Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/11/2005 2:40:20 PM EDT



Friday, March 11, 2005

Gay.com ads definitely foment reaction

By SUSAN PAYNTER
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST

The worst reaction to an ad is no reaction at all.

Well, no worries, Gay.com. Seattle is not ignoring the new series of "Come Together" ads appearing here and across the United States that claims that the image of two perfectly muscled men in bed together, wrapped in the American flag, is a message of "inclusion."

Yes, it's a naked attempt to sell gay men on the personals, travel perks and other services of Gay.com. But it's also an ad with the higher purpose of freedom and justice for all, or so claimed its spokespeople in Wednesday's column.

This at just the time that the State Supreme Court is considering gays' right to marry.

Well, if Gay.com wants to scoop up a spectrum of Seattle's response, gay and straight, they're going to need a very wide net.

"Once again, the gay movement shoots itself in the foot," says Richard Bray, who wonders how effective the ads may have been if they had focused on the (fully dressed) people and not on their sexuality. "This ad isn't about my right to marry my partner," he said. "It's about Gay.com, pure and simple."

The timing couldn't be worse, said Robert Kohrt. "Sometimes the GLBT community needs to get a reality check on what is appropriate, or at least sensible at critical times," he said. "I know there is freedom of speech and a dollar to be made in our nation ... but the time for these ads is certainly not now."

"In Olympia on Tuesday there was a big group of supporters of gay marriage. And which one did the news cameras focus on?" asks Jonathan Granato. "The one with the 'Drugs, Sex and Rock 'n' Roll' T-shirt.

"I'm gay and was nearly murdered for it, but have never been particularly active in the 'community,' " he continued. "Know why? Because, unless a gay man looks like one of those two 'hotties' in the billboard ad, nobody will give them the time of day."

"I love the term 'body fascism,' " wrote John Voorhees about criticism of Gay.com's penchant for physical perfection. "I don't identify with those ads any more than do the straight people who object. And how very unfortunate those ads are being displayed now. I think it's time EVERYBODY stopped wrapping ANYTHING in the flag."

Even a seven-year member of Gay.com who requested anonymity objected to the ad.

"I was offended and have fired off an e-mail to them," he said. "I find it offensive and not helpful to the cause of same-sex marriage, especially at this time."

Wait, Ralph McGinnis countered. The issues of "body fascism" and of offending heterosexuals in a time of fighting for civil liberties are entirely separate.

"What is offensive is that someone would be offended by two men lying in bed together," he said. "If we have to 'act right' and be discreet about our sexuality to get rights, then we aren't getting any rights at all."

Since the '70s there has been a deep divide within the gay/lesbian community between gay liberation and gay civil rights, says Robin Tyler, executive director of www.dontamend.com, an arm of The Equality Campaign.

But the current and crucial struggle "isn't about our lifestyles, it's about our lives," she said. "If you sexualize the gay movement you're doing the same thing as the far right -- seeing us only as sexual beings. This is not a movement from the waist down."

Also heard from were many who complained of a double standard when it comes to sexy ads using the nearly nude and nubile to sell everything from cars to candy bars.

"Everyday, all day, morning and night, I cannot turn on the TV or open a magazine or newspaper without being inundated with very scantily clad 20-ish females parading in front of my eyes," Allan Wenzel wrote.

Then, sadly and predictably, came the calls and mail from those objecting to the very idea of same-sex marriage or any civil rights for gays.

"Not mentioned is the 'right' to claim spousal inclusion in pension plans, Social Security, health insurance plans," wrote Jim Hochstein. (Actually, Jim, I did mention those rights too. But go on.)

"These affect my payments. So, because of these, I do not believe their campaign to be 'tolerated' ... I see their campaign of 'warm and fuzzy under the flag' as one of 'in your face and down with your values,' " he said. "(It says) 'I am going to force you to accept me, and you will have to pay for it, too.' "

And finally, there was this friendly note from "Anonymous": "You Country Bumpkin (Bleep), You should be ashamed to call yourself American much less pass yourself off as some image of soccer-mom tolerance for everyone and everything B.S. These Gay.com ads make the average American sick to the stomach -- which is why more will vote even more conservative(sic) the next time around. ..."

Well, Mr. Bleep, we may well respond that way. Or more than half of us may opt to stay home, again. But, while we may be unresponsive to elections, we're anything but apathetic when it comes to good old American advertising.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 2:45:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 2:45:55 PM EDT by R-32]
I would not give a flying FF as long as the Flag was not being used in a unlawful way...
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 2:46:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 2:47:01 PM EDT by Phil_in_Seattle]
Burn it.

Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:08:41 PM EDT
Abnormal behavior shouldn't be associated with Old Glory!

These dingle berries are only pushing normal folks farther away from them with this crap.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:14:22 PM EDT
free speech , now get over it
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:17:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Frisky-Ferret:
free speech , now get over it



OK..........

Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:20:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Frisky-Ferret:
free speech , now get over it



And it has already been ruled that burning Old Glory is protected by free speech.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:30:38 PM EDT
i see blue balls is bored again
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:33:14 PM EDT
Just waiting to get off work, watching you step on your dick every chance you get..............
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:36:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 3:36:35 PM EDT by bigscrun]
Momma?............


Link Posted: 3/11/2005 3:49:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bigscrun:
Momma?............


www.rollmop.org/ferrets/images/easter_ferret.jpg



He thinks he is the real DaBunny.



Can someone put a target over it so I can use it for 100 yard site in?
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 4:09:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By R-32:



Can someone put a target over it so I can use it for 100 yard site in?



Link Posted: 3/11/2005 4:18:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 4:23:32 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Spyda:
Abnormal Perverted behavior shouldn't be associated with Old Glory!


Fixed it for ya!



That picture just angers me. Now I'm more homohostile than before.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 4:25:35 PM EDT
Not going to see that in God's country. Come on down. By the way, 70 and sunny tomorrow. Great day for shooting.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 5:35:08 PM EDT
little blue balls, you need to get a little more,

but ill give you thumbs up at least you use new material phil just keeps ramblin the same shit day after day
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 5:38:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:

Originally Posted By R-32:



Can someone put a target over it so I can use it for 100 yard site in?



pic5.picturetrail.com/VOL77/858902/4468668/88711143.jpg




Thanks!...

Im printing a couple up as we speak.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 5:49:13 PM EDT
Which one's the 'girl'?

Speaking of wimmens - if that picture were of two topless women, would anyone complain?
If that picture were of a man and a woman, both topless...would anyone complain?
If that picture were about Christian Heterosexual Married Couples, would anyone complain?
How 'bout 3 or more people?
How 'bout an incestuous couple...gender notwithstanding?
If that picture were of a Person and an Animal...

We all know where it starts.
Where does it stop?
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 5:50:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Frisky-Ferret:
little blue balls, you need to get a little more,

but ill give you thumbs up at least you use new material phil just keeps ramblin the same shit day after day



Yeah it's called the truth.

Hurts doesn't it?
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 5:56:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:

Hurts doesn't it?



nope should it?

man you are pretty pitiful thinking things said on the internet hurt ya, what a idiot, proves you need to get out
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:03:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 6:08:17 PM EDT by Phil_in_Seattle]
The truth I post sure seems to get under your thin skin sparky, you don't answer questions, you change the subjects, you run away, or you ask for the thread to be deleted by a moderator.

You're the freaking gunkid of ARF pissant ferret.

A $20 whore-troll is what you are.

Don't you have to run off and support Red China tonight?

Maybe a meeting with your commie friends?

Or is it your turn to lick John Kerrys ass tonight?

Come to a group outing sometime why don't you?

Oh wait that's right you're afraid a volcano might blow up.


Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:21:18 PM EDT
I thought this thread was about fags on billboards...OOOPS! I said FAG.

Here's WHY:

I saw 2 bumper stickers on the same car.
One was the yellow = sign on the blue background, which as far as I know means: I'm GAY.
The other one said 'Don't judge me', or something to that effect.

What I got out of it was this:
Why would anyone blatantly advertise their sexual preference, which adds up to about 10% of the norm, then add 'dont' judge me'?

I think the term is 'non-sequitor'.

Maybe it's time to put the 90% HETERO attitude to work.
Billboards and Bumper Stickers.
Can you imagine what could be said and the effect it would have?
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:22:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 6:42:12 PM EDT by HABU]

Originally Posted By Boom_Stick:
That picture just angers me. Now I'm more homohostile than before.



Homohostile, thats good. I aint afraid of a homo, so technically I'm not a homophobe, although all homos would clasify me as one beause I dont agree with them.


Originally Posted By BusMaster007:
Which one's the 'girl'?

Speaking of wimmens - if that picture were of two topless women, would anyone complain?
If that picture were of a man and a woman, both topless...would anyone complain?
If that picture were about Christian Heterosexual Married Couples, would anyone complain?
How 'bout 3 or more people?
How 'bout an incestuous couple...gender notwithstanding?
If that picture were of a Person and an Animal...

