When In Rome…Be Roman?
[**Administrative Note: If you're in the DC Area, tomorrow, January 13, 2006, there is a party at Mirror's Nightclub on New York Avenue being thrown by the so smooth party promoters of Stockholm 76 fame. I've been to parties in DC, but the ones thrown by this promoter are some good ass parties...and that last statement has a double meaning. Check out Blue Stockholm to sign up for the guest list for complimentary admission before 11pm and to check out pictures of the crowds. DC/Charlotte/Atlanta and soon to be globally known, DJ 2-Tone Jones on the 1's and 2's. ***]
People say that what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. And I wholeheartedly agree with that statement.
I’ve been to Vegas.
Well, I also think that same logic applies to jail. What happens in jail/prison stays in jail/prison. Unless, you were shanked by somebody, in which case the statute of limitations on whipping his ass in the middle of a street is pretty much unlimited.
(And no, I’ve never been to jail. Unless you count that one time in Vegas…I’m lying. Call me now!)
However, given the circumstances of those men who are placed in jail for extremely long sentences, a question became evident one day whilst I was sipping a Mint Julep and having an IM convo on Yahoo! Messenger with the blogless wonder, Xquizzyt. In fact, let me say her name one more time…Xquizzyt. That’s two.
Is it acceptable for a man to be gay in jail?
Umm…not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Can you please place your eyeballs back inside of your head? I’m serious.
No really…and you, over there with the plaid Catholic schoolgirl dress on, please put the knife down.
Are you calm now? Can we proceed?
Thank you.
Now, think about this. People need personal interaction to live in this world. I don’t care how much of a loner you are, we all need some skin-on-skin action in our lives. That’s what prostitutes are for, to provide a service when you can’t get any skin-on-skin action from anywhere else. Much like video hoes, prostitutes do not get enough credit for the service they provide to humanity. There’s a reason why its the oldest profession bucko.
Why would this change in jail? Especially when you have to spend years in a place where the only female might be a prison guard who is only sleeping with the death row inmates. Actually, I think that was Oz. But from the mouth of a former stripper turned gangsta rapper…
“I need that love…” - The Game, “Don’t Need Your Love”, The Documentary
And I took that line completely out of context…in the song he’s talking about Bloods in New York. But who’s splitting hairs?
I’m torn on this thought…but I’m leaning more towards saying, yes…it’s acceptable.
In fact, take me to jail. Lock me up!! Throw away the key!! I ain’t scared to fuck no nigga in his ass…
*scrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr*
This nigga is trippin’.
By the way, the previous scene is from the movie Don’t Be A Menace To South Central While Drinking Your Juice In The Hood, which is way funnier than Friday, but doesn’t get nearly the props it deserves. It’s damn near social commentary.
[***DISCLAIMER: Before we go any further, let me clear few things up. I'm not gay, nor do I live a gay lifestyle...not that there's anything wrong with living a gay lifestyle. I'm not even a metrosexual. In fact, I'm still confused as to what a metrosexual means since my take means almost gay, just doesn't know it yet. Once again, not that there's anything wrong with that. I have no problem with gay people, gay marriage, pink, flamingos, or John Legend. Nor do I plan on going to jail. I just think its a ponderistically interesting topic. ***]
Of course, the other side to the game on this is…what happens when he gets out? Now, amidst the conversation that started this whole though, I wondered aloud if it would be okay if he was gay in jail, for say, 7 years, and then wasn’t gay when he got out. Now, this is in direct conflict with the notion that people are born gay. Then again, jail is in direct conflict with the notion of a mixed genitalia world.
And what with EVERY woman thinking that EVERY man is either gay, gay-curious, or just DL anyway, the thought that its acceptable to say a black man can be gay in jail and come home and be un-gay, might make me eligible to be incinerated at a Ponderosa Steak House. Which is similar to being burned at a stake, only not at all.
I’m also not an advocate of the whole DL phenomenon that may or MAY NOT be as bad as women think. In fact…EVERY MAN IS NOT DL. One ignorant nigga who was a jackass to his family goes on Oprah and the next day, every man is DL. Talk about some women making up for insecurities…
Yeah I said it. In-secur-i-ties. I do think being a DL man is wrong though. I want to go on record with that.
But back to the el pointo (which is not Spanish by any stretch of the imagination), is it even possible for a man to be gay in jail and actually come back out and live a heterosexual life? From a “desire” standpoint? That I do not know. And maybe that is where the answer lies. But…Donnie McClurkin was gay and he turned his life around.
Hmm…that was a judgemental statement that assumed that being gay means your life isn’t going in the right direction being as we only use the term “turned your life around” when referring to any negativity that you pursued prior. I mean when was the last time you heard somebody say, “wow, that Jim sure turned his life around” in reference to somebody going from being a God-fearing Christian to a Satan worshiping cat-screwer?
So, let me rephrase. Donnie McClurkin became…un-gay. Do we believe that a gay man can become un-gay and not lust after the pleasures of the manflesh?
