As an out gay man, I'd like to address a topic that I've noticed in recent months that's extremely disturbing. Specifically, I'm talking about forum posts that are nothing more than homophobic sentiments, disguised in the form of a question.
I'm not going to link to these posts because I don't want to shine light on the ugly. But the "questions" asked run the gamut from "Do you agree with gay marriage" to "Homosexuality a Choice?"
It's disgusting these kinds of forum questions even exist.
I would just like to say we are supposed to be a community here on HB. Some of us do identify as gay, lesbian or bi.
If any of us asked: "Are you ok with interracial marriage?", it would cause an outrage. In fact, I'm confident the "question" would be removed. The poster could even lose her/his account.
But apparently, gay folks (still) are are ok to go after. I don't know if the purpose of the posts are to spread hate or if it's a cheap, desperate attempt to increase hub scores. Either way, it's not OK.
So here's my message to the folks who create such posts and to the ones who reply in the comments with judgemental, nasty "that-a-boys"...
Don't assume everyone here is the same sexual orientation.
PS: It sure would be great if Hubpages would create a policy about this topic and enforce it. It's long overdue. In case you haven't noticed, some of your best writers identify as LGBTQ.
I have a close relative who is gay and accept her lifestyle with love and care.
But I also think political correctness can kill freedom of expression on both sides of an issue.
Asking if someone is OK with homosexual marriage -- which was illegal nationwide only a few years ago -- is not discrimination. It is asking a reasonable question about a complex and controversial social issue.
If the posting said, "Homosexual marriage is evil and immoral", then yes, that is discrimination because it promotes harm to a particular group of people.
Asking if someone is "okay with gay marriage" in 2016 is akin to asking if someone is "okay with black people voting" in 1966.
Referencing -political correctness- like PC is an undesirable development in our culture is simply regressive thinking.
As Mr. Wrenchbiscuit pointed out that free speech with conditions is not free speech at all. Further, subjectively, personally, defining parameters of that free speech. Then, whether that speech is actually worthy. Now it is wrong thinking. I have a God. No thanks.
Free speech exists and is protected with 1st amendment of the U.S. constitution. One cannot be legally liable for expressing ones views.
However, there are social consequences for untoward speech. Those consequences range from employment loss to loss of relationships and ones public standing. Freedom of speech does not entail freedom from the consequences of ones speech.
That didnt take long. First there is censorship, then some kind of classifying of right and wrong thinking, now some kind of punishment. The natural course I suppose.
Censorship is like a serial killer who is good at destroying evidence and hiding the bodies. No one knows where it begins or ends. Censor some lies that hurts someones feelings, here , censor some vital life saving truth, there. Who really knows? Its censored.
Why would anyone seek the approval or care about the disapproval of a person or group that have taken it upon themselves to dictate what others can say or think? Along with their suggestion of consequences? The whole notion is repugnant. Censorship, thought policing and suggesting punishment is infinitely more immoral than anything any person could possibly say.
How does one exactly suspend reason to espouse any form of censorship while using free speech to do it?
The problem with your argument is that you assume HP is a free speech forum. It's not. It's a revenue sharing website that all of us do business with. That means you nor I have the right to spread around our personal views in ways that makes other people feel shamed or judged.
Assuming you worked for a big company, do you think you could post what you just posted here and not hear about it? Your censorship argument would buy you a cup of coffee and a pink slip.
Spare me the first amendment non-sense. This isn't a public arena.
First of all I, I find it quite remarkable that there are those here who are so self-centered that they actually believe the world revolves around them. Let it be known that many people comment on Hubpages simply because they can, and not necessarily because they are expecting a response, or affirmation from anyone in particular.
Today I was sitting outside the condo contemplating the hurricane that is about to hit. Of course I could see that the woman across the way was watching me through her window. I have seen her husband who appears to be all used up, and I am sure she would rather be with me. As I was sitting there I saw a little worm at the base of the palmetto tree. He did not even acknowledge that I was there, and in all honesty I must admit, I did not even care.
Hubpages is about making money. But Hubpages cannot make money without people. The fact that this is a privately owned platform, as many here like to point out, doesn't stop the sun from shining. Without the people, it is impossible for Hubpages to make money, and so whether privately owned or not, this is a two way street. And so here is what is going to happen. The ruling elite of Hubpages will look at the situation. They will see that there have been no blatant verbal attacks on homosexual men or women. They will also notice that no one has suggested violence against homosexual men and women. They will then decide whether eliminating all innuendo, as it has been determined by OP, is worth alienating thousands of writers and participants who are apathetic, ambivalent, or who simply don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle.
The batteries went dead in my crystal ball, so I have no idea what the Founding Fathers,Mothers, Sisters, and Brothers of Hubpages will do. But I am certain that if they go the way of the OP, it will sound the death knell for Hubpages. My advice to Hubpages is just the opposite of what the OP is suggesting. I think they should relax the censorship that already exists. I say roll down the windows and "pump up the bass!" Let's face it, preaching to the choir is about as exciting as living in the same house, and having sex with the same person for 6 months. It just isn't my idea of a good time. I am very well aware that God made little green apples, but that doesn't mean we are supposed to eat them.
Yet you participate in bigoted and hateful comments about religious people down below on this page.
Your double standard is showing.
Really? We had no laws banning gay marriage just 15 months ago?
Political correctness is simply a term for liberal extremists who want to squash free speech by anyone who thinks differently than them.
BTW, likening my benign comment to racism is both offensive and ridiculous.
Phoenix, please note my stance. I hope you are surprised.
The right of free speech is not about saying whatever you want, but being able to say your opinion, while taking responsibility of your words. Words are not only letters, but they are images, feelings and thoughts.Everybody has the right to speaks freely, but everyone has the right to judge the others' opinion and feel offended by it. Democracy is not about being able to do whatever you want, cause that's anarchy, but is about showing respect to the others and their rights. This is why we have the laws too. To protect everyone's rights. So, I don't think that political correctness is something bad, on the contrary, I think that it is a limit to the people's behavior, that can hurt the others.
There are a few problems here. I am not saying this to get you upset but I am trying to tell you the truth here. Free speech only covers so much, it does not cover things like racism, violence, threats, slander, false advertising, defamation, or scam/theft/plausible deniability. I mean, if you go read the entire statue and the entire constitution including its amendments , this is clear. You can't hide behind free speech when you break its ground rules to begin with then call it 'politically correctness', that makes you the bad guy. However, this topic is not covered by those rules. Calling someone out on their sexuality is protected by freedom of speech. That's from the government, meaning people can't sue you for saying 'hey , you're gay and I don't like you'. Yet, the world in general can bring consequences upon you. Your freedom of speech doesn't include freedom from judgement or scrutiny, that seems to be a common misconception by people and I don't know where they get that idea. There have been numerous cases where people involved with just Uber drivers has lost their families and entire careers for being drunk and speaking their opinion. Society in general will not allow such rhetoric to go unpunished. We actually make it worse when combined with the media. So instead of saying 'i want to propose a bill that makes all gun purchasers get a background check' , what you see on social media is 'Obama wants all our guns!!". Instead of pointing out a poor choice of words by Trump when saying 'some of us aren't as strong' , the media and society turns that into him calling PTSD suffers weak. Your words will be taken out of context if you don't choose them correctly, there is no side that is for or against PC, it's an illusion, they both do it. So when you speak publicly about things you need to consider what consequences that could have. So many times people blame 'PC' for everything. It's just not the case. 'My black coworker got a promotion over me because he's black' , freedom of speech right? Now that gets to your boss and the problem is you tried too hard for the promotion and offered ideas that sounded good to you but didn't make sense at all. You pushed for changes that the company didn't like to hear because we knew better. Now you claim racism is why you are stuck in this job. ---this is a classic example of how speaking your 'opinion' isn't always a great idea. You don't always have the facts so you may not realize that your brilliant idea to hire more workers on the third shift to increase productivity is actually horrible to the boss because the third shift gets paid the most. If anything we should hire more on the first shift and leave the third shift with a workload they can handle. The black employee gave that answer, and he was hired, yet you still feel it's because you were white. <<-- I reference that story because I was the boss who fired an employee over it. He was a damn good worker and he just needed some training on business logistics before I could promote him. I was actually in the process of sending him to a two week course on cost efficiency and management. He started voicing his opinion to other coworkers and friends and then in the lunch room and then during meetings and that was it. I fired him and I told him why. He cursed and swore it was PC and I was a PC democrat (i am a conservative). At the end of the day though, he broke company policy with his rhetoric. Speech has consequences. My last and final point, Hugpages is a private entity , these forums may say public but they are not covered by public domain. Public only means that anyone can post, yet the owner of this website owns the rights to your post. The owner can choose to accept or reject your post based on his beliefs , not yours. Therefore, freedom of speech means nothing on a private forum nor on private property.
I'm totally in favor of marriage equality and everything, but you're wrong as to the scope of free speech. As abhorrent as it is to hold such beliefs, you are absolutely free to walk around and make racist, bigoted or sexist statements. And in my mind you should be. Let the whole world know who you are and judge you.
And in addition, while I am a classic liberal who is in favor of marriage equality and basically everything liberal under the sun, I do believe that there are about a million valid complaints against "PC Culture". The problem with the right, of course, is that instead of finding a balance, they use this criticism of people who are TOO politically correct to go far the other way, and say things that are truly insulting and terrible, then claim that the people they offend are too sensitive.
If that's the case, then who gets to squash someone just because they ask a question about gay marriage?
You are right that HP is a company with the right to do whatever it wants. But it also is owned by people who understand that you don't ban a comment or person just because their beliefs are different than yours.
Yes, they SHOULD do so if the comment incites hatred or violence. But note the "offensive" example in the original post: "Do you agree with gay marriage".
Does that incite hatred or violence? Not at all. The objection to it simply comes from someone with a thin skin.
When I was growing up my mom would not let me say disparaging things to my brothers and sisters, and I sure wanted to. I thought she was 'limiting my freedom of expression'. Now I am grateful that I learned at an early age to consider the feelings of others before I say whatever is on my mind.
If we banned everything on the Internet that offended someone there would be no Internet. If you see content you don't like, or that offends you, then don't click on it.
HubPages would be well within their rights to ban such questions and bigoted forum posts.
The authors of those posts could always post their nefarious thoughts on their own personal webpage or blog. They don't get to decide what HubPages allows.
How do propose replacing the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights?
It doesn't replace those things promisem, people are still free to slur gay people in their own blogs, or in public places.
You are free to set up a website that promotes homophobic opinions and you can bar people who stick up for gay rights if you wish.
If you went to a party at Ben Franklin's place and disrespected his wife, he could bar you from his home, but he couldn't bar you from saying bad things about her in the public market place, or the local inn.
That's been the understanding of the constitution and Bill of Rights since its inception.
(That's maybe not the best example as there may be circumstances where defamation or libel laws could be invoked in the Franklin's wife case, but I hope that you get the general idea.)
In that case, I reserve the right to ban comments that slur me on HubPages. I should be able to delete a comment that calls me regressive and likens a simple post to racism. I am offended.
Then again, offense apparently goes only in one direction for some people. They don't like to be offended, but they want to be able to offend anyone they want.
While we are at, I am offended when you say "YOU are free to set up a website that promotes homophobic opinions."
Makes senses PaulGoodman67.
Your analogy works for anyone interested in understanding.
No need to replace the BIll of Rights. But this isn't a town square. This is a privately held website that we (you and I) choose to do business with. Go post something on Facebook that marginalizes gay people, blacks, Asians or anyone else and see if that post doesn't get removed. Free speech has limitations and does not apply to private websites. Sorry.
Then why does HP allow people to post bigoted and offensive comments about religious people like the ones below?
Why can someone post heterophobic comments like the one above that imply I'm a bigot just because I don't bow down to someone's personal definition of free speech?
I have been called a lot worse on this site than the examples you cite.
It does so because it respects free speech, even when we object to what is being said. That's America.
Read my original post. Do you really think someone is homophobic just because they raise a question about gay marriage, which had been illegal in this country for more than 200 years and was just overturned 15 months ago? Yes or no.
Your right. Hubpages gets to decide what questions they post not you mark!
We're typically very lax with out moderation policies in the topical forums and Q&A simply because we don't have enough staff members to realistically monitor those areas without just relying on community members to report violations.
However, myself and everyone else on Staff are very firmly against hate speech and I'm going to bring this up with the Team to discuss what more we can be doing to keep HubPages from being a space where people feel they can express homophobic and discriminatory sentiments.
Very good of you to respond to this thread, Christy. As a concerned Hubber, I am most grateful.
Yes, " ... a space where people feel they can express homophobic and discriminatory sentiments" certainly is not something HubPages should be.
Christy, thank you. Honestly just this response means a great deal. It's just good to see this.
Christy - Can you make it a configurable setting to exclude Q&A popping up when we log in? They even show up when I select Explore/Hubs. Why can't we just see Hubs when that is what we have selected? I'm sure there are many Hubbers who feel similarly.
We have switched to the Feed being the place that is automatically shown when you log in. Only Hubs, Q&A and Forum Posts you have interacted with and/or by people or subjects you follow will now show up there.
When I enter the site over hubpages.com as a signed in user, I automatically see the start page, which includes Q&A and forum threads. I don't know if I'm the only one, but I'd much rather only see hubs when I land there. Or I'll just have to remember to sign out when I leave HubPages each day, or enter over a different URL. That would be a shame, though, because I do actually like to peruse the hubs that show up there.
In case you mean that a signed in user is now shown the Feed when entering over hubpages.com, this isn't yet working for me—I just tested it.
Ah, I just checked with Engineering. It looks like we only made it the default directly after signing in to HubPages.com. This should be fixed soon, thanks for your patience.
I agree with everything (I do not even say about my sexual orientation, because no one on this site has the right to ask me it, you are following for my hubs, not because of my sexual orientation)... these questions should not even appear on a website, and I think it is simply absurd people are going to make dozens of rows writing answers to these questions.
"Do you agree with same sex marriages?"
without writing dozen rows to similar questions... in general I cannot stand certain Q&A who seem really trivial but attract long answers (for example "what is life?" and people start writing 50 rows just to say nothing), however at least they are not against other people.
Asking if someone agrees with same sex marriages is the same of asking if black women should have the right to sit on the bus... come on, Rosa Park's age is ended...
Things like this--and hubs that are more or less inflammatory--are posted because they are great click-bait. But they probably get most of their clicks from within Hubpages, so I'm not sure if they pay.
In fact, I noticed many times these "useless" (sorry I cannot find a better word for questions like "What is life?", "Why do we go to toilet?", "Does love exist?" or "Does God love all of us?", or unrespectful ones like "Do you agree with LGBT marriages?") are very popular for around 1-2 weeks, because they attract users from HubPages. After this period, they gradually stop to attract users and answers, so I imagine they are not profitable over the long time (even if users who make these questions try to make this).
I remain of my opinion Q&A is a section in which ask useful thing and start really interesting debates about important and concrete topics... if someone wants to do philosophy, well... HubPages has a section for it, but seeing religion and philosophy everywhere, outside that section, makes me sad about the destiny of this great site (at the end, my statement is similar to the one made by the user here: http://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy … us-into-it)
However I still remain of my opinion certain questions like "Do you agree with same sex marriages?" should simply be banned from this site, they do not even deserve a section only for them: civil and modern society automatically accepts everyone: gay people at marriages and black women on bus at the same time... so these questions are completely out.