We all know where it starts.
Where does it stop?



Your damn straight I'd still be pissed about it if it were two fuzzbumpers or two heteros or anybody else. That is strictly against the flag rules. Remember the shitstorm when those dumb assed tennis players sat on the flag ON THE GROUND? As the flag nazi, I am always noticing flags hung backwards, not lighted, 6 inches tall and 4 inches long on some asshats antenna, on the side of the road, hung over the window on somebodys garage, Worn as clothing like that dillweed Kid Rock during the Superbowl two years aago etc, etc.

Too many good men have died in defense of Old Glory to have it treated shabbily. Unfortunately the America haters dont give a rats ass about what many of us hold sacred. I hope I never witnes some asshat burning the flag, but if I do I hope there is a huge fire extinguisher handy to hose down the asshats with.

I'm saddened by the lack of flag ettiquette my fellow citizens show, especilly in the wake of 9-11. People are in such a frenzy to fly the flag, yet don't bother to employ simple common sense.

God bless America and may Old Glory always fly properly.

On a side note, the ownage continues.


ETA: (d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker's desk, draping the front of the platform, and for decoration in general.

www.sar.org/colors/Flag-Act.htm
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:23:06 PM EDT
It made me laugh.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:23:06 PM EDT
actually me and hillary are going to dinner while bills in the hospital.

see phil gets all pissy when the truth hurts.

drink some prune juice you need to loosen up
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:25:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 6:32:13 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By BusMaster007:
Speaking of wimmens - if that picture were of two topless women, would anyone complain?

Put on a billboard in Seattle, yes I would.

If that picture were of a man and a woman, both topless...would anyone complain?

Put on a billboard in Seattle, yes I would.

If that picture were about Christian Heterosexual Married Couples, would anyone complain?
No respectable Christian (or person) would flaunt sexual relations like that.

How 'bout 3 or more people?
How 'bout an incestuous couple...gender notwithstanding?
If that picture were of a Person and an Animal...


Sexual relations are not appropiate for public view. Homo's dont care about principles, or values. They only care about their perverted behavior and making others accept it (selfish).


We all know where it starts.
Where does it stop?


It started with the perverts. It stops when the homo agenda is shot down for what it is.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:28:33 PM EDT
Be sure to tell us when you post something truthful Drew.



Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:33:21 PM EDT
I don't have a problem with homsexuals, I've stood side by side demonstrating for our gun rights with men who happen to be homosexual, probably some women too.

I do have a problem with fags.

Understand that there is a difference.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:36:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 6:38:45 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
Understand that there is a difference.


There's no difference. A perverts a pervert whether they flaunt it or not.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:37:40 PM EDT
you shouldnt be so hard on yourself phil,

is that why your so angry? you know there are shrinks you casn talk to
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:42:20 PM EDT
At what point does perversion begin?

Are adult heterosexuals capable of being perverts (with other adult heterosexuals)?


Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:44:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 6:46:20 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
At what point does perversion begin?

Are adult heterosexuals capable of being perverts (with other adult heterosexuals)?

No matter what you use for distraction, homosexuality is a perverted behavior.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:46:07 PM EDT
ratboy my heritage is Irish/Scottish/German if I were angry the entire city would know it.

I think you should ask your psychiatrist why you have such difficulty with, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and capitalization. I'm sure it will have something to do with with your male ass fetish or your obsession with BigScruns genitalia.



Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:48:03 PM EDT
Sidebar: what about the caption on the image? I didn't see anybody comment on the "cum together" comment.

The homos chose to use the flag in their propoganda because they knew it would be a double whammy. [homo]They are just mad abut it because we are teh ghey.[/homo]

GAFB
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:48:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Boom_Stick:

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
At what point does perversion begin?

Are adult heterosexuals capable of being perverts (with other adult heterosexuals)?

No matter what you use for distraction, homosexuality is a perverted behavior.



Are all perversions unacceptable?

Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:51:35 PM EDT
phil i still see your hostile maybe you need a hug, its ok to let it out man

everyone lets pray for phil
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:52:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 6:58:02 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
Are all perversions unacceptable?


I'm pointing out the fact homosexuality is perverted.

Would you like to discuss the worlds perversions TOO, or are you simply trying to justify your defense of homosexuality?
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:53:31 PM EDT
Stop trying to touch me Drew, I don't go in for that man-man love shit.



Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:57:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
Stop trying to touch me Drew, I don't go in for that man-man love shit.




i was told to watch out for you , you need to get out phil dont sit on your ass all night
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:58:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Boom_Stick:

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
Are all perversions unacceptable?


