehaps France ? I only ask you these things because I really don't see too much of that stuff, and I don't take part in such activities as namecalling or trying to "oppress" ANYONE. I am usually the guy that will tell another member of my "group" that is acting like a Jackass to STFU before one of his fellow members, ME, gives him a mouth full of teeth. I don't think I am a rare case at all either. All my friends in my same genre' are all pretty much the same as me. You are right, I don't feel "oppressed" because I CHOOSE not to be, but when you think about it, I am because MY "group" has to be MORE PC than ANYONE else in the world, and it is a very tough line to walk. I can be sued for pretty much anything regarding another race or sexual preference simply from someone miscontruing some words I may have used, or a bad joke and automatically you would have all the other groups nodding their heads in agreement, saying, "Yep, he did it, another whiteman trying to hold us back." :closedeyes:

[nmainguy]

you guys should be proud of what you as individuals have made for yourselves and gracious to the extreme social conservatives that they're not allowing folks like yourselves to get married and subject yourself to a higher marginal rate of taxation! I wish I could get away with that, but evidently I as a straight male lack that power.

Why would anyone be gracious to a group that promotes second class status for one group? As a straight man you have the power to provide for a loved one after you are gone by transference of any government benefits to your spouse. You also have the power to be a part of the decision making process regarding a spouse's illness should that spouse become incapacitated.

Gay people aren't "getting away" with anything as long as you continue to have special rights that are not conveyed to me as a voting and taxpaying citizen.

And before you come back with your regular anti-SS and government schtik, that's not relevant to most people. The issue isn't your opinion of marginal tax rates. The issue is a deeper one involving human rights and dignity.

[musicman]

Here is a little secret you may not know, my "group" doesn't EVER get offended by racists comments made toward us, nor do we get upset at being called a "breeder.

i never understood that either. i have quite a few gay friends who have children of their own.

[TheNiche]

power of voting is moot if it can't seem to break the unequal balance of power in government in terms of demographics. It certainly doesn't have much effect in releasing the power grip held on by mostly only straight white male in all other important places in society.

What are the sexual demographics of Congress? What are they of America? Got numbers?

Besides, just because someone in Congress is or is not gay doesn't mean that they'll align perfectly with the agenda of the typical gay man. You'll probably find that there are a lot of straight white guys that support your cause, especially if you keep the pressure on them. Remember, it was a bunch of white guys that gave blacks voting rights and that got rid of Jim Crow laws. It was a bunch of men that decided that women could vote and hold office. Like I've tried to stress throughout this thread, people act as individuals divided in opinion, not as demographic groups.

Btw, when I say to keep the pressure on them, I mean to communicate to them your concerns and vote accordingly. Prideful acts that set you apart as some kind of a 'special' group aren't endearing and only give rise to a moderate backlash when you go too far.

[RedScare]

MY "group" has to be MORE PC than ANYONE else in the world, and it is a very tough line to walk.

I find it a very easy line to walk, since I do not associate individual acts or persons with some arbitrary observable characteristic, such as skin color, gender, religious preference or sexual orientation. Political Correctness is often assailed by those who practice it, as something foisted upon them by liberals or minorities. Political Correctness was adopted by those who harbor prejudices against others as a way to conceal their prejudices. As society came to view bigotry as an undesirable character trait, politicians who espoused bigoted views found that they would become unelectable if they aired those views in public It is not a rule or a law. There is no punishment, other than public derision or being labeled as a bigot. It is only protested by those who feel muzzled by society's intolerance of their bigoted views. The rest of us simply use the inoffensive term.

No one is forcing you or other "white males" to be politically correct. You have chosen to censor your own speech so as not be be viewed as a bigot. You cannot blame minorities or society for your personal choice to not be seen as insensitive or intolerant. Frankly, most minorities and liberals do not like political correctness, as it provides a mask for the bigots to hide behind. I, for one, prefer to know the enemy. When bigots use proper terminology, as opposed to their preferred derogatory terms, it is harder to know that they are bigots.

Out of control political correctness generally comes from those who cannot understand why the terms they use are offensive in the first place. The terms are oftentimes not offensive by themselves. It is the manner in which they are used. I rarely have to censor my speech, as it is usually clear to the people I am speaking to what I mean when I say it. As the group becomes larger, and becomes comprised of people who do not know me, I will tailor my speech so as not to convey an impression that was not intended. This is not because there is some rule or law forbidding that speech. It is because I want to make my point, not an unintended one.