I hope HubPages will be more strict about this point... also because their staff is the first to say everyone should make high-quality content, not content made only to profit... and these people (I agree with you) seem to harvest this website of trivial (and unrespectful, talking about the question on same sex marriages) questions just because making a good hub, about something of really interesting, would require more time!
But yeah... making money on the web is something difficult and requires hard work, nothing compared to writing 2 questions about useless and trivial topics (even if I accept them, if they do not go out their specific sections, and if they are not unrespectful of other people)... and it is correct this, otherwise everyone would leave their work and start a living simply on "making questions about everything and nothing on HubPages".
I personally put all my efforts even in making Q&A, not only in writing hubs (even if I am Italian, so I am even more disadvantaged than these people, as I am not as fluent in English as an American)... I try to ask something about life of today, about situations, about everything which is actual and, first of all, by accepting everyone... and every opinion! I am so sorry other people do not put the same efforts and passion in it, but only want profit... profit they are not going to make, on the long terms, after their Q&A will be surclassed by other ones on the site!
The Wisdom of wrenchBiscuit
And so, you are the one who decides what is worthy of Hubpages, and what should be thrown out with the old Lady Gaga Cd's, the velvet Elvis poster's, and that half eaten Big Mac that is starting to attract flies. The OP has cited a particular Q&A as being derogatory. But I strongly disagree. And of course, since what I express in this commentary is directly related to the OP's commentary, I am on point, and directly on topic. So let us now dispense with the immoral, and unlawful attempts to silence the opposition. Obviously the OP interpreted the question as derogatory and insulting, but I and many others did not view it as such. He also suggests that a similar question about interracial marriage, or dating would have most likely been banned; the implication being that minorities enjoy a favored status here on Hubpages. I am bi-racial, and I do not find such a question to be offensive. Some people simply want to know. But now there is a movement afoot here on Hubpages that seeks to not only dictate the parameters of free speech, but also the "worthiness" of that free speech.
I am not only educated, but I am a very intelligent person. I am also a very kind and considerate person. But neither my superior intellect, nor my great degree of humanity, give me the right to control the self-expression of others. It doesn't matter if I find such self-expression to be pedestrian, ignorant, or mildly offensive. I challenge any heterosexual, homosexual, bi-sexual, or transgendered person to agree that I, Ronnie wrenchBiscuit, have the right to decide who can speak, what they can say, and how they should feel. The retarded man who can barely tie his shoe lace is as beloved of God as a Tesla, or an Einstein. The mentally handicapped also have an opinion and a world view. But it appears that the consensus of some here is that they should not be allowed to venture too far from the short bus, and that they are not worthy of our respect or tolerance. We should all beware of this movement toward a politically correct fascist state.
Here is a deceptively simple poem that I wrote and posted in response to the Q&A: "I just want to know: Do you agree with same-sex marriage or gay marriage? by herrypaul
This poem answers the question by asserting that I agree with same sex marriage because God created all three: Adam, Eve, and Steve. It further illustrates that Adam and Eve were necessary for procreation, but the poem does not specify the purpose of Steve. However, this omission is not a slight toward the homosexual community. Instead, it clearly reveals the depth of my artistry, and the great mystery of life. And this is a perfect example of why the OP's request for censorship is unacceptable.
An ignorant person could easily construe such a poem as being disrespectful, when in truth it is a work of art that acknowledges that God has a purpose for homosexuals, or they would not exist. The question I ask in the poem "But who made Steve ... if God made Adam and Eve?" is the cryptic key that unlocks the meaning of my message. How so? Anyone familiar with Christian theology understands that Satan created nothing here on Earth. On the contrary, Satan only came to destroy what God had already created. Consequently, there can be no argument that it was God who created Steve, which by default means that Steve also plays an important role, and serves an important purpose, whether we understand that purpose or not.
My Special Thoughts on Same Sex Marriage: © 2016 wrenchBiscuit
They say that God made Adam and Eve
Not Adam and Steve
If that is true
It means Adam was bisexual
And Steve was gay
But who made Steve ... if God made Adam and Eve?
And if God would have made Eve and Steve
Instead of Adam and Eve
There would have been no Cain to kill Abel
Not in the Earth
Up in Heaven
Or up in Hell below it
But out of sexual frustration
Eve would have killed Steve
And that would have been the end of the world as we know it
Gay Marriage is not same as inter-racial marriage. The one is immoral while the other is not.
BRIE HOFFMAN WROTE:
Gay Marriage is not same as inter-racial marriage. The one is immoral while the other is not.
I took note of your stance Mr. Promisem, thank you for bringing it to my attention.
And this is how it works. Someone says something, Mr Promisem replies and hopefully we get closer to a truth, that is impossible with censorship or intimidating someone into silence. Twisi.
This is so basic it has to be sarcasm...
You can call it "immoral" all you want. Guess what - it's also legal. What's more, your remark is exactly the kind of offensive commentary that doesn't belong on HP. No LGBTQ person should have to be subjected to being in a business relationship with a private company and have to read the kind of nasty comment you just made. If you think gay marriage is immoral, share it on a political board.
FYI - there are many people in this country who still (stupidly) think mixed marriages are immoral. The difference here is that on HP, it would NOT be OK to create posts on that topic.
I used to read your hubs by the way. As a person who has been with my partner for 25 years, I can't tell you how offensive what you just said was. And the worst part is that it came from someone I used to like reading.
Great - practice it in a town square or a political forum. HP isn't either.
I think sometimes people are voyeurs where they want to know everything about your sex life. I don't believe in kiss and tell. Do what you want but don't broadcast it. It's like saying, "I had some great sex last night!" Really, who gives a shit
You have chosen willingly to enter into the outed world , Do you not then understand the changing or evolutionary acceptance or not of religious oriented people ? One doesn't get to drive the stake of acceptance through the heart of the majority of people by lawsuit only , you must endear yourself on the personal level ! I suggest you ask why you may or may not be accepted by all in a singular forum , Maybe they will answer you .
The Hubpage "gay police " do not yet exist for your personal benefit .
What a twisted post from a very twisted perception of what was originally shared. "Gay Police" - gotta love that.
I am assuming you either don't know how to read or have issues with synthesis.
Sure, let's ban more things here on HP - seriously think about it - not everyone agrees with your lifestyle choice so why can't they talk about it?
No one is talking about banning anything. They are talking about stopping people who are too stupid to have a respectful, intelligent debate on people's "lifestyle choices", politics, ethnicity or anything else - and who instead resort to insults and hate speech.
RJ - it's not a "lifestyle" so let's get that correct first. Second, people don't agree that Christians and Muslims should marry but you don't see people creating posts about that - do you? What would happen if someone did post something like that? I think we both know.
HP is a place that I do business with. It's not a personal forum for people to spout out discriminatory comments. There are plenty of political websites for that. HP isn't one of them.
And it's not about "banning". It's about treating LGBTQ people with the same respect we would any other group of people. Not too much to ask.
I am bisexual, married to a trans man, and I think banning any kind of discourse that isn't directly threatening is dangerous. Don't get me wrong, the thinly veiled homophobia that exists on this site is cringe-worthy, and I'd like to get through a single question without the zealots derailing good conversation, but...I don't think censorship is the answer. It will only make the nuts retreat further into their isolated spheres.
Lana I do appreciate what you are saying but remember, this ins't a political site. It's a revenue sharing website where all of us choose to split our revenue with a company. While they are not an employer, we do have a business relationship. Hate speech doesn't belong here. As a bisexual person married to a trans man, I would hope you understand that?
Youtube Partners have a business relationship with Youtube. Should Youtube start censoring politically incorrect/ignorant opinions in this way? It's one thing in theory, and as much as I'd love to be able to read a topic without whining bigots, it's the nature of opinion-based websites. Progress will win out, but freedom of expression goes both ways.
So I can't exercise my first amendment right because it might offend you? Seriously get a grip.
You can exercise your 1st amendment right on your own website or blog.
I do bn9900. The point that eludes you is that here, on HubPages, there are community standards. It is space that does not belong to you, you share it with others.
Your 1st amendment right does not apply here. Period.
If HubPages decided they will only allow posts about various recipes for stew that would be their right.
If HubPages decides that forum posts that invite ugly hateful rhetoric is not welcomed here, that is their right.
You have no rights or power here to enforce your will upon others, or HubPages.
No - you can't hide behind the first amendment here. What would happen if you sent out an email to everyone at your employer about - let's say - thoughts about gay people. Would that be OK? After all, you are just sharing your thoughts in a first amendment way, right?
Unfortunately, this silly 'debate' isn't going to go away until religion goes away - which is slowly happening. But in the meantime - yeah, report that BS. It isn't an 'opinion' that people want to debate, its offensive ignorance - and yet another thing religious folks FEAR is sending the entire world to hell. Get over your silly fear, people. Its beyond uncool at this point.
If you give a monkey a loaded gun, a power saw, or a weed whacker, there is a good chance that he might hurt himself. Why? Because he is a cute little monkey. But in the proper hands, a gun could be used to protect your family from evil thugs who have come to steal your land, rape your daughters, murder your brothers, and place the remainder of your decimated race on reservations. In the proper hands, a power saw can be used to build yourself a home. And in the proper hands, a weed whacker can be used by illegal Polish immigrants to beautify your home and your property.
And it is the same with religion. Religion is simply a tool, and it can be used properly to seek understanding and wisdom, or it can be misused as a tool of oppression. The erasure of Religion will not solve the problem of Homophobia. Religion is a creation of man, and so it can be perverted. And man did not create God, but only an interpretation of God. If we were to take religion completely out of the picture, the hatred and intolerance of the American mainstream against homosexual men and women would not only continue, but it would be on the increase. I believe the popular notion that Christianity exacerbates Homophobia is highly overrated.
Yes, the Bible speaks of "sodomites" and condemns homosexual behavior, but we also see in the Bible a condemnation of Adultery and Lying. In fact Adultery and Lying are referred to more in the Bible than homosexual behavior. However, we don't see hate groups running to and fro across the United States spreading hate speech about Adultery, or committing hate crimes against adulterers. The only people who are proactive in this area are the spouses, or the significant others of the Cheater's. And we also don't see hate groups promoting hate speech against Liars. Yes, there are a number of people who have publicly accused Hillary Clinton of being "the greatest liar of all time", but the majority of Americans simply don't care. And so it follows that the Christian Religion cannot be held accountable for Homophobia, nor can we accept that Atheism would provide us with a cure.
In spite of the overall hypocrisy that we all have witnessed within the Christian community, Religion does create a buffer zone, a code of conduct to at least aspire to, and it is the only thing standing between the homosexual and a hungry pack of wolves. And it is evident that many Atheists have also been influenced by the Golden Rule. Read, Learn, and Prosper.
Keep complaining to the administration John. Eventually if you nag them enough they do the right thing.
It's always religious zealots that spread this kind of hate. That's why I don't belong to any religion--or just identify as Pagan. There aren't many people who can practice a religion without pushing it on you, and they usually are the least tolerant people you know. But they are self righteous and think only their religion is the right one. It's all about spiritual oneupmanship.
Thanks, Jean. I appreciate. My hope is that they will create a standardized policy on comments that takes into account the diversity of writers we have at HP and by extension - readers who visit the various niche sites.
HP should change the policy. Google Adsense has a policy on this. All of us are in a business arangement with HP and Google Adsense. This is why I have said dozens of times to people this isn't a public forum or town square. It's a private website that we do business with.
I'll post the link here for all to see:
https://support.google.com/adsense/answ … ganization
"Google believes strongly in the freedom of expression, but also recognizes the need to protect the quality of the AdSense network for users, advertisers, and publishers.
"Google ads aren't permitted on sites that contain harassing or bullying content, or on content that incites hatred or promotes violence against individuals or groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity. Additionally, Google ads may not appear on content that incites or advocates for harm against an individual or group.
"However, websites containing educational, documentary, historical, scientific, or artistic content related to such subjects are permitted to participate in AdSense."
I'm wondering if it's still the case that the only action HubPages takes against hubs that breech this policy is to disable ads.
I personally think that HubPages should adopt this policy as its own, and that any content (whether a hub, forum post or question) that breeches it should be deleted. This sort of hateful, offensive content isn't going to make HubPages any money anyway, so I don't see any point in keeping it on the site.
I'm so sorry you feel attacked and truthfully it's unfair. I understand your frustration as many believe I write about religion and attack that or my lack of grammar skill.(LOL) However, I don't understand the misinterpretation of my writing as I share about a relationship, my faith relationship. Not religion!
Where it's hurtful when others attack, the truth remains people are flawed and will always find something to attack. Sadly, if boundaries are set in an open forum to limit free speech, we also limit the ability to share and learn from one another. A public forum is to share ideas and educate as we feel led. The lack of commonality is part of its allure to learn and share from views different than our own.
This does not mean that I agree with everything on Hub or in the world. The hate, the judgement or stingers of assumption or opinion. The looking down on others or lofting the undeserving. I choose to do life as someone who loves people as a life-learner.
Good bad or indifferent, we all have a purpose and a heart to share our passions, ideas, families, interests, and beliefs. I've learned, some will try and bait you, many will hurt you, a good amount will love you, but no matter what other's decide, I hope YOU do YOU! The best you, you can be.
Shine brighter than those who are busy deciding what's wrong with you or your life. Speak your truth and your heart and let the rest go. Surrender the weight of the world as it's heavy and lift up what you can, I too will do my best to take this advice.
We change the world by living our life, conscious of the need to be as unconditional with our love as humanly possible. We need to be smart in our choices, forgiving in our mistakes and desiring to be better in some way each day than the attacks around us.
Remember when people ask questions they're often seeking answers that differ from their own thought process. Indirectly they may be trying to learn about their own insecurities or how to deal with a topic as they too are in a battle of their own.
The task of a modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts C.S. Lewis
Have a blessed day
Stages of Me,
I have no problem with questions. I do however, have an issue with posts disguised as a question that are designed to marginalize and discriminate against people.
I know what you mean. There's this bitch of a woman who stalks me on FB and always tries to discredit me. She isn't even my friend and I told her last year not to write to me, but she jumps in on a conversation between me and a mutual friend. I'd like to do something really bad to her but I won't. I used to work for her and I don't know what her problem is, but she is out to get me
I see HubPages as a writer's group. It should be a safe place for all writers, no matter what the topic. It always breaks my heart when I read about people being harassed here. I remember when I first joined HubPages and shared my Christian beliefs, I received extremely harsh comments and criticism from all sorts of people. No matter who you are - Christian, Atheist, Black, White, Brown, Yellow, Green, or Blue, people are going to have their opinion. Some of their opinions are going to be cruel. To be honest, one of the cruelest words I have ever heard in my life was a comment someone stated here on HubPages.
In order to stay active with HubPages, I had to learn to let the cruel comments flow right out of my mind. Sure, you can flag and report posters, but from what I see, when one nasty person goes down, another pops up. There are many cruel people in the world. My best advice is to simply ignore them. These little trolls are sitting in front of their computer with nothing better to do in their little life than try to get a response from good people. Don't give them the satisfaction. Ignore them!