[***Sidenote: I saw the most godawful movie ever yesterday courtesy of my Blockbuster Online subscription, Disco Godfather. The title should have told me to stop, but I put it in despite my education. Well, it's a Dolemite movie, but has to be one of the movies nobody talks about. I mean, there was no ass and titties, nothing. The movie was about cracking down on "angel dust". No hoes, no real kung-fu, and Rudy Ray Moore turned in the WORST performance ever. Anyway, there was a dude in the movie named Sweetmeat. Gay or un-gay, isn't that the most gay ass name you could possibly have? Sweetmeat?? If I ever become a gay stipper, I'm using that name, I'm calling dibs...umm...not that I'd become a gay stripper...umm...not that there's anything wrong with gay strippers. Fuck it, this is totally going in the wrong direction. I need to turn my life around. ***]
LIke I said, I don’t know the answer.
However, for sake of argument, and assuming that a man could become ungay after leaving jail, assuming also that he would be eligible for parole at some point during his prison sentence, but not before at least 5 years…
…is it acceptable for a man to be gay in prison?
January 12th, 2006 11:20
WHERE IN THE DEUCE IS MENTION OF ME!!! WHERE IS IT *re-reading* ARE YOU ASHAMED OF ME??? *GASP* My name should be in here SOMEWHERE!!! Hmmph.
I am now boycotting the comments section with regard to the actual post until I get an explanation. HMph. *folding arms*
January 12th, 2006 11:34
*throwing down picket sign and hugging Panama and giving him the most platonic kiss on that big ass forehead* LOL
THANK YOU… *deep inhale*
You already know how I feel about this… (that would be hilarious if I ended my comment there after all that wouldn’t it… I swear I toyed with the idea… but Ron Isley is singing Lover’s Eve to me right now and I’m in a gloriously good mood so I shall continue)…
It is never at anytime acceptable for a heretofore heterosexual man to engage in gay activities unless… he is forced against his will. That, he is no more responsible for that than a woman would be if she were, God forbid - forced to engage in non-consensual sex. That is the only, and I repeat the ONLY way it is acceptable… for me anyway. I could never date a bi-dude. NO!!! It’s bad enough I gotta worry about some finer chick stealing you - but I gotta worry about BOTH sexes??? Or even my ex trying to steal my NEW boyfriend?? *sigh* the possibilities are too endless and far too overwhelming to consider. It is never cool for you and your man to salivate over the same dude that walks by. If you say, “Mmph,” and he does too???? OMG not cool.
But I digress as I am wont to do…
As for you… why on EARTH is DLing NOT WRONG??? I believe if I let you INSIDE me… full disclosure is required. Thank you.
January 12th, 2006 11:39
My dearest X-
This is a direct line from my post:
“I do think being a DL man is wrong though. I want to go on record with that.”
Reading…is Fundamental.
January 12th, 2006 11:45
LOL SHUT UP!!!
First of all if you say that… you MUST cite ME since after you pointed my mistke out to me my response was “Ooops, thought you said you ‘don’t’ think it’s wrong - DAMN THEM GETTING RID OF THAT RIF TRUCK!!!” Hmmph trying to call me out with my OWN jokes!!! *stomping* LOL
And anyway your Yahoo avatar looks like the inspiration for this post anyway… thoughts? LOL
January 12th, 2006 11:49
Okay so maybe my reading isn’t the greatest these days - I scrolled up. You said it first. Once again… I missed it. Fine… fine!!! But your avatar is still gay. There. I SAID IT!!!
January 12th, 2006 11:52
A man cannot become Un gay when he gets out of jail. If you have sex with someone of the same sex you’re gay. yeah yeah folks in jail or even those who are out will say it’s just sex and my answer is so what.
January 12th, 2006 11:57
To eachs own, whatever crumbles ur cookie. However, I couldnt date a man who was a former me. No thank you. To know that parts of his body may have been violated is a thought I dont wish to have. I would forever be in torment, “is he staring at that cute guy a lil too hard, is he wearing my undies, is his walk meaner than mine?”. I’d go crazy and that just wouldnt be a pretty situation…with that said… my vote is NAY. Is u is or is u aint? There is no in between.
January 12th, 2006 13:08
I agree with everyone else. It can’t happen. You don’t just go back and forthe between the pink team and the blue team like that. And while I understand a dude in jail might-could get punked into being someone’s yard b*tch, if he starts to like it, he’s gay. End of story. Cut out the light. Case closed!
January 12th, 2006 13:17
I don’t comment often, but I felt the need to speak on some of the things that have been said here.
Though everyone seems to be so open-minded and non-judgemental on these comments when it comes to homosexuals, why is that same open-mindedness not extended to bi-sexuals? I have heard comments such as “you are either one way or another…you are not both.” But unless you are gay or bi-sexual, how do you know? I think those comments are very judgemental and really show a lack of tolerance.