Now, here is a little secret for you. Your "group" is much smaller than you claim it to be. It is not comprised of straights, whites and males. There are much more specific characteristics that dictate membership in your "group". The reason there is no straight white male "group" is that most straight white males do not identitify with those characteristics enough to bond with others with those same characteristics. Straight white males are as common as right-handed people. There is no right-handed club, though there is one for lefties (which I think is stupid as well, and I am a lefty). Try starting the NAASWM and see who joins.

[TheNiche]

Groups form to celebrate their uniqueness, not their sameness.

What's to celebrate? We are all alike in that we are all unique.

[TheNiche]

Why would anyone be gracious to a group that promotes second class status for one group? As a straight man you have the power to provide for a loved one after you are gone by transference of any government benefits to your spouse. You also have the power to be a part of the decision making process regarding a spouse's illness should that spouse become incapacitated.

Gay people aren't "getting away" with anything as long as you continue to have special rights that are not conveyed to me as a voting and taxpaying citizen.

And before you come back with your regular anti-SS and government schtik, that's not relevant to most people. The issue isn't your opinion of marginal tax rates. The issue is a deeper one involving human rights and dignity.

Well my personal opinion on the matter is that marriage shouldn't be a government institution at all and that any subsidy should be dependent upon the demographic composition of each household unit, applied uniformly. It'd make things a lot simpler, but is unlikely to ever be implemented. In the mean time, as I suggested to webdude, just keep the pressure on politicians and be reasonable.

Nobody cares about your dignity except you. That's where a big problem lies. Get over yourself and you'll feel better.

[TJones]

You try to start a group like the NAAWP, and how many seconds would it take before the ACLU lawyers would have a field day, calling it nothing but a racist group ? Double standards run rampant throughout the other groups, you gonna deny that counselor ?

Red, you say my "group" is much smaller then contradict yourself by saying we are as common as right-handed people. I am a lefty also, so I don't know how common these righties are. You are wrong about political correctness, it is a hard line to follow, for the simple fact that anything my group may say may be taken out of context or misconstrued. P.C. is B.S., I don't use it here, and you saw what happened when I said "Yellow" people. Wasn't using it in a derogatory fashion at all, and just like you say that some people are out of control in terms of being P.C., perhaps some are overly sensitive when it comes to being P.C.

As far as choosing to censor ourselves, ummm, no, that would be the ACLU also. We have been forced to be kinder and gentler for all the sennnnnnnnnsitive groups out there. No problem for a blackman to throw out the "Crackerbomb". We are not, under any circumstances to use the "N-word" in any context. It has even been censored here, by the admin. but you can still say "Cracker" and it's ok. Why is it ok Red ? I am not oppressing anyone, and since you want to throw out lineage, I am a regular Heinz57. Tell you about it later.

[RedScare]

TJ, could you be kind enough to point me to the legal case outlawing the use of the "N" word?

And, speaking of "sennnnnnnnnsitive", why would you let the ACLU scare you away from forming a group composed of like-minded peers. (As an aside, as a card carrying member of the ACLU, I can tell you with certainty that the ACLU would fight to protect your 1st Amendment right to peaceably assemble, just as it has fought to protect the rights of the NAACP and the KKK, and the Nazi Party to do the same.)

Just for grins, what topics would your "group" discuss? What societal issues unique to your "group" would you rally around and fight to change? I have already pointed out that political correctness is self-imposed. You seem disinclined to agree. What law or laws would you file suit against to win back your right to use the N word? What other injustices has your "group" endured that you would like to see remedied?

[westguy]

That's pretty odd that you haven't heard of the National Socialist Party vs. Skokie, Illinois.

[TJones]

Just for grins, what topics would your "group" discuss? What societal issues unique to your "group" would you rally around and fight to change? I have already pointed out that political correctness is self-imposed. You seem disinclined to agree. What law or laws would you file suit against to win back your right to use the N word? What other injustices has your "group" endured that you would like to see remedied?

Don't go "literal" on me counselor, you know full well I was speaking figuratively as far as the use of the "N-word" and the use of it IS banned here on this forum.