No matter who you are, someone has an opinion about it. The best way to get along in this world is if you be you and let them be them. We all have the same Father who will sort things out on your behalf. Leave the trolls in the hands of the Father who loves you. Much peace to you, brother.
I used to feel afraid of men who liked other men, just because of the few I had seen hovering around my teenaged sons. But I also have a friend (male) who is gay and is very nice. It's no different than heterosexuals. You can have a man rape a woman or a child, too. I don't care what anyone does as long as they leave kids out of the picture and if they marry a woman, he should tell her. If not, she will find out, anyway. Women have built in radar. Same with lesbians. Tell your partner because if you don't, they will find out, too. I feel bad for gays because they can't openly have a free life without judgement
It's probably just because they're Christian. You can't forbid simply asking questions about homosexuality on here because that would be seen by conservative Christians as violating their freedom of religion. Asking a simple question shouldn't be so offensive. You have every right to go to the questions and hubs and respond with your point of view. But don't try to be the speech police on here or try to make everyone else think the way you do by force. That won't get you anywhere.
Calling all disagreement "phobia" or "hate" based delegitimizes the speaker while smearing them as irrational. The reflexive "you only disagree with me because you're stupid/crazy" does not help foster debate.
When someone wants to talk about how children are best raised by a married mother and father, single mothers worse, and children raised by opposite sex same sex couples having even worse life outcomes (Canadian longitudinal study, Regernus study), the reaction is "you hate homosexual parents".
The redefinition of tolerance to endorsement, that tolerance lessons call for endorsement of various positions, you have to agree with them or you're namecalled or shunned ... when someone says I must agree with them regardless of my views or be labeled evil, regardless of my beliefs, that is intolerant on the part of the political left.
The political weight given to LBGT viewpoints is outright discriminatory. Like the gay printers who the Colorado Civil Rights Commission said could refuse to print traditional marriage material but a Christian printer couldn't refuse the inverse. That's political bias in favor of speech, saying conservative side can't refuse per various laws but the liberal side can. The bias becomes even more extreme when a Muslim man shoots up a night club in Florida per the Koran's mandates to kill homosexuals and his imam who had been recorded back in 2013 saying killing homosexuals is a kindness, and the media blames a culture of intolerance ... in short, a Muslim murders a bunch of gas, and the biased media blames Christians who don't want to make wedding cakes they find blasphemous and women who don't want to risk rapists dressing up as women to get access to them in a state of undress.
The viewpoint discrimination includes true intolerance on the left with the deliberate targeting of Christian schools that teach traditional marriage. Nationwide, a number of them have had homosexual couples try to enroll children in violation of school rules. If the school accepts the child, they demand the teachings change. This is like a Muslim enrolling in a Jewish school and demanding the Koran be taught, a violation of the freedom of belief and expression of everyone there. If the school doesn't change, they sue. If the school declines the child, bad press and/or lawsuits. A private school near us declined the child. National bad press. Then came death threats, suspicious packages, hate mail. In the name of "love" and "tolerance", someone threatened to burn down a school with the "hater's" children inside. Very hypocritical, that in the name of love, someone thinks calling for mass murder of children is acceptable. Just because a movement is branded tolerance and love does not make it so, just good branding.
Tamara, do you acknowledge that persons who are homosexual by orientation have a right to defend themselves against biased and discriminate treatment? Can you understand that is we who are under threat, our livelihoods are affected. I don't see the heterosexually-orientated members of society being threatened in the same way.
Don't be surprised that gay people become defensive to the point of being offensive. Try standing with us for a fair deal. Then we are more likely to drop our guard and you will find us warm, friendly, community based members, with lots of love and energy to offer.
We are not here to be feared.
I don't fear homosexuals. Your assumption that I do is exactly the immoral "branding" I just decried. The left branding itself as peace, love, tolerance, good, rational lets them smear the right as hate, intolerant, bad, irrational, crazy. This branding lets the left wrap itself in the appearance of morality and delegitimizes those who disagree - as you just did by assuming I fear homosexuals. I don't fear homosexuals, I disagree with the extreme political wing that threatens my freedom of belief and speech, and in the case of my son's preschool, to mass murder children because the parents disagree.
They have the right to their affairs. They have the same right to freedom of speech to express their views.
They should not have greater privilege, such as protection of their speech over others, to deny others freedom of speech or association.
Please check your own biases about those who disagree with far left authoritarians, who say tolerance requires intolerance of dissenting views to the point of threatening those who don't agree with their increasingly extreme demands.
While there are certainly some ignorant folks hung up on this phobia & hate who deserve to be called stupid simply for not educating themselves and looking beyond their superstitions; no one is calling all disagreement "phobia" or "hate". I would say it is called that when phobia & hate are directed at people because of ignorance. It is why people get so mad at idiots.
Again, religious folks are only ignorantly against the sexual orientation of gay men because religions FEAR what their man-written books say about it. (Mostly - women who are attracted to each other are ok; along with men marrying multiple women - who will hopefully all have sex with their husbands at once (because WOOT!) - women just can't marry each other, ha!)
There is a reason why religious & political leaders didn't want men sleeping with each other - because they needed people to make babies to keep their populations up at that point in time. All they had to do was put things in a religious context - and whatever politicians needed to happen, happened (for the most part, or you were killed).
Tinkering with The Bible (or whatever holy book) was a better way to manipulate the masses than adding an amendment to our government Constitution!
Get your noses out of people's bedrooms and mind your own business. If you are not a gay or lesbian person, you have absolutely NO REASON to be posting offensive or 'leading' questions about it JUST to highlight to everyone else YOUR fear and ignorance.
Now we're back to the immoral assumption that disagreement can only be based on hate or fear, denying that opposing viewpoints can have a legitimate, rational basis.
And it isn't a simple live and let live when someone says "I want to express my viewpoint, you're not allowed to express yours because I hate it so it is hate speech".
Nor is it something that can be ignored when the left's view of the subject is that no one else can express religious or political views they disagree with in public or private.
I'm not in their bedrooms. They're interrupting religious and political events and threatening people I care about, violating my rights.
Check your biases and try to understand that demanding endorsement is intolerance.
Demanding endorsement is intolerance? Would you have said that to the slaves way back before we finally freed them? I never said that 'disagreement' can only be based on hate or fear. I said THIS disagreement is based in hate & fear. Big difference.
I remember back in the 70's when I was 20 something and the govt. told us to cut back on having kids due to a population explosion. Well, most of us did. Now, the govt. wants more money to blow so they let immigrants into the country. I think immigrants should be able to come here. But our stupid govt. can't make it's mind up on what to do. They probably don't like gays because they don't have kids unless they get a surrogate or adopt. I don't care what happens in a person's bedroom as long as they are leaving kids alone and are truthful if they are also in a heterosexual relationship
None of your response directly speaks to what was originally pointed out here. LGBTQ writers on HP should not have to work in an environment where they are subjected to discriminatory, hate filled posts disguised as questions. It's supposed to be a business relationship here - not a place to vent our political views on people.
I have no problem with people discussing an issue. What I do have an issue with are comments, which are all over HP threads, that are nothing but judgmental, hate-filled rants.
How would you like it if I posted: Shouldn't women be at home raising babies instead of working with men at the office?
Doesn't feel nice does it? And you shouldn't have to read those kinds of questions at a place you have a business relationship with.
The original post comes down to "how can you tolerate these opinions I don't like? Ban them because I don't like them." Ditto my earlier statement for the immoral practice of the left calling everyone who disagrees a hater or phobic, psychological warfare 101, denying rational legitimacy to the person's views while smearing them with name calling.
I see and receive similar hateful posts regarding religion and politicals. Should we ban the people posting constant questions of "you know Trump is a wannabe Hitler, right?" or "aren't all religious people stupid, atheism is so right"? We already know there is bias by the moderators, since anything critical is Islam is taken down, but not the same for criticism of Christianity. Now the demand is take down anything other than wholesale endorsement of LBGT agendas. Shall we simply admit this is the road to censorship of everything that doesn't meet a left wing political checklist?
Yes, this type of censorship in the workplace is happening, but that doesn't make it correct. It is tragic-comic if yet another site for sharing ideas follows sites from Facebook to Youtube censoring discussion and debate per strict ideological checklists.
The Wisdom of wrenchBiscuit : What Is "OFF Topic?"
Apparently, there are some people on this thread who do not know the meaning of "off topic". But not to worry! I am here to help those who are having difficulty navigating the Forums. I will teach through example. For instance, lets us assume that someone has started a Jerry Springer type thread with the title. "I Slept With My Girlfriends Mother, and My Girlfriends Mother Is A Man! Does This Mean That I Am Gay?"
Now imagine a respondent answers in the following manner:
"What a stupid question! Please don't tell me they let you have children!"
The OP Responds:
I am not stupid at all. I have a Masters Degree in "Online Censorship and Moderation Techniques" from Harvard, I also ... (And then the OP continues with a litany of degrees, awards, and certificates he has received, in order to refute the charge that he is stupid)
In this example we can clearly see that there is a very fine line between someone who is "off topic" and someone who is simply following the flow of an online conversation. We cannot say the original respondent was off topic, because he was reacting directly to the question. Had the respondent commented with, "Hey, did you guys hear the new Justin Timberlake release?" then obviously he would have been off topic.
As far as the OP is concerned, he was also responding directly to the respondents comment with a rebuttal. And so everyone is still on topic. Even if the OP feels the need to digress with 3 paragraphs on how educated he is, it is still directly related to the original topic.
I hope this brief tutorial has helped. And of course, this post is on topic as I am responding directly to comments made about off topic comments that were made on this thread. Read and Learn.
The reason some of these comments are 'off topic' is because of where within HP this forum is. This part of the forums is supposed to be about writing for HubPages. Look at the other threads here and you might get the idea. I would have thought that someone as intelligent as yourself (or so you keep telling us - and remember just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so) would be able to work it out.
If this thread had been moved to the topical forums then, yes, you are free to have at it. Where it is presently, discussion and viewpoints should be kept to the general subject of publishing on HP.
Hope that helps.
And since the title of the thread and the original post are HubPages related, and because of the OP's obvious HubPages related intentions, it is correctly placed on the HubPages Forums.
wrenchBiscuit: On Waking In Oz and Getting In Tune
It helps to explain who you are, but other than that you have added nothing of value to the discussion. I have grown accustomed, as well as immune, to the vitriol of my subordinates. And I have always found the Scarecrow to be the most realistic, and the most pathetic of the three. The superior intellect understands that it was the OP who posted in this particular section of the Forum. And anyone with an IQ of at least 100 should understand that he is not giving a "tutorial". And if he is giving a tutorial, then someone please explain to us what he is teaching. The "Community" aspect of his original post is valid. However, the fact that he necessarily needed to identify his grievance also places his original post in the following categories as well.
• Gender and Relationships/Gay,Lesbian, Bi-Sexual & Transgender/ LGBT Discrimination
• Politics and Social Issues/ Social Issues/ Gay,Lesbian,Transgender Issues
Based on his original post, as well as the comments I have posted and followed, I see no major deviance from the original topic.
Furthermore, anyone who understands musical theory will realize that a stringed instrument, such as a piano, viola, or a guitar, can be tuned to relative pitch, as opposed to concert pitch. In Concert Pitch the note "A" above middle C is tuned to a frequency of 440 Hz. However, we can tune A above middle C to any other frequency, such as 450 Hz. As long as all of the other strings on a particular instrument are properly tuned relative to A at 450 Hz, then the instrument will appear to be "in tune" although it is not at Concert Pitch.
Apparently, everyone is in tune here except for the whiners and the complainers.
wrenchBiscuit: "I Am A Bass Frequency"
If you are referring to those who are fanning the flames of revolution here on Hubpages: Yes, they most certainly are. I suggest that these wannabe moderators and public censors should seek employment with law enforcement. Then they could tell everybody what to do, and even beat people up, or kill them if they didn't comply in a timely fashion.
If you are referring to me then you are mistaken. In a musical sense, I am more akin to a low bass frequency. As you know, unlike the higher frequencies, the bass frequencies can be the most annoying, and the most difficult to contain.
The man in the picture didn't like loud rap music, or low bass frequencies. And so, he murdered a young man in Florida, and now he is in prison for the rest of his life. This is what can happen to people when they so desperately want to rule the world.
Censorship has things in common with throwing someone off the rooftop of a tall building. Unlike speech or freespeech they are both acts. They also have the same results of silencing someone.
Name calling. Very mature.
No-one is 'whining or complaining', I'm just pointing out to you that this forum here:
http://hubpages.com/forum is the wrong place for this topic, or rather to where this topic has deviated, i.e. personal viewpoints about homophobia. The correct place for this discussion is here: http://hubpages.com/forum/topical.
It's nothing to do with censorship either - you can say what you like, I don't give a toss. The whole point is that keeping the thread on topic, i.e. what is and isn't acceptable **on HubPages (forum posts & Q&A)** would make a more useful discussion **on this forum**.
wrenchBiscuit: Back To School Days
Apparently you would like me to take you to school. So let us proceed! I have not called you any names, so please, put your strawman back in the corner. Your assumptions make a very weak argument. But let me remind of one of your previous posts. And here, there can be no misunderstanding. You comented:
"...I would have thought that someone as intelligent as yourself (or so you keep telling us - and remember just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so ...)
Call it what you like: slander, ridicule, derision; by anyone's playbook you singled me out for the sole purpose of slinging mud in my direction. Anyone would find such a remark demeaning, as it is an attempt to cast someone in a negative light; that someone being me. To the best of my knowledge I have never singled you out, but those days are over. Welcome to my world!
Many of you are quick to make a disparaging remark, but you are even quicker to cry foul when the tables are turned. Many people are against homosexuality because they feel that it goes agaisnt the natural order, or that it is against their religion. And so, whether right or wrong, they have a tangible reason. Overall, they feel that homosexuality is "bad".
In your case, it appears that you have decided that a very sexy and intelligent man, a man like Ronnie wrenchBiscuit, has no right to show pride in himself, or to speak of his intelligence, his talent, and his good looks. But on the otherhand, based on your previous commentary, I am led to believe that you are accepting of "gay pride", and of people "coming out" about their homosexual lifestyles. But there are many who are offended by homosexual parades, and images of homosexual men and women holding hands on Hubpages, Facebook, the silver screen, and in public places
And now, I see that you are no different than those who would deny the homosexual; those who would deny homosexual men and women the right to publicly express pride in themselves. You have decided that I am a "bad" person for having self-confidence, of being proud of myself, and for speaking of it publicly. However, I am thankful for the many blessings that God has bestowed upon me, and so I stand upon a mountain and shout it to the world. But when I do, you come quckily throwing stones. You want me to be ashamed of who I am, and of how I feel. And so you take the pride I have in myself, drag it through the mud, and then hold it up to world as if to say,"Ronnie wrenchBiscuit, you are a nothing, you are a nobody, and you are just a fool who has deluded yourself. And the armies that appear to stand before you are only windmills".