Whether you would want to date a homosexual or bi-sexual is your preference of course. But to say that you wouldn’t date a bi-sexual because you are worried that a woman might steal him/her and a man might steal him/her sounds pretty egotistical…
While I am not homosexual or bi-sexual, I definitely am not going to claim what is and is not possible. Many people say that you are not born gay…many people say that no one is truly gay. So who are we to be the authoritative figures, definitively drawing the lines in the sand about sexuality. All you can really do is speak on yourself…not trying to attack anyone, just stating an opinion…
January 12th, 2006 15:02
Oh well Maverick you clearly don’t know me, because if you did then you’d know that an egotistical comment is exactly what one should expect from me as I’m an egomaniacal personality. LOL
And furthermore, I think that worrying about your man being stolen is actually quite the opposite of egotistical and more insecure… if you ask me. An egotistical person would be prone to believe their partner would never stray and could never be “stolen,” just my .08. But don’t take these comments so seriously sweetie. It’s just a blog… I’m not giving life lessons here, just stating my opinion… =)
*running back to desk to proofread some more documents for my boss’ “great ideas” and sticking tongue at The AfterParty Hostess* LOL
January 12th, 2006 15:27
@X: LOL @ being an egomaniacal personality (kudos on that one). “Egotistical” is still the word that I would use because it is implying concern with your ego…worrying about your man being stolen would not be “conceited” but definitely egotistical. I was merely commenting on the acceptance that people seem to have for gays but the lack of understanding they seem to offer to bi-sexuals. There are many comments that are made about how people cannot really be bi-sexual and I just don’t know how people can make that comment without being or have been bi-sexual. It was a general comment, not aimed at you. And I know you are just stating your opinion…just stating mine as well…
January 12th, 2006 16:01
I think some of the comments here may have been taken out of context. For me personally to date someone who is BI is out of the question. It is my choice not to date someone who wants both men and women. damn straight u either want me or u dont and u better be clear on what you want.
i have no problem with people being BI, however for me or my man that just isnt an option.
January 12th, 2006 16:15
Where is the rationality behind all of this? Regardless of a person’s sexual preference if he is going to stray, he is going to stray. It’s not the sexuality that makes people unfaithful; it’s the people. To drop a boyfriend because he is bi-sexual is unfair to him because you do not give him the chance to be monogamous with you. That’s assessing his worth by his previous lovers. If that seems acceptable, then at the very least, people should be consistent. Dump him if the woman he dated before you was skeezy. Dump him if he has the reputation of being a dog. Dump him if anything in his past isn’t up to a set standard. Dump him if his credit is bad. I simply feel that this shows that people really don’t care about each other on the individual level, but only by what they represent.
On another note, why isn’t it bad for a woman to be bi-sexual? It’s almost an asset round these parts. How is this any different?
Finally, the way we deal with bi-sexuality and homosexuality is up there with how people have dealt with interracial dating and miscegenation. How exactly are we determining people’s worth or goodness?
January 12th, 2006 16:21
Okay I don’t want to turn Panama’s comment section into the X and Maverick show - however, while your use of egotistical makes logical sense, it is not factual… as the definition of egotistical refers to an ego overinflated, not just ego-related thoughts. *shrug*
Oh, no, no, I hear you - and I definitely think people can be bisexual, as there are… umm… bisexuals. LOL If one is attracted to both sexes, hey more power to you. My personal intolerance is for people who do not disclose that information at the gate. I need to make an informed decision about who I am sleeping with. I know you weren’t directly poking at me… because… *chuckle* why invite that upon yourself. ROFLMAO!!! SEE!! There’s the ego!!! =) LOL
January 12th, 2006 16:30
The rationale is, God gave us the freedom to choose. Some people like bananas, some dont. If you dont want to eat a banana, hey guess what?! You dont have to! I do not want a man who has been with other men (by his choice, rape is another whole story)period. There is nothing attractive about that to me, that is why i want a MAN. Same way gay men do not like women, or gay women dont want a man. Thats their CHOICE.
January 12th, 2006 16:52
I agree with Chocolat…that is kinda what I was trying to say with my point. You should look at the person and whether they were faithful or not in previous relationships, not whether they were bi. The sexual orientation is telling you nothing about their ability to be monogamous. I have just found that people always equate bi with promiscuity…
As for X, I am just going off of a definition of egotistical, which is being overly concerned with one’s self. We may use it differently in our everyday lingo, but I was using that particular definition. I wasn’t trying to say you were conceited, I was just saying that it was worried about one’s self…
@Creem: I am not disagreeing with you…your choice is your choice. All I am pointing out is the differences that people are making between those who are gay and those who are bi. Let me ask this question…if you do not ask your partner about previous lovers that they have, then why are they obligated to tell you that they are bi? If they can keep the identities of their past partners a secret, then why does it matter if they were bi or gay in the past? They are with you now (just playing devil’s advocate)?
January 12th, 2006 16:54
That wasn’t what I was asking. Let me clarify. What’s the rationale of worrying that he’s checking out the same guys his woman is checking out? Hmmm, the better question is, “how is his assessment of someone’s attractiveness a problem?” I mean, what happened to “look, but don’t touch”? Is that only relugated to heterosexuals? He chose me. He could have chosen to be single, footloose, and fancy-free. He could have chosen a homosexual relationship. But he chose me. that’s got to have some value. More power to you that you know exactly what you want. I have other things that I’m looking for that take priority. Someone might need their boyfriend to be straight as an arrow, and I suppose that’s cool. I just believe that we often miss out on a gift because we’re caught up in the wrapping paper. Don’t you think?
January 12th, 2006 17:11
Hmm… bisexuality is not “wrapping paper” like a mole, or a hairy back. We’re talking a fundamental part of the person. I could be missing out on a LOT of people who could be just GREAT in other areas, simply because I have certain standards… but hey, those standards are what I want and EXPECT in a mate… so if someone doesnt fulfill them on a most basic level, how on earth can I be missing out?