As far as "grins", the whole point of forming a group is for "grins". A "group" is not needed, and furthermore would never be tolerated, even by the ACLU, no glory in it for them to defend the "Oppressors" of modern day society. I am not in the least bit worried that my "group" has no voice. We have a huge voice already, and like I said, we don't need banners, bumper stickers, causes, martyrs, or the like. I do disagree with you that P.C. is self-imposed, it has been imposed upon us. I never found much use for the word, but won't deny that I have ever used it. Does it make me a racist ? No, not when used in confrontational situations, psychological warfare between two combatants is more like it, because I know how it stings. DO I use it in my everyday life, certainly not. I don't go walking around downtown saying "Hello N-word ! Nice day we're having isn't it N-word ?" Would you call that P.C. if I just use to word Sir? No, that's called human decency, and that is what I practice everyday. If I went up to nmain, and said "Hey nmain you ol' F-word." You think he might punch me in the mouth. DEFINATELY. I would never in a million years say such a thing to him though, not because I am P.C. , it's because I am decent.

[nmainguy]

Nobody cares about your dignity except you. That's where a big problem lies. Get over yourself and you'll feel better.

Ah but you're wrong. Many people care about my dignity. That's a very human principle employed by most people I know as well as many here on HAIF. So there's no problem lying there.

BTW, I'm never sure what you mean when you tell people to "get over yourself" unless it's just a lazy, generic response when one is not even required.

[Pumapayam]

Ah but you're wrong. Many people care about my dignity. That's a very human principle employed by most people I know as well as many here on HAIF. So there's no problem lying there.

BTW, I'm never sure what you mean when you tell people to "get over yourself" unless it's just a lazy, generic response when one is not even required.

I support you nmainguy!

[Montrose1100]

So, go join a frat. That's what they were invented for.

And from there, the only thing seperating you from being gay or straight is how much alcohol you have in your blood stream.

[RedScare]

TJ, I did not expect you to understand the mission of the American Civil Liberties Union, and I will not try. There are numerous sources of information about them, and how they operate. You can look it up if you are so inclined, but I suspect you prefer the incorrect demonized version that you use.

Would you call that P.C. if I just use to word Sir? No, that's called human decency, and that is what I practice everyday.

This is an interesting quote by you, as it defines what political correctness is. PC is a derogatory term for decency when the utterer would prefer to use more derogatory language. I recognize that your good upbringing causes you to confuse public derision with a law forbidding the use of bigoted language, but there is NO legal restriction from using non-PC language, except speech that is not protected (yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded movie theater, etc.).

Let me put it as plainly as I can. You have an absolute LEGAL right in this country to use bigoted speech. I have the absolute right to call you a bigot for doing so. You would be correct to amend your argument to complain that I think your use of derogatory terms is bigoted. The right to free speech does not include the right not to be judged by the speech you use. That is what you and the anti-PC crowd are complaining about, and frankly, while you have the right to complain, I am not required to change my view when you do.

Now, THERE's a group you can form...the 'I don't like it when people call me a bigot for using hate speech group'. I won't join that one either.

BTW, I will wholeheartedly agree that today's America is entirely too thin-skinned. However, I find that the color of one's skin does not dictate just how thin-skinned a person is. White people complaining about perceived injustices is a great example of it.

[nmainguy]

Would you call that P.C. if I just use to word Sir? No, that's called human decency, and that is what I practice everyday. If I went up to nmain, and said "Hey nmain you ol' F-word." You think he might punch me in the mouth. DEFINATELY. I would never in a million years say such a thing to him though, not because I am P.C. , it's because I am decent.

Well, after reading through your's and Red's and Niche's posts, I realize it really is all about respecting another person's dignity. Now I agree with Red that no one forces PC on anyone. If someone chooses to practice PC (whatever that may be today) then that is their choice. But thankfully most of the people I choose to surround myself with don't need to be PC because for the most part they are decent, considerate and thoughtful of others. There's nothing wrong with exercising civility and respecting another's dignity-it's what makes it a better world for most of us.

BTW, I WOULD NOT punch you in the mouth.

[webdude]

What are the sexual demographics of Congress? What are they of America? Got numbers?

Besides, just because someone in Congress is or is not gay doesn't mean that they'll align perfectly with the agenda of the typical gay man. You'll probably find that there are a lot of straight white guys that support your cause, especially if you keep the pressure on them. Remember, it was a bunch of white guys that gave blacks voting rights and that got rid of Jim Crow laws. It was a bunch of men that decided that women could vote and hold office. Like I've tried to stress throughout this thread, people act as individuals divided in opinion, not as demographic groups.

Btw, when I say to keep the pressure on them, I mean to communicate to them your concerns and vote accordingly. Prideful acts that set you apart as some kind of a 'special' group aren't endearing and only give rise to a moderate backlash when you go too far.

I am talking about all other groups that is not straight white christian male, not just gays.

You just gave examples of 'bunch of white guys this and bunch of white guys that', then turn around and say ppl do not act as demographic groups.