Yes, you and others here who stand in defense of the homosexual man and woman, and who champion the homosexual's right to be loud, to be proud, and to be openly gay, have not hesitated to amuse yourselves at my expense. And there are several words that can be used to describe those who walk down a one way street, saying one thing while doing another. But I will let you decide which one to choose.
Got me mixed up with someone else, mate. I haven't expressed an opinion either way on this thread. As for the rest of your tirade: tldr
I have nothing against gays. In fact, I have a good (male) gay friend. But I don't think that gays should go broadcasting, "I
m Gay!" Any more than heterosexuals should say, "Hey, I'm a heterosexual." Why tell anyone anything? I can see telling friends and family by why make a big fuss over it? If people don't like it, don't hang around with them. If they like you for who you are, that's how you'll know they are your true friends. I don't care what anyone does with their sex life. They can buy sexual aides, go find a hooker, of the same sex or not. It's none of my business or anyone else's but that doesn't mean you have to broadcast it, either
You sure got off topic here, didn't you? Nobody is talking about advertising sexual orientation here. The conversation is about discriminatory, hate filled comments that are on HP about LGBTQ people.
By the way, I'm darned if I do and darned if I don't. If I say I don't like the comments, it necessarily means people will ask why. If I disclose my sexual orientation, I'm then subjected to, "You shouldn't advertise it".
The term ‘homophobia’ was created by homosexual activist George Weinberg to make it seem as if any who do not glorify sinful homosexual behaviors have mental problems, since a ‘phobia’ is an irrational fear that needs psychotherapy. Homophobia has become one the main tools of the Cultural Marxist in his war on normality, his war on reality, his war on Western Civilization. What he calls homophobia is simply a natural feeling of utter revulsion for an unnatural behavior, which has nothing to do with fear---or 'hatred', the other favorite word of the Cultural Marxist. In nature, things have a design and purpose, and the design and purpose of the male and female is to procreate. Attraction and sexual chemistry between male and female therefore is the normal and natural requirement for procreation. Anything else is abnormal, unnatural, unhealthy, deviant, and perverse by definition (not by opinion). Though a male and a female are complete individuals with respect to other functions—for example, nutrition, sensation, and locomotion—with respect to reproduction they are only potential parts of a mated pair, which is the complete organism capable of reproducing sexually. Even if the mated pair is sterile, intercourse, provided it is the reproductive behavior characteristic of the species, makes the copulating male and female one organism. The bodily unity of spouses is possible because human males and females unite organically when they mate—they form a single reproductive principle. Although reproduction is a single act, the reproductive act is performed not by individual human beings but by a mated pair as an organic unit. What is unique about marriage is that it truly is a comprehensive sharing of life, a sharing founded on the bodily union made uniquely possible by the sexual complementarity of man and woman—a complementarity that makes it possible for two human beings to become, in the language of the Bible, one flesh—and thus possible for this one-flesh union to be the foundation of a relationship in which it is intelligible for two persons to bind themselves to each other in pledges of permanence, monogamy, and fidelity.
Hello James,so good to read you once again. We are at opposite ends of the religious spectrum yet we agree on this issue (and Pink Floyd);That,I think,speaks volumes.
No disrespect intended to the LGBT...Q? community.You have the right to practice your preferred sexuality just as heterosexuals do.
As an 'old fashion' man,however,I would prefer ALL sexuality to respect the bounds of common decency and be kept Private;But that is just the opinion of an 'old man'....
In fact, ALL sexuality have to respect the bounds of common decency... including french kisses near you in the train, for example... I would never french kiss someone in a public place, even if I was heterosexual
I love that people think sexual orientation is something one "practices". As for keeping it private. Does this mean that straight people shouldn't kiss one another in public? Just trying to understand the exact standard you wish were in place. Or is it just gay folks who can't hold hands at a ballgame?
James A. Watkins: For some time now I have been conflicted about this issue because I was unable to pinpoint why I feel as I do about it. Your brilliant post has made me finally realize the foundation of my discomfort. Personally, I don't care what people do with their lives behind closed doors, but when their behaviors are pushed in my face and violate the principles and ideals that I feel to be correct, I become agitated. Not wanting to be classes as a "hater" or "homophobe", I generally keep these feelings to myself because I have never been able to discern why I have them. Now, thanks to you, I know and no longer have to feel like a pariah because I think there is something inherently wrong with same sex relationships. I feel for these people because I know most if not all of them cannot help being the way they are. I would never abuse or mistreat any of them. I think many are brilliant and talented and bring real meaning to the world in many ways. I just am uncomfortable with what they do, don't like it and don't want to be around it. They will say that what they are doing doesn't affect me, but it does...and now I know why. Thank you.
This is actually a very honest post; and there is nothing wrong with it if you're not comfortable with other people's life choices. It doesn't sound like you are someone who would write a 'leading' or offensive question like this forum post talks about - in the first place.
Free speech is misused, misrepresented and highly-overrated. It used to be illegal to identify yourself as being attracted to your same sex - now we get to rake people across the coals for it with our 'free speech'.
Its not free speech when you talk out of fear & ignorance against something you don't understand and don't want to understand. Just because you can't relate or figure out how to be okay with someone else's sexuality, shouldn't give you a free license to spout your ignorance to the world in ways that perpetuates more hate.
But respectfully Ms Misfit, you seem to enjoy your own speech. Some people might be offended by your speech that might be considered anti "religious folks " sentiments .
http://hubpages.com/community/forum/138 … ost2843241
http://hubpages.com/community/forum/138 … ost2843567
The difference is noone is demanding you be censored nor do I believe the offended would even be acknowledged.
A good standard is to never wish to have someone imposed upon if one is unwilling to have the same, by their own arguments, deserved imposition upon themselves.
"A good standard is to never wish to have someone imposed upon if one is unwilling to have the same, by their own arguments, deserved imposition upon themselves."
That's why I firmly believe in gay marriage rights.
Unfortunately, a lot of the "religious folks" do seem to have an unhealthy obsession with sex and sexuality in my experience.
To your final paragraph: This has also occurred to me when perusing the religious and political forums here. I must say, however, that I've never experienced it in offline life, but that could be due to location.
Can I assume the standard works pretty good? Then you also by admission would have to agree that denying rights in your point is as least as bad as denying rights in this case.
A gentleman in an earlier post, who is very adept at articulating his personal beliefs, said something I objected to. He said something about sinful. I personally believe such things are between God and them if they believe or between them and their own conscience if they do not believe.
But Id rather be generalized as being obsessed with sex than silencing another human being.
Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. But instead of just living your own life the way you see fit, you want to trample on the rights of others who are different than you. Your religious beliefs do not outweigh the civil rights of your fellow Americans. This attitude is simply shameful you will see in the near future (as though you haven't already) that people who hold these attitudes are going to be seen as reprehensible in a similar way to those who advocated against interracial marriage or in favor of any other abhorrent policy in our nation's history.
James, your extremely narrow definition of "natural", basically seems to condemn any relationship that is not somehow concerned with procreation as being "deviant" or "perverse".
Does that mean that you oppose older people having sex? I am guessing you see my relationship is "abnormal" because my girlfriend uses contraception? Maybe if we don't do it in the missionary position, you think that''s deviant?
Do you have some sort of list? Where does fellatio fit in, or doesn't it?
There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomenon. It existed before Christianity came along and will likely continue to exist, whether it is socially accepted or not.
There are a whole lot of different types of relationship out there, James. Some of them are very rich and loving but don't involve procreation, even notionally. I find it a little sad that you choose to reject large sections of humanity as "unnatural" or "perverse".
I believe "perverse" is an immoral, discriminatory and inaccurate description. But Merriam Webster defines "unnatural" as:
"Different from how things usually are in the physical world or in nature."
If you agree that homosexuality is a minority behavior, and the evidence is overwhelming, then it seems to me that the use of unnatural is accurate.
So we are left with some words that are accurate and some that are not.
<snipped> You post this and claim you are an amazing writer and we should ban homosexuality. If you are a writer you couldn't truly believe that you should ever limit content. No, you have been noticing the stupid amount of attention and views that people posting such rhetoric are getting and you want in. So you post a picture of holding hands in the sunset and try to question and bring the beliefs of those who have posted on other topics in here. You just want views, you don't believe a single thing you just wrote about. <snipped>
You do you, I'll do me. If our lives don't hurt each others', things are good. The day heterosexuality or homosexuality becomes contagious, I'll start to worry about it.
The responses are pretty much going to prove the point of the picture. It doesn't take being much of a mind-reader to know that. Just knowing the audience.
Hubpages is providing the Q&A venues specifically categorized for questions regarding homosexuality. Homosexuality a choice? Seems innocuous, since you did not provide an actual example. I searched the question here and online and found the same question and related posts and articles on sites like Scientific American etc.
You publicly wrote in the title and in your post that it was homophobia and homophobic sentiments. My concern now is the damage to the reputation of anyone that asked those questions in the Q&A provided by HP.
Furthermore It is my opinion that your content contains vulgar and obscene material. Combined with that (in my opinion) vulgar and obscene material is what I feel is a heedless regard for illegal drug use.
Maybe we should all learn to play nice? What do you think Mr. Misterhollywood?
One only needs to read the responses in this forum thread to see concrete examples. It's loaded with them. But then again, anything you might be shown would be discounted I suspect.
As for my hubs, I love that you decided to check them out and are now judging me in a public way for them. Call them "Vulgar" all you want and "Obscene".
As for your bullying comment - "Maybe we should all learn to play nice? What do you think Mr. Misterhollywood?" - go pull that intimidation crap on someone else.
It's not working here. You don't get to swipe at me and my writing and then come back with that passive aggressive non-sense play for a "let's all get along".
I'm a gentleman. I don't cut other people down in a public way.
PhoenixV you are the worst kind of bully. Anybody gay or lesbian who read your response here sees it exactly for what it is. Sickening. And you attacked the OP's hubs and him personally. What a petty, sick person you are.
Some food for thought...
Someone giving their opinions on someone's HP content and what it contains is one thing. It is another thing to call someone the worst bully for doing so, and that they are attacking someone personally as well as their hubs. Then you called PhoenixV a petty sick person.
If your concern is to help people not be bullied we must consider being more fair minded than what this appears to be. Its very possible this whole thing grew out of people making more out of something in the first place, or taking offense where none was intended, not even remotely considered perhaps. Why not ask first?
By asking questions first, you can usually pretty quickly find out where a person is coming from and if they are a hateful type of person. Even if they try to hide it, one can usually tell because their tone comes through in their words and the way they arrange the words.
Asking people to not question things they might genuinely have questions about, isn't the best way to open up dialogue about important issues. I do think that people on both sides of the coin on these issues aren't really so different. I am thankful for my free speech and for HubPages over the years. It is an amazing site and I wanted to weigh in because I am concerned here.
The OP never mentioned his hubs in his post did he? Yet Phoenix took it upon himself to make respond by attacking Mister Hollywood''s hubs and calling them offensive and vulgar. That's called shaming someone in public and its a form of bullying. The hubs has nothing to do with the discussion happening here. Why bring them into the conversation at all?
Question: Would it not be better to take the approach, "I can see how that might be offensive to someone?"
I love free speech too and am glad for HubPages. Not sure what that has to do with what you wrote here in response to MH's post though. _
Perhaps. As long as I feel the playing field is fair id even. support your right. to call me petty and a sick person. Or imply people are homophobes or call them trolls. Or call em horsefaces ( not that would I debate the accuracy or innacuracy of it)
As far as judging people I already posted such things are between individuals and God or their concsience. So that had to be answered. Like shaming it goes to intent.
Show me this godlike being that knows the intent of the heart, whether it is filled with hate or not so that i can worship at its feet.
Intent. It seems that turnabout is fair play. Before it was other's free speech that was in the balance. My intent was to wonder if it was good for the gander.
I cannot speak for others here who have responded. I can only speak for myself. I will respond to your other post. I simply have not been able to get to it with the number of posts here. If I called someone a horseface, it was a typo and I will correct this.
With that shared, my hubs had nothing to do with this conversation. Yet you did take the time to look at them and then come back to this thread and offer unkind words.
And your justification: "I feel the playing field is fair id even" with respect to my writing speaks directly to the "us against them environment" I am talking about.
That's never what this post was about.
At it's core, I respectfully asked all of us to be mindful of the diversity of writers we have on HP. It also asked that LGBTQ people be afforded the same respect as others when in the forums. I don't need to be told it's between God and my conscious. God, with all due respect, is not part of what the original post was about.
And let's be super clear, Nobody called for censorship. But rather than discussing the issue at hand, you have chosen to attack my hubs, bring spirituality into the discussion and use other tactics to fight for a cause that was never at issue here.
As an aside, I did visit your hubs after your comment. I found them to be insightful and meaningful. Know that if I found something different, I wouldn't say so in the public forum.
Well Sir, I believe that HP has always accomodated the lgbt community. They have ackowledged your concerns and I am sure that theyll do whatever they can.
I am a horrible writer. If you got something out of my hubs youre probably the only person on the planet that did. But thanks.
Hp is a business and it looks like you get views. So your work actiually pays bills here on hp so congrats on that.
Im old and have lived in a rural setting all my life but i have seen the world. Ive seen some great things and horrifying things. There was a young girl that rode the bus as a child. We didnt know it but shed get off the bus and climb up on an old tractor and huff the gas tank. They found her dead that way with her face in the tank. Youth use bad judgement and once they have inhaled some chemicals they cannot exerecise good judgment at all. And so, as you may be aware, or may become aware. As you get old like me you see things from a different perspective. Perhaps stories like that have made me angry or aggressive or value certain things like free speech or expressiion and other liberties.. Or if everyone is accomodated fairly etc.
Sorry I ramble. And sorry I post from. A 19$ LG phone and make errors in punctuation.
But I do believe you made your point with this thread.
I'm so sorry you are dealing with this. It is not right to judge, bash, or cause hate to a specific gender, race, creed, religion, whatever. You can clearly decide NOT to have the same lifestyle if it "repulses" you, but what about prejudice? You don't like whites, blacks, Chinese, Muslim, whatever and they're clearly what they are- they cannot change the fact that they are what they are. Same with homo/bisexual individuals. They cannot help who they love. So a guy is not attracted to females, or vice-versa. Whether or not they act on their impulses is none of anyone's business nor is it their responsibiity to judge. Keep on writing, keep on being you, and keep on keepin' on! :-)
The topical forums are a cesspit. Only venture there if you are feeling up to it, lol.
Even if you feel up to it, I would urge caution and take a shower immediately afterwards! They kind of draw in some of the most angry, unhappy, and mentally twisted!
Agreed Will Apse, there's nothing wrong with stepping back to get a breath of fresh air from all the toxic fumes the bigots put out.
It's things like this that make me want to venture into my own sites/blogs, which I plan to fully commit to in the next few months. I'm just so sick of seeing these disturbing topical trends and I really hope outsiders aren't seeing this. It completely tarnishes the reputation of this site and everything surrounding it.
I'm not gay but as a tolerant person I do support and agree with you. Some of the questions have biased and ugly underpinnings. I especially dislike having to see these questions thrown up in my face when I sign in rather than the old feed. You are right to speak up.