January 12th, 2006 17:21
Yeah, I think I’m with X on this one. Wrapping paper is something like, red hair if you like brown hair, or slightly overweight, or something very superficial. I know Maverick said something earlier about peoples comments being judgemental, but for real…finding a mate ain’t shit but a contest and until we seal the deal, its all judgemental. We’re trying to determine if people align with our wants and desires…so its okay to do that because ultimately you have to live with your decisions.
I mean shit, if i dont want a woman that has slept with 100 dudes, I think I’m totally justified. And a woman’s parnters means shit in the long run, its a personal mind thing. Does it speak of intolerance…maybe…but shit, I’m making a decision that affects me and if I can’t have peace of mind with my decision, what the fuck else do I have?
For some women it might be bi-sexual, for others it might be the number of partners, and despite whether or not that has any real implications on a person’s personality or character, for some it might be a deal breaker. And from that point, if you don’t get to know them any better, are you really missing out??
I understand the potential and shit, but unrealized potential in somebody you don’t even get to know might as well not exist…so you aint missing out on anytyhing.
January 12th, 2006 17:22
I see what you’re saying. I do think that sexuality is important to a relationship, but not in the way it does for you. I believe that someone’s sexuality is only a problem when that person is dishonest or unfaithful, and only because it speaks to the largest problem of all: trust. I realize that most of this is people’s personal preferences in their lives, and I don’t find that to be the problem. My concern is devaluing someone because of their sexual stance. The passion that people seem to have about sexuality replaces reason–when we say “eeewww” about homosexuality or bisexuality that when we take a preference and impose it on the world. (Just like I’m doing right now, heh.) But really. We’ve judged someone without knowing them. What other experiences do we have when people judge us without knowing us? Racism, sexism, classism, and a host of others. I’m all for choosing your own standards, but I also believe we should always interrogate our standards. Sometimes they hurt us more than help us.
January 12th, 2006 17:36
Damn Chocolat… you’re not playin’!!! LOL You damn near posted a response to Panama’s comment BEFORE he posted the comment! LOL
First of all I don’t “devalue” anyone… I simply rule them out as a life partner. A bisexual man could be my best friend in the world… but EVERYONE is not up for contention to be my life mate. There are basic standards that rule people out before I get to know them at all. Like dude must have teeth. Clean teeth. He must be hygienic. He must be… straight. Period. Fundamental things like that. There could be some really GREAT guys out there for whom brushing his teeth and bathing are not priorities. Well guess what, that guy is not for me. Am I missing out? No. Because I want a man who is all the things that he might have to offer… PLUS who brushes his teeth and bathes. See what you’re suggesting is that someone forego what they claim they want and need and SETTLE because someone could possibly have the OTHER things they want and need.
I don’t get down like that.
I want what I want and that’s what I aim for. I don’t JUDGE a man because he’s openly bisexual, that’s fine… good for you. Great. Screw animals too if you like. *shrug* I couldn’t care less. But I take that fabulous bisexual man out of the running to share my life, and since I do not WANT to share my life with a man who is attracted to other men… I am not missing out on whatever ELSE he might have to offer… why, because he can’t give me something that I need… his complete heterosexuality. It’s really pretty simple.
January 12th, 2006 17:44
uhhh no wrapping paper you can take off and change mix it and match it, with your sexuality you cannot. that is something that is part of who you are. And i dont think anyone here is devaluing or trying to degrade anyone just because they are BI. Im sure at one point in time all of us have engaged in risky behavior, whether it was driving drunk or unprotected sex or even walking in the hood after midnight. However, when someone makes a decision to sleep with men and women, you potentially double the ramifications. thats a whole nutha world, i dont want to participate in. A mental picture of my mate having sex with a man would forever be etched in my brain (if he disclosed to me he was bi). I dont want that stress. Its something i just dont want for myself.
January 12th, 2006 17:51
That is kinda wild to me, X, saying that a bi-guy could be your best friend in the world, but would never be your mate…almost as if he is not good enough…
I am not getting on anyone for liking what they like…you may like permed hair as opposed to natural hair. You may like blondes as opposed to brunettes. You may like people with green eyes as opposed to brown. The point is that your preferences do not rule out the remaining possibilities…
People nowadays frown upon racial preferences…why is sexual necessarily different? If you saw a man, do you ask him if he has dated outside of the race before? And if he lied about it, would you automatically leave him? If not, then this is kinda the same situation. If you asked your man how many sexual partners he has had, and he says none, but then it is revealed that he had two partners before you, would you automatically leave him? If not, this is kinda the same situation. You may have your preferences, but they are preferences not discriminations.
Point blank, I am not trying to convince anyone to abandon what they believe. But I am trying to show the parallels in the argument. By the time your partner gets to you, they have a past. Why is excusing multiple sexual partners different than excusing bi-sexuality? Regardless to their past, when they are with you, you are the one that they like. If your man dated a white woman with three children and loved S&M, but found God or something, many of you would look past his history. But not with sexuality…I just want people to realize that they are indeed judging…
January 12th, 2006 17:56
Okay, well I don’t mean settle. I mean reassess. I once thought I wanted a man who was politically active. I did not want to budge on that, so I dated a lot of them that were “down for the cause.” I reassessed. What I really wanted was a mate that was interested in improving the world, rather than just living in it and taking from it.
