Tewder
Senior Member
As mayor your constituents should be a priority too, no? Go to the cottage on another weekend, or attend the flag pole thing... or if you can't do anything then don't be mayor. Plain and simple.
|
|
|
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
As mayor your constituents should be a priority too, no? Go to the cottage on another weekend, or attend the flag pole thing... or if you can't do anything then don't be mayor. Plain and simple.
kkgg7
Banned
Since we all know AIDS is NOT pretty much a gay disease, why does his voting against AIDS preventing money have anything to do with the gay people at all? Your logic works against each other here.
RC8
Senior Member
I wouldn't attend Mardi Gras if I was the mayor of N.O., and would rather not attend the gay parade as a mayor of Toronto. I don't like the way in which either one pretends to represent people, though the pride parade is less disagreeable out of the two.
I think we damage people's well-being by having the whole 'gay' tag at all. People should kiss/hug/fuck whoever and whatever they want so long as there's consent and some health precautions taken. I've met people in the gay community who are afraid to pursue a relationship with someone of the opposite sex due to the social/ideological implications of this, and that has turned me off the whole thing for good. The current mainstream debate treats sexuality as if 'straight' and 'gay' were different mutually exclusive sports teams. It also makes it laughably acceptable to point to an 'airhead blonde' as being 'fake and annoying' in liberal circles. Describing a man who purposely copies the airhead blonde's mannerisms as being 'fake and annoying' himself is unacceptable however, "he was born that way and he's a minority".
On the topic of pride I'd rather have a yearly lecture pointing to the biological and social phenomena affecting sexuality - This would encourage people to pursue theirs without any set of prejudices (as opposed to replacing the current conservative set of prejudices with a 'gay people are born gay and if you are gay you are gay' set of prejudices - which we do today). As a mayor I'd be happy to sponsor such an event.
I think we damage people's well-being by having the whole 'gay' tag at all. People should kiss/hug/fuck whoever and whatever they want so long as there's consent and some health precautions taken. I've met people in the gay community who are afraid to pursue a relationship with someone of the opposite sex due to the social/ideological implications of this, and that has turned me off the whole thing for good. The current mainstream debate treats sexuality as if 'straight' and 'gay' were different mutually exclusive sports teams. It also makes it laughably acceptable to point to an 'airhead blonde' as being 'fake and annoying' in liberal circles. Describing a man who purposely copies the airhead blonde's mannerisms as being 'fake and annoying' himself is unacceptable however, "he was born that way and he's a minority".
On the topic of pride I'd rather have a yearly lecture pointing to the biological and social phenomena affecting sexuality - This would encourage people to pursue theirs without any set of prejudices (as opposed to replacing the current conservative set of prejudices with a 'gay people are born gay and if you are gay you are gay' set of prejudices - which we do today). As a mayor I'd be happy to sponsor such an event.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
kkgg7:
AIDS isn't a gay disease - just because you aren't gay doesn't mean you are immune to it, but it is a disease with disproportionate impact to the gay community. Nice cheap try with that logic bit. Maybe you should tell your gay acquaintances that and see how they react?
AoD
AIDS isn't a gay disease - just because you aren't gay doesn't mean you are immune to it, but it is a disease with disproportionate impact to the gay community. Nice cheap try with that logic bit. Maybe you should tell your gay acquaintances that and see how they react?
AoD
Last edited:
Torontovibe
Senior Member
Could it be that Ford will not go to any gay event because he really believes the people of Toronto are strongly homophobic and it will hurt him in the polls, if he shows any acceptance of homosexuality? His supporters are mostly right wingers (I would assume) and his biggest supporter, the Toronto Sun, has a long history of hating homosexuals. So maybe Ford just thinks most Torontonians are gay haters and him rejecting Pride, will guarantee him a win in the next election. Maybe that's what Ford thinks of the average Torontonian. It would certainly explain his actions.
CanadianNational
Senior Member
By JasonParis:
Thank you for the concise list.
To TorontoVibe: Yes, I'd say your opinion is about right. Ford is letting his actions speak louder than words to show, in no uncertain terms, that he's aligned with conservatives, evangelicals and those who, for various reasons, oppose public and private expressions of homosexuality. I don't believe it would escape his understanding that this would also win him favour with the conservative and evangelical base in southern Ontario and further afield. He's probably not looking for any kind of office there, but as a lowest-common-denominator kind of populist, it would feel natural to him to please this base as well.
ssiguy: "I know many gay people who avoid the Pride parades like the plague".
A revolting choice of words.
To say that Ford's "just wanting to go to the cottage" is apolitical and casual is disingenous at best, considering that a) he's the head political figure in the city, and b) this is a guy who's fervently politicized everything from councillor's lunches to disinformation about public transport. I don't know if Ford is intelligent enough to consider the implications of what he is doing, but there are smarter, more aggressive and more malevolent people out there who will be more than glad to take advantage of them.
Thank you for the concise list.
To TorontoVibe: Yes, I'd say your opinion is about right. Ford is letting his actions speak louder than words to show, in no uncertain terms, that he's aligned with conservatives, evangelicals and those who, for various reasons, oppose public and private expressions of homosexuality. I don't believe it would escape his understanding that this would also win him favour with the conservative and evangelical base in southern Ontario and further afield. He's probably not looking for any kind of office there, but as a lowest-common-denominator kind of populist, it would feel natural to him to please this base as well.
ssiguy: "I know many gay people who avoid the Pride parades like the plague".