I support what you say and what you ask for - and I'm not gay (not that this is in any way relevant - but I thought I would leave the trolls with one less to have a go at!)
You should come and live in the UK. The police investigate comments left on the Internet and social media when they are nasty and inflammatory and break the law!
People also get prosecuted and fined and/or sent to prison.
It happens in other countries too, not just the UK.
Why HubPages should tolerate stuff which would get you thrown off many other websites is beyond me. However I do wonder if people report such comments to them? Do you?
And so you are suggesting a fascist state is better? Free speech isn't :"free" when the content is decided by a particular group or agenda. I am Indigenous. I have dealt with racism my entire life, and so did my parents. I even find the Statue of Liberty offensive! Hub pages is full of white racists. But I have not once attempted to censor anyone., as I am not concerned with dogs barking.
Censorship is evil. If that is what they are doing in the UK, then that is not a place I would want to live. It's bad enough here. No one has the right to dictate the parameters of self-expression. I don't really care if the racist says hateful things about my people. That is what they are supposed to do. Otherwise, they would not be white racists. It is the same with homophobes. That is who they really are. You cannot change them. They were born evil, and they will die this way.
I speak my mind here and elsewhere. But I am not trying to make friends, nor am I trying to change anyone's mind, or make them understand my point of view. You cannot take something evil and turn it into something good. Who told you that lie? I have freed my mind from mental slavery. I do what I want and I say what I want, just as the evil Americans say what they want to say. This is as close to perfect as we have been able to get. I have no desire to go backwards.
I am not a racist. I am part Native American and white. But I have only met one black person who has been nice to me. There is a woman I know who is half black and half white. She wears pants so tight, you can see her privates. She puts down all the women but not the men. I went to a MT. Sinai hospital in Cleaveland, Ohio and I was the only white person there. The receptionist wouldn't even look at me, or talk to me. That is when I learned what prejudism is. It's not just whites against blacks. I don't care what color someone is as long as they are kind and nice. But my experiences have made me wary.
The black person who was nice helped us find the place we were looking for because it was in a different state. I am grateful to him. I just want you to know that blacks can also hate white people. I never had any slaves in my family. I think that is a horrible thing to do to someone, anyway. Bad enough, we've got the govt.'s federal minimum wage under $8.00! Just about enough to buy a gallon of milk for your kids.
She sounds like a very sexy woman. Perhaps she is proud of her privates, and it is good to be proud of the many blessings bestowed upon us by God.
I have read your story, but I can tell a very different story. I am mixed race Indigenous, and I also grew up in the mid-west. The black people were very nice to me, but the whites were very violent and abusive. At one point they attempted to force my parents from their 200 acre farm, and my parents had to buy a rifle and a shotgun in order to protect themselves from the evil racists.
Your story and your conclusion ignore the history, and the dichotomy between white and black in America. If you are mixed race then most likely you look like a white person. I am mixed race, but I have dark skin and high cheekbones. An Indigenous person can recognize me in a crowded room. And when a Black person sees me they apparently don't see a white person. Any animosity that a white person may experience coming from a black person is usually from a defensive posture, and has nothing to do with racism, as racism requires an element of superiority. It is absurd to suggest that a race of people who have suffered the degradations of slavery for nearly 400 years, and who continue to suffer abuse over 500 years after the evil Invaders began the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, would feel "superior". The black people have had it worse than me, but even I did not feel "free" until I joined the Navy after high school and was stationed at Pearl Harbor. Living in Hawaii was the first time in my life that I did not feel the weight of white racist oppression. The term "reverse racism" is an oxymoron, and such a thing does not, and could not exist. White racists have simply perverted the term "racism" in order to promote a false narrative.
But the homosexuals who seek to enforce censorship on Hubpages should study the history of the African and the Indigenous in the "Land of the Free". No amount of censorship will change the heart of evil. No amount of legislation will bring the homosexual man and woman acceptance among the Sons of the Pioneers. At best, what they will be able to create through censorship is just another plastic, imaginary world. Many advances made by the Black and the Indigenous during the Civil Rights era were superficial at best. And today people of color are still discriminated agaisnt 50 years later! The police are still murdering the Indigenous and the African disproportionately, and with impunity; 50 years later. And economic opportunity for minorities is not much better; 50 years later.
The homosexuals are kidding themselves if they think that the legalization of homosexual marriage is a magic pill that guarantees acceptance.
Ronnie, you write some honest and sensitive understanding here. Thank you.
Not looking to change peoples hearts and minds on homosexuality. I just don't want to read the hate filled rants in the threads. Is that too much to ask at a place I share a business relationship with?
People seem to forget what HP.
I have reported such threads/comments/questions/discussions etc. many times, but usually nothing is ever done about it, which leads me to believe this kind of thing is allowed and even encouraged.
What I particularly loathe is when I get these things "in my face" on the start page.
I agree with the OP absolutely.
Mark, thanks. Yes I have reported and I know several others have as well. It doesn't seem to stop it thought (sadly).
That would suggest HubPages are NOT reading reports
If Christy says they rely on reports, then I think people are entitled to know whether they also ACT on reports!
Personally I'd query what the need is to have these type of forums at all. From what I can make out they're just an excuse to bump traffic up and have no real value.
Yes, makingamark, I understand all media are heavily censored in the UK and Europe. This allows the authorities to form or shepherd public opinion. Freedom of thought and expression makes it more difficult for government to tell people what to think. And of course all governments have historically promoted every imaginable kind of falsehood to advance the interests of elites and make it impossible for us plebs to be heard.
There are many object lessons to show where this leads: North Korea and Saudi Arabia are fine examples. If you like thought control, you have many options, should you choose to immigrate to a region where you can be untroubled by hearing people speak their minds.
If you see ANY questions, answers or forum posts that you feel are offensive, the first thing to do is report them.
People assume that HubPages staff are monitoring the Q&A and forums for that kind of thing - but they're not. Some, but not all, of the HubPages Official forums are monitored by staff - NONE of the topical forums are. So if you don't report people, the staff won't know.
Even if you report them, action won't be instant because staff time is prioritised to other areas. And they don't work weekends. But be patient and you may find action will happen, especially if several people all complain about the same question or thread.
People do get banned for being offensive - sometimes for life. So it's always worth a try.
Thanks. I did not know it takes time. I always thought the monitoring was instant (like a day or something).
No it's definitely not instant - like I said, they don't monitor the topical forums AT ALL, they just wait for us to report problems and then they react to those reports.
I'm sure John is aware how people from the LGBTQ community are treated in countries who are third world and backward. But now all the LGBTQ people in the US enjoy the same civil rights as everyone else, though there will be prejudice and hateful people who will never accept that, just as there are still people fighting the Civil War in the United States.
John, these forums are so nasty, even the ones where people ask for advice on hubs are getting hard to read. Everyone is an "expert" and instead of kindly answering your question, or dare I say read it well enough to understand it, the person asking is lectured and made to feel like a 5 year old. The climate here is at the worst I've ever seen it.
It's great to keep speaking out. I will do the same.
Are you sure 'third world and backward' is entirely non-judgmental? Am I missing something here?
Does this have anything to do with the honest, if very traditional opinion of the Indonesian woman who posted a page about sexual orientation recently?
I came off the wrong way. I spend time in the Caribbean, and there is no tolerance for gays or LGBTQ people there. They live on the streets without food or shelter, and people treat them like dogs. I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. I did not read or know about the Indonesian woman. I get passionate and should think before I write. Thanks for pointing that out to me.
I've seen what you are talking about Jean some Caribbean locations. So sad to say but it's totally true!!! Thanks for sharing. I didnt take what you shared by the way as offensive or judgemental. I think all of us are likely sensitive to things now given what's being posted in some of the threads.
Open forums lean pretty rife with hostile opinions. That worries me less than the standing policy, unless it has been quietly changed, that any hub about homosexuality is about sex and so not permitted. But equivalent straight topics are fine.
I think there are certain words that automatically lead to not publishing hubs. A long time ago I used the word "abortion" in a hub, and it was taken down! It's all about pleasing Google and Adsense...aka, money!
Of course one alternative which is open to anybody would be to report to Google any page which contained hate speech.
Google does act on such reports and buries the page. If they get too many they bury the site.
That's why I don't understand why Hubpages runs the risk of people taking this course of action by leaving up the topical forums and live threads which cause problems on this site.
I find it offensive that anyone would consider--let alone insist--that free discussion of any issue whatsoever be prohibited. I am personally very much in favor of gay rights. I am not in favor of ANYONE attempting to infringe on the rights of others, including the right to free speech. Probably a substantial majority of people have problems with homosexuality and transgender people. A lot of people have problems with me any my particular views on most matters. So people don't like you. So what? Let them unfriend you on Facebook. In other words, stop whining and deal with it. You overstep your rights--and certainly engage my hostility--when you assert that you should be able to silence people. You will find--as other interest groups have found before you--that attempting to advance your cause by restricting the rights of others will ultimately work strongly to your disadvantage. Seeking acceptance in the broader society will win you friends, of whom you have many already. Pushing for coercive measures against the rights of others will win you enemies. If you go full-bore Nazi, I who am now your friend will become your enemy.
Are you saying we should tolerate all speech? Should we also tolerate hate speech?
I'm not judging. Just asking.
For starters, the term "hate speech" has no exact definition. The term "hate speech" has come to be synonymous with any political opinion and any type of discourse with which liberals do not agree. If someone expresses an opinion you do not agree with, the onus is on you to show why you believe their opinion is mistaken, using objective facts and the intellectual rigor imposed by logical analysis and the logical progression of ideas. Not by name-calling or demands that they be forcibly silenced.
Many of us were under the assumption that it ceased to be acceptable to allow authorities to dictate our beliefs some time in the 1600s (during the Inquisition), but apparently there is a new religion in the making, in which personal opinions and free and independent thought and discourse may be shut down merely by declaring them heretical, by our modern Ecclesiastical authorities.
In my personal experience, I have found gay men and women to be some of the finest people I know. I feel that allowing civil unions (gay marriage) for gays is reasonable. I do not feel it is reasonable for a gay couple to use the force of law to compel anyone to bake them a wedding cake.
I feel that good manners and respectful behavior towards others is an important core value that may, in certain situations, be enforced. For example, I feel that if there are individuals on college campuses who are screaming "faggot" at gay men and "slut" at women, it would be appropriate to expel them from college, since they would have demonstrated that they don't meet the minimum standards of social civility of said institution.
I likewise say that people who scream "racist" or "homophobe" require the same treatment, because these are disrespectful and uncivil slurs against others. They are also often unreasoned and not based on objective facts--and frequently based on the denial of objective facts.
I think you'll find most websites with forums have a working definition of "hate speech" and use it - and expel people.
HubPages has one too - they just don't pick up all the examples unless reported.
The key thing is to report examples and then let the site owners decide what they will and will not allow. It's their site and their rules - if you want to inhabit then you have to comply.
After all it's exactly the same as living at home with your parents. If you want to live at home then certain standards of behaviour are expected of you - and there are repercussions if you don't observe them. I don't see what's so difficult to undersand about that.
If you want to say exactly what you like then you should buy your own hosting (always remembering to read what the IP has to say about what you can do and say on your site and their ability to shut you down with no refunds if you don't comply with their conditions) and then set up a blog or a forum and say whatever you like.
There again Google might have views about what you are saying.......
Here's a link in which the American Bar Association discusses "hate speech." http://www.americanbar.org/groups/publi … _hate.html
The ABA begins by defining "hate speech" as "Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits."
The most obvious difficulty with this definition is that it is entirely subjective. There is really no telling what words, opinions, or lines of inquiry might cause some people to feel (or contrive to feel) a range of negative emotions.
Sometimes common sense and good judgment have to prevail.
I think you'll find "Hate speech" in relation to websites and internet forums is defined by the owners and whatever risks they are prepared to run in terms of getting their site trashed and/or banned.
There is no come back - legal or otherwise. When you agree to post on a website like HubPages you agree to agree to their terms and conditions. If you don't like them you are free to post elsewhere.
The only issue here is what are the owners of HubPages prepared to tolerate - when "hate speech" is reported to them. It's NOT a question of what your opinion is or how somebody else has defined it.
Your attempt to show how unbiased you are is very telling. It's the "Liberals'" fault about hate speech. You have many wonderful gay friends. etc, etc. etc. Classic.
The liberal stock rebuttal to opinions they don't agree with is to label them "rascist," "sexist," or "homophobe." These are not reasoned replies but mere accusations of "heresy" against an the accuser's ideology--an ideology which, like other religious and quasi-religious beliefs, is impervious to facts and reason. There are many instances in which proponent of what amounts to this "new religion" have insisted that their views trump the rights of others. The person who initiated this discussion by demanding that opinions that don't agree with his should be silenced is an example of this attitude.
I am the person who started this thread. I demanded nothing. I asked that HP change its comment policy to reflect the diversity of writers we have here so that no person or group feels discriminated against or marginalized.
Your response here is politically charged and not rationale. This isn't a town square. It's a private website that all of us do business with in a revenue sharing agreement.
Interesting how you tried to turn this political.
It would be useful if you (or others here) would give examples of comments they view as "hate speech."
I don't believe I have ever heard a conservative demand the repression of "hate speech." It's entirely a liberal ploy, and it's purpose is to try to silence opposing views, or even make it illegal to express ideas that are not State sanctioned. As someone mentioned above, this is already the case in the UK and Europe. Liberals tend to be Statists of a very deep dye, and are active in advancing the cause of silencing all but State-sanctioned discourse and opinion.
The Bar Association defines "hate speech" this way: ""Hate speech is speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits."
So, in effect, anything that anyone finds offensive, threatening, or insulting should be banned, pretty much without regard to objective reality and based entirely on someone's "feelings." Hence all you would have to do to ban someone from expressing their views is to claim you "feel" "threatened, insulted, or offended" by them.
Liberals just love "Safe Zones " , and yet hypocritically attack everyone against their ideology , In other words stand within the safe zone a deliver hatred to everyone outside of the circle . there are five or six areas of liberal attack to be used ;
But the bottom line is owned by todays liberals
I'm in Thailand and despite its many issues you cannot really criticize it for its attitude to sexual orientation. It is entirely a matter for the individual. The nuances escape me (Toms, Dees, Kathoeys, Ladyboys, etc) but the wonderful thing is the lack of posturing. Nobody needs to prove anything because, although being gay is mildly stigmatized in middle class settings, the general population are entirely accepting.
Of course, if you happen to be a Dee or a Tom (the two halves of a traditional female couple) your mother is going to ask you when you are going to find a nice man so she can have grandchildren, lol.
The acceptance is probably a Buddhist thing.
I am not going to attack anyone's religion but none of the Abrahamic religions exactly have positive attitudes towards sex of any variety. And that is what I reckon underlies the problems in countries with fundamentalist leanings, including the evangelical varieties you find in the Caribbean.
But countries move at their own pace, whether you like it or not, and condemning them out of hand is certainly not going to help.
Yes. The Abrahamic religions are obsessed with sex and sexuality (you only have to look at the European history books to see how attitudes changed after Christian culture replaced Roman!)
I'm kind of located in a small liberal oasis here in North Central Florida, but generally in the US Bible Belt people think nothing of judging people based on their sexuality. For me, it's like judging someone by their eye colour. I see Buddhism as superior in that respect!