I’m SO not trying to change anyone’s mind–and by looking at all these posts–I doubt I could! I just want to add to this conversation since it is a bit one-sided.
Believe it or not, I haven’t dated a bisexual man, but I have dated outside of my race and have gotten more than a little advice similar to what people are saying here. It ends up boiling down to a question of how high of a priority sex ranks in determining a relationship.
As for the risky behavior, yes, everyone should be operating under the safest sexual conditions. No one wants to die. Again, I think that this isn’t actually the problem. The problem is, is my man responsible? Faithful? Mature? Without those things, we’re all still operating under risky behavior.
I am beginning to think I’ve joined this discussion to avoid teh work I got right here.
But who can turn down juicy convo?
January 12th, 2006 17:57
@X
Exactly, I equate a mans sexuality with his teef game, if it isnt correct, youve got to go! Hygiene is a must, no one should settle, always go for what you WANT, not what you can GET.
And i have asked men if they traveled over to the other side, i have no problems with honesty. I am protecting myself. Same as if hes a woman beater or has a committment problem, peace…thats not what im looking for in a man.
January 12th, 2006 18:03
Hey new topic Panama,
Would we rather our mates cheat on us with the opposite sex or the same sex. What would have a problem with the most and why?
January 12th, 2006 18:22
@Creem: How is asking your man’s sexuality protecting yourself? This is exactly what I am talking about…people equating sexuality with promiscuity. Your man may have had one relationship in the past…it may have been with a man or a woman. Why is it safer for him to have been with a woman? The question that you all seem to be trying to find an answer for it how much has he been out there. But sexuality does not tell you that, and to assume such from sexuality is wrong…
That is why I am wondering…if you (general you, not specific you) don’t care how many partners your mate has had in the past, then how can you honestly care about sexuality? It is not for the purpose of protecting yourself…
January 12th, 2006 19:01
@Mav: I guess my question is why is it so important to point out to people that they are judging? In all truth, who doesnt judge when it comes to relationships. Everybody does. Nobody is exempt.
The first thing we do when we find folks is size them up according to our own personal wants. Why is that so wrong? Like I said before, WE have to live with our decisions. And for the record, lots of people do have issues with a partner that has slept with enough people to populate a small city. That can be a deal breaker on its own. That’s why peole lie about it so much or at least ambiguous about it when they meet somebody. Maybe it wouldn’t bother you if you dated a woman who has slept with an entire college campus, but it would bother me. Am I judging her…maybe, but its against my own personal wants. Such is life…
Plus, homosexuality, and more specifically male gayness isn’t the most comfortable thing for everybody to accept. People might be okay with it, but put it in somebody’s face and it might cause uneasiness. I have no problem with men being gay, but when I saw the scene on the Real World of Karamo and his boyfriend dancing and shit, it made me uncomfortable, and I don’t even KNOW them. Two men who are clearly dating holding hands…okay…two men grinding on one another or tonguing eachother down…for a second, its gonna make me uncomfortable.
There’s also a double standard issue here. If my girl tells me that she’s bi, well, for some reason it just doesn’t bother me so much. But I can totally understand how a woman might be uncomfortable with that. And shit on the real, I know lots of great women that I might not date for whatever reason…does that mean I don’t think they’re not good enough? No, it means they are not what I’m looking for. That’s not a judgement that’s just taking what’s presented in accordance to what you’re for.
I just don’t see how that’s wrong, be it sexual preference, racial makeup, etc.
January 12th, 2006 19:15
Go to CDC or planned parenthood, it is a known or unknown fact that it is EASIER for men to transmit diseases than it is for woman to transmit disease. The anus has very delicate tissue that tears easily, possibly transmitting all types of stuff not to mention the bacteria from the fecal matter thats already in there.
So is there a fear thats associated with Gay or BI men,…yes there is and to me its some what warranted.
good nite all. im going home.
January 12th, 2006 19:21
haha. Have a good night.
Let us all remember, it’s not only men having anal sex. Need I say “tip drill”?
Well I guess this is the end of this discussion for the night. See you on the next Panama post.
January 13th, 2006 09:30
Of course, I am coming back to find the comments that were made after I left, so I just felt the need to address something right quick…
The problem is not preference. We all have our preferences. If you decide to date a black girl, that might be your preference. If you decide to date a girl from New York, that might be your preference. If you decide to date a girl with kids, that might be your preference…
The problem that I am having is the logic that people are using to justify their preferences. You don’t have to justify them…if you have a preference, sometimes it just is what it is. Period. But to sit up and start pulling in CDC statistics on why you don’t want to date bi-men versus promiscuous men or any other related matter is senseless…
Why is it important to point out that people are judging? Because people are acting as if they are not doing it. Yes, we all do judge…but recognize it for what it is. We all have our prejudices, but it is one thing to recognize it as that. It is another thing to try and rationalize prejudice…
January 13th, 2006 10:18
Well call me senseless then…to me its common sense. If men sleeping with men= a higher transmission rate then men sleeping with women= lower transmission rate then id rather take my chances with the latter. (in addition to my choice to be with a hetero man)
January 13th, 2006 10:27
Mav,
I hear you on recognizing our prejudices, but it’s human nature to make sense out of anything you believe. Sure, that’s a generalization, but most discourse between people centers on substantiating and articulating one’s stand point. How do you feel about the death penalty? Why do you like purple? Why was the Best Man better than Love and Basketball? Ultimately, anybody could take unequivocal, unexplained stances on all of these things…I’m against the death penalty, I dont like the color purple or the “Color Purple”. The Best Man was way better.