A revolting choice of words.
To say that Ford's "just wanting to go to the cottage" is apolitical and casual is disingenous at best, considering that a) he's the head political figure in the city, and b) this is a guy who's fervently politicized everything from councillor's lunches to disinformation about public transport. I don't know if Ford is intelligent enough to consider the implications of what he is doing, but there are smarter, more aggressive and more malevolent people out there who will be more than glad to take advantage of them.
Last edited:
kkgg7
Banned
My gay friend couple only engages sex with each other exclusively, and both of they are healthy. So I don't think they even need a condom for sex as it is safe. If I tell them that, it wouldn't offend them any more than it offend a straight couple, if at all. AIDS is simply not a health concern for them whatsoever. It has nothing to do with them being gay or not, but how responsible their sexual behaviour is.
So In a developed country like Canada (to exclude cases due to poor health conditions and poorly managed blood supply), I believe the probability of catching AIDS has little to do with homosexuality or heterosexuality. I mean theoretically if a gay person only has sex with his partner (who is also exclusive), he is very unlikely to get AIDS; On the other hand, AIDS has a lot to do with how responsible one's sexually behavior is. If one habitually engages sex with multiple random people, then he/she is a lot more likely to catch AIDS, let him be straight or gay.
I am not an expert, but I think this is how AIDS works, right? Correct me if I am wrong.
cdr108
Senior Member
yup, you're right.
'committed' couples, gay or straight, NEVER have affairs.
some people are quite open discussing their personal 'love' life to friends, etc, while others are not. considering how judgemental you are on here about various topics, i wouldn't be surprised if your friends, gay and straight, rather not engage you.
kkgg7
Banned
yup, you're right.
'committed' couples, gay or straight, NEVER have affairs.
some people are quite open discussing their personal 'love' life to friends, etc, while others are not. considering how judgemental you are on here about various topics, i wouldn't be surprised if your friends, gay and straight, rather not engage you.
I don't know why you are so cynical about "committed couples" who never have affairs. Is that strange to you? My parents had 30 years of marriage, NEVER had affairs. Yeah, I know, never. You think all couples cheat? so sad for you.
gristle
Senior Member
He has a right to chow down on a bucket of KFC in order to drag his weight loss publicity stunt for many more months. Lucky us.
Then again, in the end, his whole stint as mayor will be a publicity stunt. And the joke is on us.
Anyone who thinks this is about the mayor wanting to go to his cottage is just kidding himself. The mayor wants to avoid Pride. Period.
Last edited:
cdr108
Senior Member
no, i don't think all couples cheat.
i'm just not naive to think none do.
beyond 'cheating', there are couples out there that intentionally have 3somes/4somes ... swinging.
however, in their minds, they're still a committed couple.
fouronesix
Active Member
There's two important statements here.
1) Rob Ford has made remarks about AIDS being "pretty much" a gay disease.
2) Rob Ford has consistently voted against all AIDS-prevention money
If one believes that there is a disease that only impacts a particular community, voting against programs that would alleviate the impact of that disease is essentially knowingly voting against programs that would alleviate impacts on a particular community. Ergo, Rob Ford's stated belief about AIDS only impacting a particular community combined with his votes against programs that would alleviate the impact of AIDS is essentially Rob Ford knowingly voting against programs that would alleviate the impact of AIDS on the gay community.
What we all know about AIDS has nothing to do whatsoever with Rob Ford's belief or the relationship between that belief and his voting record.
kkgg7
Banned
Fair. So you agree that AIDS is not a gay issue, but rather a sexual behavior/promiscuity issue, which I always firmly believes.
I don't judge on commitment, which is a personal choice, but should millions of public money be spent to help s very small group who choose to experience extramarital sex, or experimental 3somes/4somes and swinging, knowing the health risks? It should, if the money is unlimited, but due to the budget deficits, I am sure there are better ways to spend it than to help people to have more reckless sex. AIDS is unlike other diseases such as cancer or the flu, which is hard to prevent. Don't have sex with strangers, don't have sex with multiple partners, don't inject drugs into your vein, and you won't catch it.
nfitz
Superstar
Are you trolling us?
Ford himself has said he thinks AIDS is a gay disease. And yet you excuse him for voting against funding for it because it's not just a gay disease?
Either kkgg7 is a bigot or is trolling us. I can't believe that anyone is this ignorant. Either way, I don't understand why he is here.
Tewder
Senior Member
You'd be pilloried for not attending what is one of the greatest economic engines in that city, and all the more so post-Katrina! You see, it's about duty and responsibility to the city, and not personal taste. That's what it takes to be in office, to be a public servant. Again, your sensibilities are so fragile? Then get the hell out!
You're not wrong (necessarily) but you do dismiss the politics of sexuality a little too smugly. In other words, it was a community/activist identity of 'Gay' and 'Pride' (good, bad and ugly) that paved the way for you to be so free about who you screw. It wasn't that long ago my dear that you would have been thrown in jail and beaten for such a viewpoint, or institutionalized for just expressing the desire. So for me, coming down on the gay pride thing smacks a little of the 'you've come a long way baby' type of condescension that women still endure.