I've spent a fair amount of time hanging out in the Q&A, and I almost always answer genuine questions about homosexuality, marriage equality or the supposed "gay agenda". I use those questions as opportunities to express what I hope is a more open, accepting viewpoint than most questioners are prepared to hear.
I also report answers that cross the line between civil exchange of differing views, and hate speech. If someone cannot express their views without diminishing someone else's, or without disparaging an entire group of people, that's where I draw that line. Let HP decide when they review the report.
I only wish that comments could be reported, as well. I've had some pretty hateful responses to answers I've posted.
I find it disturbing that I can't change settings to avoid seeing those ignorant and hateful posts. Hubpages replied that you only see them when logged it. I see them whenever I connect to Hubpages. If I want to view my account I have to log it, so I'm not sure that it works as they say. While logged, in I just clicked on Explore/Hubs. The first things that come up are Q&A posts. Why is that, Hubpages?
As a side note, I think there should be a better word than "Homophobic". It doesn't fully capture the vitriol displayed by "homophobic" people.
I've been reading this thread, and been sitting on my hands for two days...
I'm all for freedom of speech. After all questions are just what they are and thoughts and writings are also only what they are. Everyone can't always agree with you, it happens all the time, it's human; that why we were provided a brain even though the new world order would like us to stop using it.
Much time would be gained by putting things in perspective. I'm not shocked when I read hard words, true thoughts, sincere posts or answers to any question.
Instead I'm shocked when in some parts of the world, the simple fact that someone is an homosexual - or is considered as one - means that this person will end up naked in the street, beaten to death by people judging, sentencing and applying justice in less than 5 minutes.
Or when I think of other parts of the world, where being homosexual can get you officially sentenced to death: hung or beheaded in public because it's considered as a sin that you should be forbidden to spread.
In some parts of the world you can't say that you're gay or lesbian unless you're ready to leave this world. And don't dare saying that you're bi... let alone transgender.
That is putting things in perspective... There's nothing worst than that, isn't it?
As someone pointed out, laws can't change the minds. You can't force someone to like you nor can you force someone to agree with your point of view, your preferences, your habits, your style, your hairdo, your clothes, and so on.
Not even fines can do that.
With fines and strict laws, you can only make the individual shut up and get him/her frustrated, in which case he/she might use physical violence in return. And you don't want that, don't you? Neither me... I'm against any kind of violence.
As far as you can get back in History, homosexuality has always existed. It was a known "inclination", silently accepted but officially rejected, and criticized. There have always been pros and cons. Things won't change, and certainly not if one is forced to it. Freedom of speech insures us to be free to say what we think.
Some of my friends are homosexual, and even though in my country homosexual marriage has been legal since 2003, these friends have never got married nor are they pro. Lastly, the country next door's debate went so far that my friends got hit big time, which is why they dislike the LGBT (in addition to being a lobby and support one specific ideology). So as you can see just saying "I'm against this or that" doesn't automatically imply hatred.
Since I put things in perspective, between words and death, I choose freedom of speech
Just my two cents. Wishing you all the best
Blueheron is derailing this most valuable thread. Can Blueheron not start/continue her/his discussion in the Politics and Social Issues forum in a new thread?
Perhaps it is time this entire thread was moved over. It has ceased to be anything useful re :HubPages (if it ever was) and has degraded into the usual bickering that goes on over there.
How is blueheron derailing the discussion? By asking a question that is on topic, and that no one can seem to answer? By highlighting the subjective nature of the term "hate speech?" Apparently, your idea of a meaningful discussion is when people sit right down next to the Big Rock Candy Mountain, hold hands, sing a rousing rendition of Kumbaya, and then start preaching to the choir.
The point that was made is valid. A Nazi can rightfully say that anyone who speaks ill of the Nazi Party is engaging in hate speech. And from their perspective they would be correct. A convicted rapist and murderer could also make the same claim about people who make hateful remarks about rapists and murderers, and from his perspective, he would also be correct. Anyone with an agenda, whether it be right or wrong, can rightfully claim that an opposing viewpoint that casts them in a negative light is hate speech. Consequently, the term "hate speech" is a dangerous, and highly subjective term that is used to force the will of one individual or group upon another,
The subjectivity argument is interesting.
It is pretty much the last argument that can be employed by those who want to defend hate speech. It is based on the idea that the feelings of persecuted minorities do not matter. Or that persecuted minorities deserve to be persecuted. Or that persecution has never happened.
When you get down to it, it is the subjectivity of the haters which is the problem.
The facts do not matter to them, whether you are talking about holocaust denial, the long, continuing and well-documented history of systematic racism or the notion that gays, somehow, represent some kind of threat.
Given that the facts do not matter and no rational argument is possible, you really cannot be expected to treat the haters like grown ups.
They need to be shushed.
I am a member of the most persecuted minority on this continent: The Indigenous First Nations. And so your argument not only doesn't fly, but it doesn't even have wings. Furthermore, my parents were Civil Rights activists, and I am also an activist as well. A majority of my commentary, and my Hubs are against racism,discrimination, and the status quo. I have never posted any derogatory commentary about homosexual men or women.
Among the Indigenous nations, homosexuality has never been persecuted and treated as it has in the white Christian world. Many of our people have also understood that the homosexual is a "3rd gender". Furthermore, many of our holy men, shamans, or "medicine men" have historically been bisexual or homosexual. Our societies overall have always been more progressive than Europeans in how we have respected, and accepted women and homosexuals. Many Christians are apparently still suffering from a mental illness that has perverted the message of Jesus.
I am a defender of freedom. And in this ever growing police state, we are enjoying less and less freedom. The Ku Kux Klan are my natural enemy. But I champion their right to speak their foul language. I grew up in a part of this country where the Klan regularly burned crosses within a 40 mile radius of our home. My parents also suffered because of the racist whites. As a student of history, I know the evil history of the Klan. But it is not possible to protect my right of free speech if I deny others the right to speak, even though I may find it offensive.
You call it the last argument, but I say it is the best argument. A conditional freedom is no freedom at all, and only an illusion. And what do you gain once you are able to force your will upon others? In the end you will simply live in a world of two faces; a world where many will privately despise and discriminate against the homosexual, but where they will publicly display acceptance, a phony smile, and many kind and sympathetic words. What you are advocating is a fascist world of make believe. A good example of this is the demonization of the N-word in public. In spite of the fact that it is no longer fashionable to publicly use a word the white man has been using for over 500 years, this word and it's meaning is still in the heart of many white Americans. Very little has changed at all. The Indigenous and the Black man are still disproportionately murdered by cops, and minorities are still discriminated against when seeking housing and employment.
It appears that in your mind, anyone who doesn't agree with you, and your agenda is a hater. But here your attempt to slander me has backfired ! You may as well call Jesus the devil, or the Lion a pussycat.
You are as much a slave of your hatred as your persecutors are of theirs. I sympathise, but cannot admire it.
wrenchBiscuit: The Return of The Antibody
How ironic! Let the world take note that this individual who seeks to censor the rest of us for "hate speech" is now directing hateful speech in my direction! Here, this individual has proclaimed that I am "a slave of hatred". This is obviously meant to be a derogatory statement.
Your vitriol is simply a mask to hide the fact that you have no valid argument to support censorship. And you are also like many others here who will commonly prop up a strawman and then base their argument on a fiction. And so, you have painted yourself into a corner. I challenge you to show me where I have commented that I hate anyone. I have often commented that I am of a superior intellect, but that is no secret, as this is revealed in my deeper understanding. But I do not consider Love and Hate in such a primitive manner as you are suggesting. So please, either verify your accusation, or refrain from any future derogatory comments. Practice what you preach.
You say certain people are born evil, you indulge in absurd conspiracy theories, every sentence is a wild attempt to crush your enemies (whether they are or not).
It is very tiring to read.
Why not give yourself a break. Step back a little, get a more balanced perspective, take at look at your own failings (easier to change than other peoples, lol), stop projecting, try a little forgiving (yourself and others).
You cannot sustain yourself on rage alone, for ever.
But as I said, I sympathise. Letting go of rage is not easy, especially if it has become a core part of who you are.
Incidentally, one benefit of going easy on the rage is that people will take you much more seriously. Mastering ones own feelings is a growing up thing.
wrenchBiscuit Shares His Special Secret With The World
Here in your entire commentary you did not cite one instance where I commented that I hated anyone or anything. And that was the original question. Furthermore, there is no such thing as a Conspiracy Theory. But if there were such a thing, it would not necessarily have anything to do with hate. And your comment "wild attempt to crush my enemies" is pure conjecture, and has no basis in fact. But for the sake of argument, this is also not indicative of hate. Do you honestly believe that a cat hates the mouse? Do you believe a hungry pride of Lions hates the antelope as they eagerly engage in their bloody feast? You do not know how I deal with my enemies, as it has been revealed that you do not possess such an understanding. And if you find my thoughtful commentary to be tiresome, then why do you insist on tormenting yourself by reading it?
You make many assumptions, which leads me to believe that the crystal ball you purchased at Wal-Mart has sorely malfunctioned, and you should immediately seek a refund. Not only did you not answer my question, you now raise a similar strawman by implying that I am full of rage. Is that how you perceive the truth as it is revealed? As rage? It is clear from your commentary that you have a need to be accepted, to be appreciated, and well liked by the members of this online community. But I have no such needs. No one here cares if I live or die, and so, even if I had a need to be "taken seriously" as you suggest, I would not seek such support, or affirmation here on this platform.
No, this is not for my benefit. I am not looking for followers, or anyone to agree with my perspective, and I am certainly not trying to change anyone's mind. But since I am a free and sovereign entity, I am not compelled to explain my purpose, or my motivation to you or anyone else. This thread I am responding to was placed in an open public forum. And so, the public has responded. But you are not happy with what the public has to say, as it does not suit your agenda. Apparently, you are the one who is filled with hate, and even though you persist with your demeaning remarks, I have not responded in kind.
And so, as I have just proven , even though you have said a lot, you have said nothing at all. You have raised up your unholy strawman, and you have based your entire argument on a fiction that exists only in your own mind. But not to worry, there are many who have challenged me here on Hubpages, and they have all failed miserably in their attempts to destroy my resolve, and my righteous arguments. But I will now share with you the secret of my success, and that secret comes in two parts:
First of all, I have a great self confidence, and I love myself. I love myself on the inside, and I love myself on the outside. And still I possess 20/20 vision. I love what I think, and I love what I feel. If I were a woman, I would want to be with me. If I were a gay man, or bisexual, I would also want to be with me. If I were a lesbian, I would make myself straight just to be with me. Even the angels want to wear my red shoes!
But the second part of my secret is the most important part. And that part is "The Truth!" I only deal with the truth, and my arguments are based on the truth. And the truth is like titanium steel. It cannot be bent and it cannot be broken. And this is a great teaching that I have shared with you today.
The level of disrespect demonstrated to the original poster by those seeking to pursue their own agendas is mind-boggling.
If you have an issue which is unrelated to the topic of this thread - as per the very first post - please go and start a thread in the appropriate forum.
We have not been formally introduced: Let it be known that I am Ronnie wrenchBiscuit. My father was a great mid-western farmer and Civil Rights activist, and I am one of the greatest songwriters of the late 20th and 21st centuries.
Word: What is mind-boggling is that when people respond with their own opinions that are directly related to the topic, there are those individuals who cry foul, and label any opposing viewpoint as being disrespectful or hate speech. In Nazi Germany they burned books and executed many people who opposed the National Socialist Party. This has happened in many countries. It appears that the United States is headed in that direction. Everything that I have posted here, as well as the opposing posts by others, is on topic. Furthermore, when anyone makes a false accusation against someone in a Hubpages Forum, the accused has the right to rebut that false claim, as I demonstrated in my last post.
If you or anyone else do not want to hear opposing viewpoints then you should not be posting in public Forums. And I will now challenge your false claim of disrespect. Please provide us with your evidence that I or anyone else disrespected the OP, or the gay community in any of our responses. Since all of the original responses are here for the world to see, that should not be too difficult if it is true. But of course, it is false, and so you have nothing to provide. You have made it clear that respect for the gay community is not the issue here, but instead it is a desire to censor the opinions of others. Furthermore, I suspect that my comments concerning self-confidence, and self love have perhaps also set you aflame. But I challenge anyone to demonstrate how loving myself is in any way, shape, or form to be considered "hate speech", or disrespectful. And who am I disrespecting or hating for loving myself? In a materialistic, capitalistic, and narcissistic society, is loving yourself now also a crime? I am only God's humble messenger, and this is a great teaching I have delivered today.
This is the wrong thread and forum for the discussion you are pursuing. Please start a new thread in the Topical Forums if you wish to discuss it further.
I am responding to a public forum that is suggesting censorship on Hubpages. I am responding to the topic presented by the OP, as well as derogatory remarks made against me for expressing my opinion. If you don't like my opinions then I suggest you start a new thread ( a private thread). And here you come with another false narrative. Please tell us what "discussion I am pursing" that is not relevant to the OP.
Perhaps you ought to read the original post and the title of the thread properly.
I will not be discussing anything further with you on this thread.
First of all, I never asked for your response. And based on your previous responses, I fail to see why that would be a concern.
Here is the basic idea presented by the OP.
"As an out gay man, I'd like to address a topic that I've noticed in recent months that's extremely disturbing. Specifically, I'm talking about forum posts that are nothing more than homophobic sentiments, disguised in the form of a question. ... It's disgusting these kinds of forum questions even exist.
...If any of us asked: "Are you ok with interracial marriage?", it would cause an outrage. In fact, I'm confident the "question" would be removed...
But apparently, gay folks (still) are are ok to go after. I don't know if the purpose of the posts are to spread hate or if it's a cheap, desperate attempt to increase hub scores. Either way, it's not OK..."
Unless I am living on Mars or en route to the Twilight Zone, the OP is clearly suggesting censorship. There can be no argument on this point. Consequently, any opposing viewpoints that have been posted are directly related to the issue of censorship. Why? Because if the OP gets his wish, no one will be allowed to post anything that might be even remotely misconstrued as opposition to the homosexual lifestyle. Homophobic devil worshiper's, as well as Christians who are sincerely opposed to homosexuality based on their religious convictions, will no longer be able to express any opinion that does not glorify the gay lifestyle. Even an innocent question like: "Have Any Of Your Gay Friends Ever Made A Pass At You?" could be interpreted as homophobic. The issue of censorship is the fundamental basis of the OP's argument, since in order to appease the OP, Hubpages will necessarily have to increase censorship of anything relating to homosexuality. Read, Learn, and Prosper.
Thanks. Most of the comments here I'm choosing not to respond to. The reason - a good number of them prove the point I was trying to make.
That old saying really is true.
Unbelievable and exactly the original point. It is impossible to have a rational dialog here.
Hubpages - Please remove these useless forums. Keep the technical forums that address site issues. If you are unwilling to remove them at least give users the ability to avoid seeing them. I've been here for seven years and I've had enough of this.
Yes, I generally stay away from the forums on politics, religion, etc. and just stick to the ones on getting traffic, improving hubs etc. I guess the idea behind them was/is to "create a community".