While I understand your point, the fact that so much power is concentrated in the hands of only one defined group when the population is so diverse should give one pause to the state of equality in this country.

Again, this lie about wanting to be 'special' or special privileges is getting tiring. Being loud about being wanted to be treated equally is not wanting to be special.

And equality is not just a cause of gay ppl. I am not gay and I don't have to be to support the cause for equality.

[nmainguy]

I support you nmainguy!

Ah!! My favorite Persian!

[musicman]

We are not, under any circumstances to use the "N-word" in any context. It has even been sensored here, by the admin. but you can still say "Cracker" and it's ok. Why is it ok Red ? I am not oppressing anyone, and sense you want to throw out lineage, I am a regular Heinz57. Tell you about it later.

while i haven't used the n-word, i have heard it used once that wasn't offensive (or maybe i should say it was appropriate). it did make me think twice.

Well, after reading through your's and Red's and Niche's posts, I realize it really is all about respecting another person's dignity.

i hope you did that BEFORE you read their posts!!

[TJones]

Ah!! My favorite Persian!

Don't you mean Anti-terrorist Persian ?

Red, I am not for joining ANY group or forming ANY group in the first place. I don't need a pep talk from some political figurehead to make ME feel good about myself. Do I think the ACLU is biased, YES, do I demonize them, NO, they just have an agenda as their "mission", which I am sure goes along the lines of your party. You have your opinion of them, and I have mine.

Is P.C. a derogatory term for decency in your book, or is it now just the stigma that has been attached to it ? I would venture to say that there are those who choose to be un-P.C. in every race. I don't define the term of P.C. the same way you do. In my definition, it is a term used to pacify those who are overly sensitive to free speech, who are wishing for a Utopia that will never happen, because humans are fallible. Political Correctness has been a nice experiment, but I see a change, I saw Bill Maher just the other day complaining about having to be P.C. on his show. Red, I think people have just forgotten HOW to be decent to each other for the meer fact that it seems you can't trust anyone in today's society. Teachers being caught with students seems to be a weekly occurence now, gangmembers are rising in numbers again, Police officers and politicians continuously being caught taking bribes or worse. When does it come to a point where we just say enough is enough ? I don't think that someone who fails to be P.C. is who you can consider YOUR enemy, it usually turns out to be the ones you would hold nearest to you that tend to let you down, and not by using words, it is always the people you'd never expect that wind up doing the most damage to you, and those are the people of your same "group" not the OTHER, DIFFERENT, people across the hall.

[TheNiche]

Ah but you're wrong. Many people care about my dignity. That's a very human principle employed by most people I know as well as many here on HAIF. So there's no problem lying there.

I was speaking in the general sense as it relates to politics. Lots of people will say that they care about your dignity, but don't expect for them to vote with your dignity in mind. Your issue is not likely to be at the top of their mind unless it affects them too. The solution is to continuously apply pressure. Make it affect your elected representatives by using sound arguments repeated with consistency and resolve.

BTW, I'm never sure what you mean when you tell people to "get over yourself" unless it's just a lazy, generic response when one is not even required.

You just aren't that important is all. You're just a person. Not special. I don't care what mommy told you. ...only human.

That you crave acceptance (and wear perceived martyrdom like a badge) seems indicative of underlying deep-seated insecurities that you have yet to overcome.

[TheNiche]

I am talking about all other groups that is not straight white christian male, not just gays.

You just gave examples of 'bunch of white guys this and bunch of white guys that', then turn around and say ppl do not act as demographic groups.

While I understand your point, the fact that so much power is concentrated in the hands of only one defined group when the population is so diverse should give one pause to the state of equality in this country.

I don't get it. You understand my point but remain suspicious of a group of people whose individual actions have freed slaves and empowered those that don't match their own slim demographic group? Granted it hasn't been easy, but on the whole it seems like a pretty good track record of progress to me.

I could care less what their demographic composition is, so long as they are competent.

Again, this lie about wanting to be 'special' or special privileges is getting tiring. Being loud about being wanted to be treated equally is not wanting to be special.

And equality is not just a cause of gay ppl. I am not gay and I don't have to be to support the cause for equality.

Then it seems that we're entirely on the same side. What annoys me is not the political process leading to equality, but the fraction of people that embrace this notion of martyrdom as a badge of honor, or those that put on pride parades when that is the antithesis of any notion of equality. There is nothing to be proud (or ashamed) of. They aren't special. Isn't that the point of equality?