I guess my point is that there’s no discussion in unexplained assertions…there’s no exchange of ideas if we dont make sense out of our preferences (or prejudices) for others to understand, whether by CDC statistics, closely held beliefs, conservative absolutism or plain illogic. I don’t think it’s a rationalization at all…people don’t bolster their theories to feel better about themselves, or to suggeest that they aren’t prejudices; i think they merely want to explain to someone how they’ve come to hold and maintain them.
January 13th, 2006 10:32
If you are a Black man who strictly only dates white women for 10 years, then decides to date Black women, you have to live with the fact that some Black women will not date you simply because you exclusively dated white women in the past. Is it acceptable for a Black woman to refuse to date you? Absolutely. That woman feels there are issues at work in you that made only white women attractive in your mind. That may be true or untrue, but that is her opinion; as a Black woman, she doesn’t want to go there and deal with those issues.
Similarly, if you (again, general you) are a bi man, who has dated men in the past, you have to deal with the fact that some women don’t want to deal with the underlying issues that made men attractive to you. This isn’t about nature v. nurture, or anything like that. It’s about one person’s willingness to deal with another person’s quirks/preferences/beliefs- the basis of picking someone for ANY kind of relationship, be it friendship, fuck buddy or life partner. It’s not prejudice, it’s preference, and just like chocolate vs. strawberry ice cream, it doesn’t require rationalizaton.
January 13th, 2006 10:42
Well, if you are going to go that route, then you may as well rule out dating black people because the are more likely to produce children with sick-cell anemia. You may as well not date Eastern European Jews because they may have Niemann-Pick disease. You may as well not date someone who is Irish because they may have hereditary hemochromatosis. That is how senseless that rationale is. You can worry about the person that you are dealing with in particular…there is no problem in that. But you are generalizing, and that is where the problem lies. Higher transmission rate does not mean the person you are talking to has something…
January 13th, 2006 10:43
And I am sorry…I was responding to Creem’s comments in my last comment…
January 13th, 2006 10:48
@Skelow: you asked the question is it acceptable for a Black woman to refuse to date a man who has only dated white women in the past. Acceptable to who? Of course, it is “acceptable” because she has accepted the fact that she is going to do it. But the fact of the matter is, how much of a problem can he have if he is dating the Black woman now? You are refusing to date a man because you assume he has issues, but you don’t really know. And you don’t care to know…once again, we are going off of generalizations…
January 13th, 2006 11:32
It is not generalizing, and yes there are some people that will NOT date someone who has sickle cell because they dont want to pass that gene on to their offspring. It makes perfect sense to me. And no it doesnt mean that, that person has something but knowing that he has engaged in homosexual relations (to me) puts him at (a higher or greater risk) than a hetereo male.
If i were the type of woman that generalizes, I would have stopped dating black men a loooooong time ago. I could have assumed that they were all the same and started looking outside my race. However, i havent, i love my black men and that includes (ALL of them Gay, mixed, BI). but as for me when choosing a potential life partner, i need him to be hetero.
January 13th, 2006 11:48
Wow, if there are people out there who won’t date someone with sickle-cell, then I am done. Because if that makes perfect sense, then I have no more basis to argue…that makes absolutely no sense to me…
January 13th, 2006 12:00
I think most people look at homosexuality and bi-sexuality as a completely different world. Perhaps including cross-dressing, lip synching drag queens, transgendered people, etc. This whole comments section has been very PC, but I wonder if everyone is THAT comfortable with homo/bi-sexuality.. I know that Maverick is an atheist.. or at least that is my impression from his blog. But for the “God fearing” people, I think that homo/bi-sexuality remains questionable behavior. Not to get in a big religious discussion, because I can not cast stones! LOL..but I would never consider dating a bisexual because I consider the lifestyle to be strange to me, and not an option. If someone had that in their past, and felt that is was totally experimental, and definately had to interest in it whatsoever for their present/future, then it is slightly possible, I might be able to move past it. I do not see how likening interracial relationships to homo/bi-sexuality makes sense. Skin color? Screwing dudes up the bum? I don’t think those are even in the same ballpark of lifestyle differences. AT ALL.
A black man dated a woman with white skin? He must have very questionable ethics. How could a black woman EVER LIVE with the knowledge that her man had put his thing in a WHITE WOMAN?? Because a white woman is pretty much the devil. LOL
Again, for the “God fearing” people out there, I don’t think there is much of a parallel between interracial/bi-sexuality. IMHO.
January 13th, 2006 12:02
So you mean to tell me it makes no sense if you have the SC gene, and you want to have a healthy child that you would procreate with another person who has it, thus giving your child an excrutiating, life long disease? When you have the OPTION to find a mate who doesnt have the gene? how does that NOT make sense.