It sometimes seems counter-productive, however, when forums generate bad feeling and we are expected to tolerate some of the more ignorant and bigoted rants.
At the time, I think sometimes you have to just walk away from some of the vitriol on here, or ignore the angry people with their own agenda (e.g. wrenchBiscuit).
That's not an attempt to trivialize the issue of hate speech, which is real. I could happily live without all the superfluous forums on here. It is supposed to be a writing site, after all, and some of the forums really don't present the site in a good light imho.
You are quite bold to attack and suggest that I have my "own agenda". And what is that? An honest opinion? Please explain. You and others here are quick to make accusations, but you cannot backup any of your claims. My words are strong and meaningful, and they are on topic and here for all to see. I am a believer in free speech. As all have witnessed here, I have not responded in kind to the evil remarks that have been made against me. Instead, I have taken the high road and demonstrated the superior intellect with thought provoking commentary, instead of childish vitriol. It is not my desire to mock and ridicule the uneducated American who lives in constant fear, and who is exploited and abused by an evil government. It is only my desire to shine a light.
The homosexual, just like the heterosexual, was created by God. And so, the male and female homosexual, just like the heterosexual, are serving God's purpose. No man has the authority to question almighty God. Whenever anyone posts anything that I disagree with here on Hubpages, I am quick to respond with an opposing viewpoint. Why should I treat the homosexual community any differently? To treat homosexuals any differently than I treat heterosexuals would only demonstrate a bias against homosexuals. In effect, it would suggest that homosexuals are emotional cripples; men and women who possess such frail sensibilities that they are unable to engage in a heated debate. But on the contrary, I engage the homosexual man or woman in the same manner as I would engage the heterosexual man or woman, as I do not place one above the other.
There is also the practical issue of do HP really want to use staff and resources monitoring superfluous forums, when they could be used improving the writing and helping writers on the site.
Why do writers need to provide the details of their sexuality? I don't reveal mine and I never will. It will never be relevant to anything I write.
We all offend each other some point in our lives... However you are a little insensitive to want something band because of your preference. We are free moral agents and if you are a homosexual and i don't like it or agree with it. Then it is my choice!
You cannot force anyone tp share your views and that is exacly what homosexuals have been doing late. Trying to make everyone change their thinking or beliefs to support yours.
Its like me working with an organization and there is an atheist working there. And i walk up to my boss and say, hey can you fire the atheist... Because i believe in God and he is a Jesus hater!!!
Nope it won't work, i am not seeing that people should be nasty here or mean... But people have their RIGHTS just as you have yours to speak on any topic they wish too.
Maybe its liberal arts , or onset of new of spirituality , maybe if an issue wasn't an attempt to stuff something down other peoples throats then that issue might exist without it mattering to anyone .. I believe that all this "hatred ' of others is simply the manifestation of the NEW communication world , Think about it !
Before the eighties there was no internet and so no social media . Social media today is exactly the cause , concern and creation of many a debate about WHATEVER the cause ; Once the newness of Face-Book , Twitter , My Space , whatever the form of communication is , a form of sexual extroversion , a need for outing a cause of personality or behavior order or disorder , for instance , autism , downs syndrome , small people ..........you will notice all of these in the upcoming TV, season , Once the new way of communicating begins to wear off and away , ALL of these social causes will return to the shadows from whence they came .
Solution , Simply attach whatever your cause to social media and watch it nourish and grow . But beware , you may suffer a major attention challenged life once the newness of this "face book" mentality wears off and away . Until that time enjoy the outing , enjoy the attention of cause . Perhaps one day gays , trans , bi-sexuals etc......will return to the quiet serenity of their homes and stop attention whoring , in public , where I live , nobody cares dudes!
The new social media is very much the telephone when it was first introduced. There were all sorts of strict rules about how you should answer the phone and about what you should and should not say. Now no one cares. In time, people will adjust to the presence of social media and the hypersensitivity will probably greatly diminish.
What is social acceptable and what isn't may change over time. But it's a complete myth to think that society was somehow accepting of anything and everything in the past. People fought duels to the death, or even started wars over being labelled with certain phrases or words in previous centuries. Words have always mattered. It's naive to believe otherwise.
Rather than setting up new rules, social media reflects cultural codes of behavior that already exist. For instance, the words "n*gger", "f*ggot", or "c*nt" remain taboo terms for the vast majority of people whether they are spoken out loud in the local store or posted on Facebook. Although political correctness can admittedly be taken to extreme levels at times, there is still a strong case for having some sensible rules and guidelines on what constitutes acceptable and respectful discourse and behavior.
So , someone needs to show us all of the discrimination going on Hub-pages to begin with , Because one raises the issue of gays being , what , harassed ? The only place I can imagine any problem or discussion of gays in modern media is in religious forums or questions , My advice , can't stand the heat of modern moral debate ? Better stay out of the fire .
No one gets to dictate morality in debates . Not by rule or regulation , sorry .
I'll be the first one however to argue for fairness for LBG in forum discussions however .
wrenchBiscuit: Hypocrisy, Censorship, and a Big Beautiful Woman
I just got home from the beach. I went there to follow a muse and write some music, but I was interrupted by several women who were admiring me. This happens more often than not, which is why I try to go to the secluded beaches when I can.
The Rest of the Story:
Hear Ye! Hear Ye!
You are not the one to be speaking about acceptable and respectable discourse: You commented eariler:
"At the time, I think sometimes you have to just walk away fro [sic] some of the vitriol on here, or ignore the angry people with their own agenda (e.g. wrenchBiscuit)".
PaulGoodman67, I have not made one disparaging remark about anyone on this thread. Of course, the words are all there, so this can be verified. There are many who are jealous of my good looks, my intelligence, and my attributes. I will not assume to know your motivations for such slander, as only a coward, a fool, or a heavenly creature would claim to know a man's emotional state, or his motivations, simply from words he has posted here in the digital domain. Except for heavenly creatures, such cowards and fools are usually homely looking men who lack creativity, as evidenced in the lackluster essays, and commentary they post online. No, I am not one of those fools. I am only a fool for a beautiful fat woman with ample bosom, strong buttocks, an insatiable libido, and a fondness for cooking sweet meats.
Because I am only a fool for love, I am not offended by your hateful remarks. As an example: When I hear dogs barking, I am also not offended. I am only posting this comment as a favor to you as a friend. The evil words you have posted may seem contradictory to many people, and it casts you in very a bad light. Although I would never suggest such a thing, some might suggest that you are a hypocrite for slandering the philosopher, the musical composer,the provocateur: Ronnie wrenchBiscuit, and then lecturing another about "acceptable and respectable" discourse. There is nothing acceptable or respectable about slandering Ronnie wrenchBiscuit. But nevertheless, you have provided us with a great teaching. You have demonstrated to the world, that the people who champion censorship, are often the ones who are very rude, and most offensive.
A voice of dissent is healthy and important. When dissent isn't tolerated, it leads to a society/culture that is not representative of its members.
Hubpages needs to ban all Q&A not directly related to the mission of creating, improving, or promoting Hubs. There are enough places on the internet where people can show their true colors. It doesn't need to be here.
If for some reason the Hubpages team feels the need to host an Off-Topic forum, it should be buried somewhere and not the first thing Hubbers see when they log in.
The staff is currently fixing the log in issue, as you can see from Christy Kirwan's posts on the previous two pages of this thread.
I would, however, and perhaps other Hubbers too, like to be able to click on 'Hubs' under 'Explore' in the header and see hubs and not Q&A or forum threads listed there. The only exception would be sticky staff forum threads that inform us of new and retired features etc.
By the way, not a single hub shows up in 'Hubs' under 'Explore' at this moment for logged in users.
Yeah, there are those of us who have suggested that the Q&A and forum be left out of the 'best' or 'recent' list (I'm not sure which it is supposed to be) on the main page. There is always garbage up there; and it STAYS up there forever until another garbage post wins the positioning battle.
If we saw productive stuff there, hubbers would be more inspired to write their own hubs instead of trying to convert the world to their religious perspectives, etc. Many hubbers view hubpages as a place to 'save the world' through their 'witnessing' on that front page - along with the arguments within. It's ridiculous. What must any new person coming in, think?
This has always been a problem. The Topical and HubPages forums used to be lumped together. Many of us complained about religious and political threads dominating the forums page. Eventually a very clever Hubber developed a plugin with which we could filter forum topics. So, HubPages decided to separate topical and HubPages related forums, and shove popular (usually Topical) threads and Q&A in our faces on the landing page instead—the situation we have now. To be fair, there was a time when the landing page featured a 'Hub of the Day' slider, but now that's gone, we have the situation I describe above.
The Topical Forums and Q&A could be very useful tools for serious writer's if only they weren't being constantly abused. In other words, they don't work—at least not the religious and political forums.
I totally agree with Bill and Jayne. In my opinion HubPages diminishes itself by allowing the community site to be dominated by so-called "chat" and things wholly unrelated to the functioning of HubPages. Who knows it may even provide one of the reasons why Google has not liked HubPages.
Jayne's last sentence is particularly apposite.
Of course this thread was supposed to be about the functioning of HubPages moderation - before it was taken over by excessive rants from individuals with their own personal agendas. It really speaks to the lack of moderation.
It has always been a mystery to me why HP has the free-for-all topical forums. This is a writing site not a social media one. It's not about censorship, it's about the appropriateness of the forum topics as they relate to the purpose of HP.
There are many, many places to discuss religious tolerance, homophobia, racism, politics, or whatever, but on a site that is supposed to be doing its utmost to recover from a devastating Google slap, it must be detrimental to have these divisive and abusive arguments.
Unhook the topical forum and set it free, together with the awful Q&A section, under another domain name and let HubPages be what it's meant to be, a site for writers and publishers.
On the other hand, I have seen some very respectful and helpful topics discussed here in HP, in a way that I doubt you would find in a social medium like FP. At least here in HP we do have a tradition of fair give-and-take discussion. Occasionally we get the extreme points of view which seem unwilling to bend from the obsession with narrow-mindedness. Most of us learn to deal reasonably well with those, although it can get very boring and irritating some times.
Maybe if any casual visitor does "drop in" on us, in any forum, they might get a better impression if we work harder on the respectful protocols. But I don't know of a worthy alternative venue for discussing like we do. Does anyone else have such knowledge?
Does anyone venturing here feel they are searching for a sort of Nirvana debating platform? Errr.... hello!
I'm not disputing any of what you said, but that's not the point I'm trying to make. However respectful and helpful the forums and their users (and you have to admit they are not always respectful and helpful by any means - I had heard about HP's ferocious forums long before I started writing here), how do they enhance HP's reputation as a writing site... especially in the eyes of Google, etc.?
Sorry, long and rambling sentence.
I may add that it astounds me that so many people who have participated on this thread haven't even bothered to comprehend what it's really about.
This world isn't perfect and there will always people who will disagree with your life choices. If we tell people they can't have a different view to what we have then that is being dictatorial. If you are not happy with someone else's choice or views, especially online just ignore/avoid it as nobody is pointing a gun at your head and making you read it.
It all comes down to the fact that we are free to choose what and who we believe in. We can't make everybody agree with us if they don't want to. You have to learn to live with other people's choices just like they have to learn to live with your choices.
This is interesting to me, because this is a page where we should be free to write about different aspects as we relate to all types of people in this life. For the topic of sexuality, I believe it's fine to discuss it if it is only for curiosity and understanding. It should not be discussed if one is against something totally and is bringing it up for a sole purpose to outcast here. Sexuality is not politics for heaven's sake. That topic is for the people, but sexuality is a more private matter.
So, I would say, if written in a respectable manner for understanding purposes that do not offend, I can see asking questions. However, if you are against a certain sexuality, and you just want to be a bigot-well then, it's not appropriate at all is it? For example; say someone asked a question about if others feel it's alright to be homosexual. Then, you could assume this person is being homophobic, but how do you know it's not a young man or woman who is struggling with their own identity in this area and just needs to know others' opinions? Maybe they are scared to come out and are looking for a comfortable connection with people to do so. I always say look at the whole picture. Look at a broader range of why a person is asking. You never know. Answer these types of questions with an open-mind. If it comes out to be the negative reason for asking, just leave if it discourages you to be a part of a conversation.
I wish we all could be big boys and girls when it comes to writing on this type of platform. Hubpages is for an array of different styles of writing. I write poetry, I have written about cooking, I have written about music- and lord help me- politics. lol...So, it is kind of senseless to get too upset about freedom of speech. This is a forum that promotes it!
For the record, I am not homophobic. I have gay friends of both genders. I am not racist in anyway. I love people not color. I have two beautiful bi-racial children. I have no bias to anything. I see pretty fat people. I see pretty skinny people. And I see this because I see people for their heart not their personal preferences, color, or eating habits. I am a free-spirited and open-minded individual, but please do not label me as left or liberal or anything like that. I have my beliefs period. I will say you couldn't pay me a million bucks to vote for Donald Trump though. He is nothing that I just described. Lol... I just had to throw that in there. Peace!!!
It's one thing to be curious. It's another thing to disguise questions when it's really a hate filled commentary.
I wonder if it would be OK if any of us posted the following:
"Do you agree with white men marrying black women?"
I can promise ya, that question would get nixed from HubPages in about a minute. The poster would also run the risk of being banned.
People who happen to be LGBTQ, however, regularly see these kinds of questions here. Why is that OK?
The logical answer is - it's not. Hope that makes sense.
I'm a heterosexual artist and what disturbs me most about such questions of sexuality is that they are usually posted by "religious" people who really know next to nothing about biology and nature. They also ask dumb questions like why doesn't everybody accept Christ as their savior, as if the only good in the world originated w Jesus, and the bible is the only book worth reading. Oh excuse me Jesus is GOD. Well GOD is probably doing somersaults up there in the heavens because some people think homosexuality is a sin, but having your head up your ass is somehow divine.
"Never trust people who've only got one f**king book!" Billy Connolly
How is this posting not bigotry and discrimination against religious people? I have never met a single real Christian in my long life who thinks this way.
Do they exist? Of course they do. But making such a generalization about religious people is grossing injust.
Once again, we have bigotry and offensive comments going in both directions. Shame on you for taking part in the hatefulness you claim you despise.
By the way, all human nature is a combination of choice, genetics and environment. If you don't agree, then feel free to ban science.
Why are people having discussions that are completely off-topic? We are on the HubPages Forums and not the Topical Forums. Are these people deliberately trying to irritate those who are discussing the subject brought up by the OP?
It's rude and highly disrespectful.
It surprises me when those who say they are gay are so uncomfortable with those who discuss their status. You want to be gay and no one should question you? As a christian, when people have questions about my belief, I take it as an opportunity to explain it to them; I don't condemn them. I do not support LGBT, but it would serve me better if those who do explained the logic behind it. Censoring such questions is like burying your head in the sand. If you gay and are are out, then be out. Why hide?
The trouble is, the majority of questions etc. asked on HubPages that relate to LGBT on the Topical Forums (mostly either Religion and Philosophy or Politics and Social Issues) or Q&A are asked with the intention of condemning it. Questioners don't actually want anything explained, and they're not looking for any answers. And anyone offering an educated explanation or answer can expect to be attacked.