I'm discussiong homosexuality and the fact it's perverted.

Would you like to talk about the worlds perversions, or are you making a point/justification about your defense of homosexuality?



The point is that you seem to be condemning homosexuality because it's a perversion.

At what point in the perversion scale does the condemning start?

These really are rhetorical questions because I'm not sure that there are black and white answers to them.

What's Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's quote?
“I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it.”
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 6:59:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 7:02:34 PM EDT by Charger01]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:

What's Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's quote?
“I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it.”



Here's my stance:

"I support homosexuality. But only when the two chicks are hot."
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 7:02:31 PM EDT
Yeah we can see who sits on his ass all day, how you manage to talk so loudly it when you're clearly on it all day is impressive though.

Frisky-Ferret
Active Stats
Post Count :: 708
Posts Per Day :: 13.62

Phil_in_Seattle
Active Stats
Post Count :: 5587
Posts Per Day :: 3.55
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 7:03:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Charger01:

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:

What's Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's quote?
“I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it.”



Here's my stance:

"I support homosexuality. But only when the two chicks are hot."



But when they invite you to join they aren't homosexual!
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 7:07:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 7:16:14 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
At what point in the perversion scale does the condemning start?


Many people choose to overlook perversion but it doesn't mean it shoulden't be condemned and berated.

Link Posted: 3/11/2005 7:12:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
At what point in the perversion scale does the condemning start?



That's what I was posting about.
The word at one time was "Queer".
Look it up in your Funk & Wagnell's.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 7:29:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Boom_Stick:

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
At what point in the perversion scale does the condemning start?


Many people choose to overlook perversion but it doesn't mean it shoulden't be condemned and berated.

The answer to what homosexualty is is cut and dry, black and white.



So all perversion is to be condemned and berated? Then at what point does perversion begin?

I'm not asking what homosexuality is, the question is where does perversion begin and that is where Justice Stewarts quote comes in.

Perversion to one may not be perversion to another but at some point it's perversion to everyone.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 7:46:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 7:55:00 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
So all perversion is to be condemned and berated? Then at what point does perversion begin?

I'm not asking what homosexuality is, the question is where does perversion begin and that is where Justice Stewarts quote comes in.

Perversion to one may not be perversion to another but at some point it's perversion to everyone.


If you want to confuse yourself with "retorical" questions go fo it. I've long freed myself from such frustrations and you should too.

Then again, maybe a TESC social engineering "think tank" is more your style.


TESC = the evergreen state college
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 7:55:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Boom_Stick:

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
So all perversion is to be condemned and berated? Then at what point does perversion begin?

I'm not asking what homosexuality is, the question is where does perversion begin and that is where Justice Stewarts quote comes in.

Perversion to one may not be perversion to another but at some point it's perversion to everyone.


If you want to confuse yourself with "retorical" questions go fo it. I've long freed myself from such frustrations and you should too.

Then again, maybe you feel more at home at a TESC social engineering "think tank."


TESC = the evergreen state college



You clearly don't know me if you think I'd fit in at the Evergreen State home for the loonies. (TESC)

Link Posted: 3/11/2005 8:05:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 9:44:46 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
You clearly don't know me if you think I'd fit in at the Evergreen State home for the loonies. (TESC)


The convoluted logic had me wondering.

There is a fine line between perversion and the norm. It is not a subjective issue like most evergreeners/liberals try to make it, and it seemed like you were using the same subjective reasoning.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 9:57:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2005 10:02:59 PM EDT by Boom_Stick]

Originally Posted By Phil_in_Seattle:
What's Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's quote?
“I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it.”


If a judge cant define pornography w/o having to look at it then we're doomed! All the judge has to do is look in the dictionary if he needs help!

BTW Phil, I wasn't trying to insult you with the TESC comment, I was trying to make a point. We should be able to define what porno is w/o having to stumble upon it, and we should be able to say what perversion is w/o having to take everything else into perspective first.
Link Posted: 3/11/2005 10:12:09 PM EDT
Unfortunately I don't think that the world will be running short on perversions, of all types, anytime soon.

Boom_Stick, I didn't think at any point that you were trying to insult me, it's been a reasoned and mannered discussion.
Link Posted: 3/12/2005 3:01:47 PM EDT
Man, gays and gay marriage is incredibly tame compared to the holocaust of horror that awaits on the internet for every fetish imaginable.
Morally outrageous? Sure, but it doesn't hurt anyone.



Unless your in prison.

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top