January 13th, 2006 12:04
@Juli: I think the parallel was made strictly for the purpose of highlighting that people are making their decisions possibly due to the past behavior of the person…I think that is as far as it was going (or at least I thought so)…
And as for me, I wouldn’t consider myself an atheist. Closer to agnostic…
January 13th, 2006 12:11
First of all, from what I know, if a parent has it, then the child will not have it…that is the way that Sickle Cell works due to the workings of active and dormant genes. If both of your parents don’t have the sickle cell trait, then you cannot get the disease…they can just pass the trait onto you (someone correct me if I am wrong)…
But it is stuff like this that kills me. You would not DATE someone with sickle cell for fear that you might fall in love and marry them, and if you possibly have kids one day, you might pass it along to them. What kind of prejudice stuff is that? You may as well not date someone with hypertension or diabetes in their family. You may as well not date someone with breast cancer in their family. That type of logic is highly insulting and I can’t believe you can’t see that…
January 13th, 2006 12:14
This is bordering on silly now…I can possibly understand the homosexual/bi-sexual thing because you are deciding whether a person’s lifestyle is for you. The point I was making is that we don’t need to rationalize these things because there is not as much logic behind it as there is preference. But to discriminate on someone because of something they are born with…you guys are killing me here!!! So if you date a guy a couple of times and it comes out that he has sickle-cell, then you cut him off??? I can’t believe we are saying this…
January 13th, 2006 12:20
hmmm.. I would not descriminate for an illness. I would probably even date/marry someone actively fighting cancer. shoot, maybe even AIDS. You never know. But sexuality is kindof at the core of who you are, don’tcha think? Different sexual preferences seem to give people much less in common with each other. I suppose like a devil worshipper marrying a CHristian or something. There is a major common ground missing.
I think to many hetero’s, bi/homo sexuality makes that person practically a different species. Right or wrong, a bi-sexual man might as well be a cow, for how likely I would be to date him. Also, I think that bisexual men KNOW, WITHOUT A DOUBT, that that info should be divulged to a woman they are dating. I think they would feel a conviction about that, a sense of WRONG for NOT telling a woman that. It would be like a secret, because it is a major part of who they are. isn’t it?
January 13th, 2006 12:33
No, I agree with you, Juli…sexuality is a big part of who you are. I was just saying that people are making their reasons for discriminating on the basis of sexuality more logical than they really are…
As for whether they should come out and tell women from the start, that is another conversation…
January 13th, 2006 12:36
I didnt say I wouldnt date a person who has sickle cell because I have, im just saying there are people that will do those things. It is a reality and it is one that needs to be faced. Its called survival of the fittest or Eugenics and it is real. and if both parents have the SS gene, their children will get it. you can do the math yourself by doing the Punnett Square (those who took biology or remember some stuff from it know what im talking about)
and for you to say someones logic is silly or theres no logic behind their preference is wrong. People have the right to say however and whatever they feel. You are the one being judgemental by saying its wrong.
January 13th, 2006 12:49
I like dem guhs dat like dem guhs!
January 13th, 2006 13:04
You are right, Creem…if both of the parents have the trait, then it is likely the child will get the disease. But on that note, everyone in the world could say they would never date you because you have the trait and they don’t want to risk how their child will come out. That is like dating people with the thought in mind that you are planning how your child will look…so you are only going to date men with good hair, light eyes, light skinned and all of these other traits because you are looking out for your child. So you are screening “love” behind the guise that you are truly looking out for your child…
And on another note, logic is logic. There is no such thing as “someone’s logic”…if it is logical, it is logical for everyone. Two plus two does not equal four just because it makes sense to me…and applause for Harold Clemens coming in and adding the humor…I thank you…
January 13th, 2006 13:07
@Creem: and I see that I am a bit confusing in what I said. My point was if a person has sickle cell, their children are going to get it only if both parents have it. So if you are not going to date someone who has sickle cell, your child would only be your excuse if you had it also…otherwise, you are just discriminating…period…
January 13th, 2006 14:00
@Maverick - Dammit, I posted another comment, but I don’t see it…
But I essentially was commenting back to you… yes, you’re right, there’s no almost in it. A man who desires other men is NOT good enough. Because that’s not what I want and I’m fabulous enough to not settle for “good enough” but I want EXACTLY what I want and I deserve nothing less that THAT… not “good enough.”
What I think confounds me about your analogies is that you keep comparing a person’s sexuality, something that is an essential core of who they are, to mutable traits like hair texture and skin color. They are not that trivial. For me it’s not a preference, because in my mind, a preference is something that you “prefer” but don’t have to have… it’s preferred. Well no, my husband’s heterosexuality is NOT a preference, it is a REQUIREMENT.
And I don’t know why it’s wild that I could be friends with someone but stop there because they don’t meet my needs relationship-wise. That’s common sense to me.
What I find strange is that YOU’RE judging our wanting nothing less than what we want and calling THAT judgment. LOL It’s a vicious cycle of judgment. If realizing that someone with desires that are not strictly heterosexual is not the person I’d like to spend my life with is judgment, then so be it. But don’t we ALL judge? Isn’t dating a sort of judging process, where you determine just who IS good enough in your opinion to continue on - to get further? I mean the way you tell it, we should just forget the standards we have and settle down with or open up to EVERYONE we meet because hell, why judge them, they just MIGHT be great people.
