Posted on 02/21/2003 11:07:52 PM PST by webber
First, this place is not as prudish as it's detractors would like to portray it. As long as you're not too graphic, gratuitous or abusive I doubt anyone will object to you making a salient point, even if it involves an idea that most of us don't like. Of course, I don't speak for the management.
But I don't think you have to, I get your point. But you are wrong: a heterosexual male will never have his prostate jabbed by his wife's genitals. Devices don't count. Also, your statement "the only difference being that their partner is of same gender" attempts to imply that the gender of the participants is a trivial matter.
Most here would asert that the gender of the participants is a primary defining aspect in the nature of an act. So a woman doing something with a woman is never "exactly the same thing" as a man performing a similar act with a woman. Likewise male/male.
I have nothing to hide, it isn't graphic. What would be the point of an evasion?
Not compared to Jesse Dirkhsing. How did the press determine that one wasn't very newsworthy?
Yeah.. I agree. My initial thinking was that I would rather not have people accusing me of using the forum to post sexually explicit things. My plate is full as it is in here. But what the hell... ;-)
"But you are wrong: a heterosexual male will never have his prostate jabbed by his wife's genitals. Devices don't count."
Well.. maybe not by her genitals, but it does happen. Even if devices don't count, you still have to admit that anal sex occurs between men and women. Therefore, it is not an act exclusively reserved for homosexuals.
"Also, your statement "the only difference being that their partner is of same gender" attempts to imply that the gender of the participants is a trivial matter."
I'm attempting to imply no such thing. I've often seen it posted on FR that homosexuals are disgusting because of their engagement in anal sex and other less common things as well.. but all these acts are engaged in by heterosexuals too. Their points are all I'm trying to address... preemptively, maybe.
"Most here would asert that the gender of the participants is a primary defining aspect in the nature of an act. "
Sure.. but it doesn't change the fact that heterosexuals and homosexuals are engaging in the same acts.
"So a woman doing something with a woman is never "exactly the same thing" as a man performing a similar act with a woman. Likewise male/male. "
It's also not the same on a person to person basis. I see what you're saying, but I stand by my original statement.
"A male Milwaukee public school teacher has been arrested for dressing like a woman and trying to sexually molest a 15-year-old boy. James Simmons was charged with one count of child enticement and one count of second-degree sexual assault of a child."
Simmons told the boy that he was a transsexual and offered to pay him money to have oral sex with him.
After he made bail, he returned to teach in his elementary school classroom at Keefe Avenue Elementary School. School officials refused to tell reporters if Simmons would be removed from his teaching position.
Simmons has a police record of prostitution-related loitering and prowling in Milwaukee."
How are Milwaukee Freepers confronting the dereliction of duty and misfeasance by the school principal and district superintendent in their intentional and blatant failure to provide for the safety of the children in their care????
If it were my city I'd be :
writing letters to the newspaper;
calling talk radio;
picketing in front of the school;
bombarding the district superintendent with faxes, emails, phone calls and letters;
confronting the school board demanding they IMMEDIATELY place this scumbag on administrative leave, and fire the two incompetent administrators!!!
I agree.. that was quite brutal. I'm not in a position to answer why they did not publicize that more, because I'm not in the journalism profession. I'm definitely not here to defend journalists or their decisions, since I trust them about as much as you do.
Oh, they probably just agree with Qwerty, ala post #3 above, shrug their shoulders and mumble, "It's just 'anti-homosexual propaganda'."
Please stop misrepresenting what I said. It's at least ignorant, and at worst dishonest.
It amazes me is how many people get outraged at homosexual child molestations, but when it is a 13 y/o boy and his female teacher, for example, the tone of the thread is mild and often jokes are made like "Lucky guy....I sure wish I had a teacher like that when I was 13", etc
Molestation is molestation, no matter if it is heterosexual or homosexual. And not worthy of jokes.
No, two acts with different primary defining aspects are two different types of acts.
By definition, people of opposite sexes cannot possibly perform homosexual acts on eachother.
To accept a statement that they are the the same or even equivalent is to implicitly accept that sexuality is not an intrinsic part of a sex act. I don't accept that.
You said it.
See #3 above.
You will have a short life here.
So you're suggesting that there should be two different terms for anal sex? One indicating the participants are heterosexual, one indicating that they are homosexual?
I agree with you that heterosexuals do not perform "homosexual" sexual acts. They don't do homosexual anything... up to and including homosexual teeth brushing, homosexual feeding the dog, homosexual walks on the beach. Still, any of these acts remain exactly what they are, regardless of the sexual orientation of whoever is performing them.
"To accept a statement that they are the the same or even equivalent is to implicitly accept that sexuality is not an intrinsic part of a sex act. I don't accept that. "
You don't have to accept that these acts are roughly equivalent on a personal level, because for you they would not be. They wouldn't be for me either. But it doesn't take away from the fact that.. anal sex is anal sex. That's why there aren't separate definitions. (I've never written "anal" so much in my life.)
Please re-read. I was referring to the article, not the jailing of sex offenders.
"Perhaps it is non-political if they are all"stright" crimes, however, it turns political when the bright light shines on homos. " It would be political if I wrote an article which attempted to imply that because most molestations occurred at the hands of "heterosexual pedophiles", that heterosexuals were a bunch of pedophiles.
By all means, lock all these bastards up. They certainly deserve that and probably worse.
"You will have a short life here. "
We'll see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.