I mean please, I’m sure there are heroin and crack addicts that are FABULOUS people, but damn if I want to marry into THAT. Sorry, just not for me. I have standards, yes, they might be judgmental, but that’s why EVERYONE is not even your friend, let alone your spouse… because life is about judgment calls. Period.
January 13th, 2006 14:11
@X: What I am doing is assessing what you all are saying and trying to get at the logic that you are using for it. I am not looking down on you for wanting what you want…I don’t feel that you are morally bankrupt or something because you want a heterosexual husband…that is what you want. But to pull some of the reasons into this discussion that people have is what I am taking issue with. To sit up and throw STD transmission rates into it and use that to rationalize it is not logical, because transmission rates have more to do with sexual behavior than sexual orientation. You can’t have a high transmission rate if you have never had sex. So, it seems as if people are equating sexual orientation with promiscuity and that is not a logical parallel to make…
As for the friend thing, that comment is wild to me just because I can’t imagine telling one of my friends they are not good enough for me. That really has nothing to do with the sexuality conversation at all and was just me trying to understand how a person could tell someone they considered a friend that they are good enough to be your best friend, but not good enough to be with you…
January 13th, 2006 16:32
See but whether or not you would WORD it that way is one thing, but if a cool friend of yours came to you that you knew you could never get with, because let’s say she had children, or because she smoked, or simply because her personality or ethics rubbed you the wrong way as ideology your WIFE would have, or tactics your WIFE would use, would you not tell her, “Girl please, we have to keep this as friendship because you and I would NEVER work out!!!” I know I’ve said that to MANY male friends. Not for the bisexuality reason but for others, like, “I’d KILL you if I was your girlfriend/wife!!!” or whatever. I would never say to a friend, “You’re not good enough.” but if you chalk it up, they’re not. *shrug* Not for THAT grand of a role in your life. Not for FOREVER. And that’s what people tell each other every day when they date for a while and break up, or when they choose others to marry. You weren’t good enough to be my spouse. *shrug* Harsh, but true. You dont have to actually SAY it, but if you analyze it, that’s exactly what your actions mean.
January 13th, 2006 16:58
I threw those CDC statistics up in there because they are a reason why someone wouldnt want to get with a BI-man. Maybe no one wants to admit it but in the back of some peoples minds, gay-bi man does set off HIV/AIDS alarm. The rates among Gay/bi men are higher then it is for gay/bi woman. Its easier to be infected by a man. It is what it is.
and to me logic can be subjective.
January 13th, 2006 18:22
I’m glad to see that X hasn’t stop blogging. I guess she’ll just do it in folks’ comments section. LOL. Much love X..
I also believe that everyone is entitled to their own preferences and should set their own standards for their mate or potential mates. Yes it is passing judgement but that’s NOT a bad thing at all. You can’t miss what you never had so if you lose out on getting to know a ‘great’ person because something about them struck you the wrong way, then so be it. It’s your life to make that choice.
January 14th, 2006 19:48
I think you are gay. I do not mean this in a disrespectful way. It is nothing wrong with it. It does not lesson your manhood or talent. But, in my experience men who talk about homosexuality this much are closeted gay men. Again, nothing at all wrong with that. It is nothing wrong if your anus screams for the penetration of another man’s organ than the sweet tongue of a woman. Accept responsibility for who you are. Please quit misleading your readers. We are more than ready to embrace you for who you truly are. Blessings are awaiting you.
With love,
A concerned US citizen
January 16th, 2006 02:30
Gotdayum. Is the IP Police gonna have to roll up in this bitch again?
January 16th, 2006 03:08
As one negro sheep doth quoted, “Back on the scene, crispy and clean” Lol. Panama, great post! This is the debate of the day among our generation. I know I have more gay male friends than my parents would have had and I’m sure I’m more liberal. But I would agree with X in that I am not the least bit interested in marrying nary a one. End note. C’est fini. Everyone has their preferences… tall, short, big-boneded, Idris Elba (oh… that would be mine. Lol)… homosexual (even a part-time one) is not one of mine for a mate. That doesn’t mean one has prejudged gay people. Doesn’t mean one has condemned anyone to fire and brimstone. Just means that is your stance. I must however, add, that I loved the debate: X and Mav, you guys are insightful thinkers… there’s a reason why I have you linked (well, X, until you left the scene. *sniffle*) Take care all…
January 16th, 2006 20:27
Is Panama Jackson gonna have to choke a bitch?
I’d like to personally thank “a concerned US citizen” for providing the funniest shit I’ve heard this week.
Hell, I wasn’t even aware that I talk about homosexuality that much…
Fact is bucko, I’m not gay or bi.
And I especially like the line “accept responsibility for who you are” coming from somebody who won’t leave a name. Classic…
Oh and thank you for the blessings that await me…now I feel much better. And thanks for sharing…please do come back and share more of your offbrand ass opinions.
Nigga don’t check his shit for two days and he gets called gay foar asking a question? You just have to love the internet…its faaaaaaaaan-tastic.