And even if the intention of the original poster isn't to condemn LGBT, most of those participating in the thread will attack it and the OP if the OP mentions that he/she identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender or queer. It is not possible to have a reasonable, constructive discussion on HubPages about anything relating to LGBT.
It has come to the point where HubPages has turned into a place where people feel free to express homophobic and discriminatory sentiments, which is something HubPages should not be—or do you think it should? The problem is that HubPages does not have the resources to sufficiently moderate the above mentioned forums and Q&A in order to protect users. The problem will, however, be addressed ( http://hubpages.com/community/forum/138 … ost2841810 ).
I'm gay and a Christian. I have no problem holding both constructs at once. Love the "either or" thinking here.
I think sexual orientation is a personal choice and none of us have much to say about the same. The LGBT community is growing and I think it is time to change without judgements.Everyone has a choice to exercise their likes and dislikes
Moderators, please move this to the topical forums, it doesn't belong here.
I think that would be unfair on the OP. Nevertheless, I do wish the moderators would do something, because the off-topic discussions taking place on this thread are now more than annoying.
Moderators should do something about all those long blocks of writing too, maybe force the trolls to learn how to use paragraphs to express their ideas in bite-sized chunks! We have basic spelling and grammar standards for hubs, why not comments too?
Okay, I'm joking of course! But I do sometimes wonder if there's a link between not following linguistic rules and values, and not following basic societal rules and values of respect. (I'm getting a little philosophical now!)
I am sure there is a correlation, Paul.
I find the "no rules are good" people tend to operate in all areas of society and linguistic discourse - and it's the same everywhere - they don't like rules!
I don't care what you are or believe that you are, it doesn't change the fact that other people have a right to their opinion, just as you have your opinion. You can't decide what you will allow people to write about and how they should not be against your view point. You can't decide that you will not allow other's to insult you. It's just not how the world works. If you are homosexual that's an issue that is personal to you but that doesn't give you the right to decide other's need to agree with you or else be silenced.
It does give us good cause if the freedom of expression allows or encourages victimisation in any way.
There are places in the world where any person with a homosexual disposition is at extreme risk of losing his/her life. In some extremist christian communities one can be thrown out, banished, deprived of contact with family.
So please don't kid yourself or us that the world is a level playing field. Standing up for "Rights" sounds fair if you are on the winning side.
Micheal - all I can say is you really need to check yourself. Let's apply your same standard of illogical nonsense to people of color. Why not judge them by the color of their skin? How about their national origin? What's more, why not publish our personal thoughts here on HP?
Oh that's right - it wouldn't be acceptable on ANY level. Your account would be cancelled immediately.
And NO sir, being gay isn't an "issue that's personal to me". It's not an "issue" at all. We've so moved past a time when we "other" folks and pretend that being gay is a choice. It's not. Just like you were born with whatever eye color you have, I was born gay. Deal with it and get over it.
PS And yes Michael, I am a homosexual and I am not ashamed of it. Funny how you used that term as a "bad" thing. You are exactly the type of troll I am complaining about here. And I'll continue to make noise and speak out about it until the time comes when HP doesn't allow discriminatory, bigoted, hate filled remarks on its boards.
Like you, I do business here. When I come to work, I shouldn't have to read hate. There are plenty of other venues for that. HP shouldn't be one of them.
That, Michael, is how the world works. Stick that in your cap.
Your problem isn't that you are gay it's that you are an angry man. You assume that I was offending you but I wasn't. My point is that you can't control everything in life. You will always have critics no matter who you are or what you do. I guess you make my point better than I do. You can't shut everyone up just because you don't like what they say or believe.
Like many others here, you are missing the point. It's not about freedom of speech; it's about whether HubPages should allow discussion of certain topics in a certain manner.
It will do none of us any good should Google decide that HP is a hate-filled site. Think of it as if someone is in your home, extolling the virtues of freedom of speech and then goes on a hate-filled, swearing rant in front of your family. Do you respond, "It's okay, say what you want." or do you politely (or otherwise) ask them to take their opinions elsewhere?
My personal opinion is that HP should disassociate the topical forum from the main domain, assign a moderator or ask for volunteer mods, and let this forum be restricted to HP-related subjects.
My personal opinion is that HP should disassociate the topical forum from the main domain, assign a moderator or ask for volunteer mods, and let this forum be restricted to HP-related subjects.
Mine too 1000+
I feel this is better: it's moving the discussion away from vitriole and disagreement towards solution and resolution.
Which is what some of us (moaners and whiners according to wrenchbiscuit) have been trying to say all along. Any other discussion, i.e. personal views on LBGT, racism, whatever, are off-topic and irrelevant *on this forum*.
Only when it applies to homosexuality right? Yeah NOT. So now we can't talk about Religion, Faith, Politics, Homeopathic Medicine, Sports teams that have native american mascots, environmental issues or lack there of, did I say politics? Um, I know my writing is terrible but do you all get my point?
Why won't you understand?
Theraggededge is talking about the purpose of this thread. It is not about personal views and opinions on LGBTQ. It is about what can be done to deal with forum threads/posts and Q&A that incite hatred against the LGBTQ community.
You are obviously having trouble reading and understanding mine.
I don't agree. It's very much about free speech. The point that some people are missing is that people or their comments shouldn't be banned just because a handful of other people don't like the comments.
I don't have a problem with gay marriage. But should I be banned or have my posts banned because I have a religious or moral belief that doesn't agree with it?
That's not just free speech. It's also plain old bullying.
Not once have I said that anyone should be banned or censored. I'm saying there's a place for such discussion but it ain't here.
I'm not saying that you were asking for it, although you imply it with, "t's about whether HubPages should allow discussion of certain topics in a certain manner. " I'm responding to your post within the context of the OP.
That being said, the OP is about site policies and very much about banning posts and articles that he finds personally offensive.
No. It's about site policy regarding content that incites hatred.
Read the original post! He says that asking whether someone agrees with gay marriage is homophobic.
I'm in favor of banning hate speech. Asking a question about gay marriage or whether homosexuality is a choice is not hate speech. It's censorship based on personal preference.
The OP is not talking about somebody asking an innocent or justifiable question. He is talking about questions etc. asked on HubPages that relate to LGBTQ on the Topical Forums (mostly either Religion and Philosophy or Politics and Social Issues) or Q&A with the sole intention of condemning it and inciting hatred. Questioners in such cases don't actually want anything explained, and they're not looking for any answers. And anyone offering an educated explanation or answer can expect to be attacked.
The OP wants to know why this is allowed to continue. The reason turns out to be a lack of moderation on the Topical Forums and Q&A.
And for the umpteenth time, this thread has nothing to do with free speech and censorship. If you want to discuss that, start a new thread.
Jayne, I understand and agree with the major point in your first paragraph about the need to deal with hate speech. I bet I have been blasted on HP forums far me than most people on this thread because I don't like bullying by either side of an issue.
But the examples he cites are not hate speech. He is listing subjects he wants to censor because he doesn't like them and not because they are hate speech. He is bullying and trying to silence people with whom he doesn't agree by calling them homophobes.
So for the umpteenth time in return, it is very much about free speech and censorship on HubPages.
It is about dealing with content that incites hatred. It is not about censorship and free speech.
The OP answers your question himself on page 12 of this thread: "My example questions were completely made bland on purpose. The real examples, which can be found in thread histories here at HP, are much, more in your face." http://hubpages.com/community/forum/138 … ost2844175
I won't challenge you on the fact that your first paragraph doesn't address my most important points about the inflammatory nature of his original post.
But I will say about your second paragraph that he doesn't provide any examples on page 12 and certainly does no backtracking on his demands.
I will also point out that he doesn't mind supporting posts that are great examples of religious bigotry and hate speech:
http://hubpages.com/community/forum/138 … ost2843542
Is that a double standard?
Your link sends me to the start of the thread, so I don't know what you mean. There is one post, however, to which the OP replies positively, that describes certain people as "religious" in inverted commas. Is that what you mean? I think you ought to try understanding without having to have everything spelled out to you.
It would actually be totally illogical for the OP to want to have all LGBTQ related content banned on HubPages, because he himself likes to provide content on the subject. His only concern is content that incites hatred, and this is absolutely obvious.
Wow. You can't defend obvious problems with your side of the argument, so you resort to personal insults. Shame on you.
How ironic that you claim to oppose hate speech.
"I think you ought to try understanding without having to have everything spelled out to you."
I'm sure you meant that respectfully, right?
I'm talking about your nitpicking and scrutinizing every word without even trying to see the bigger picture. I actually get the impression that you're deliberately avoiding it.
Anyway, you've now succeeded in getting me off topic, which means it's time for me to end my discussion with you.
I object to your assumption that I implied that anyone or anything should be banned. My suggestion is a practical one in that the commercial part of Hubpages would be better served if it moved such discussions elsewhere. It's about Hubpages being shunned by Google or losing Adsense - nothing to do with curbing free speech. HubPages is a writer's site, or it should be. Not somewhere with a reputation for insulting tirades.
I believe you have lost track of the OP. Please see my post above.
Also, you have no grounds to object to my statement. The potential for banning is obvious in your sentence, "It's about whether HubPages should allow discussion of certain topics in a certain manner. "
You have chosen to interpret it that way - your choice. It isn't what I said or meant. If I thought that banning was the answer, that's the word I would have used. If you read my posts on this thread, nowhere have I said that free speech should be restricted - only that the two parts of the forums should be split so that HubPages won't be penalised. My concerns are based on commercial reasons, not moral ones. And in that sense, I believe that HP should have clear guidelines on what is allowed or not. But, hey, it's their site - they can do as they wish.
There's a difference between 'banning' and allocating an appropriate forum for free speech and personal opinion on topics not directly related to publishing and writing on HP. Again, as you, and others, don't seem to understand - the topical forum is for freedom of speech and self-expression. This forum is for discussion of HP content and publishing.
As to the OP's concerns, I can't really comment because I don't frequent either the Q&A or the Topical forums. If he feels marginalised or singled out then he should report the offending posts.
As a quick idea of what to do when seeing questions like this, "Do you agree with gay marriage" to "Homosexuality a Choice?".... Why not respond with asking your own question of something like this...
"Is it homophobic to ask questions like is homosexuality a choice, and do you agree with gay marriage?" The case needs to be made that the idea is even true. You cannot tell the intent of someones heart and mind for simply asking that.
I think that would be a better route to take than assuming people are homophobic and possibly silencing people for asking questions. I think the case would need to be made first, that those questions are homophobic, before posting in a forum asking HP to take action that would result in silencing people. If those are the best example that the OP calls disgusting for even existing, I am not sure I agree and think more is possibly going on there. If that is the 'gamut' or range of extreme homophobic questions one sees.... I am not on board with that idea.
At least you made an intelligent argument here. My only point of disagreement is this - you can tell a person's intent by the question. My example questions were completely made bland on purpose. The real examples, which can be found in thread histories here at HP, are much, more in your face.
I don't think silencing anyone is a good idea. I do think any reasonable person can tell when someone asks a question that is designed to inflame and offend.
But I do see your point and do appreciate the comment.
Ok. I was going off of your original post when you said the questions ran the gamut between those two, and then how you thought they were disgusting.
I have seen such questions as those, not related to this particular issue but to some others. Truly intended to inflame and mock people, etc. I think that isn't as much of an issue now as it was before. Which I am glad for. I do not traffic much in all the questions/topics, so likely missed what you are referring to. I hope now that things are better for all groups on HP so we can keep on carrying on in great dialogue. Even if, and maybe especially if we disagree on certain topics.
For what it is worth, I am very much against those that are cruel, intend to inflame, and cause trouble. If you were to share a question here like the one you allude to, I would probably agree they are inflammatory or disgusting. Without seeing it though, I can't weigh in on those. Thanks for your comment back, I appreciate it.
For those wondering about "free speech" on HubPages, can I draw your attention to the following - WHICH YOU AGREED TO WHEN YOU SIGNED UP (it's in "para 6 Proprietary rights; Content ownership" of the Terms and Conditions)
HubPages does not pre-screen User Content, but will have the right (but not the obligation) in its sole discretion to refuse or remove any User Content for any reason, including User Content that may violate these Terms, or that is otherwise objectionable.
Bottom line you do NOT have free speech on your hubs or in the forums.
By the way, I did (in my above post regarding Google policy) originally include a link to a forum thread that concerns a hub inciting hatred against the LGBTQ community whereby ads had been disabled, but deleted it after deciding it might be too provocative.
"You must follow specific guidelines for publishing forum posts, comments, questions and answers, and other content services that are posted on the Service."
The specific guidelines can obviously be found here http://hubpages.com/help/forum_rules in the left sidebar and here http://hubpages.com/make/request/?requestText= in the right sidebar.
But perhaps HubPages needs to be a little more specific regarding hate speech.
Let's see if I can get some of you to understand. Look up at the top of the page. See the title of the thread? Now look down about half an inch. It says Hubpages/Hubpages Forums/HubPages Tutorials and Community Yes?
Now go here: http://hubpages.com/forum/topical Can you see the difference? That is where the personal views belong. Lots of free-speech going on there. So if you have a viewpoint or want to start a discussion about anything that's not related to hubpages content, that's where your post belongs.
Okay, we've got that straight (s'cuse pun).
So the actual discussion here is not about your personal view on LBGT issues (or sport, or religion, or freedom of speech, Michael McNabb) It's about ***how hubpages deals with such topics***. Especially those which seem to encourage hate-speech.
As I keep saying, I think that topical forum mentioned above, plus the Q&A section, should be allocated their own domain in order that Google et al don't associate it with the main HP site, and the company itself. Then everyone can free-speech away to their heart's content. As HP have already set up separate domains for the niche sites, it's only one little step to do so for the topical forum and Q&A.
Apology accepted, Ronnie.
I won't challenge you on the fact that your first paragraph doesn't address my most important points about the inflammatory nature of his original post.
But I will say about your second paragraph that he doesn't provide any examples on page 12 and... read more →
Perhaps Hub Pages will open a new forum moderator division ,
"The Safety - Zone Forum Page "
That way anyone entering said safety zone can feel perfectly safe in this chosen forum environment .
I have definitely noticed that there are definitely two sets of standards in these forums and hubs , the reactionary posts of liberals who wish to deliberately offend ----and those of conservatives doing the same thing ! . It becomes political . It makes no difference where one posts ,in a hub or forum , everyone could stand a few manners ?.
My advice - Don't dish out insults if you don't wish them returned . We all need to think about others reactions to what we say !
by GoldenBird4 years ago
There are some troubled men who regularly use forums, and they have not a single hub in their profiles. How come? How is it allowed? I do not get it--- Is HubPages a chat-website?
by R.S. Hutchinson5 years ago
HI I'm new.. and I think.. that if someone (that isn't a Hub Page Member)visits my Hub page and scrolls to the bottom of my page they can see all the forum activity I have been a part of. I'd rather this info not be...
by Mary McShane2 years ago
Recently I'm noticing new members who have no hubs, no activity where they read or comment on hubs, and only join to participate in self interest and/or bleeding heart questions in various forums. Sort of using HP as a...
by dellea3 weeks ago
PROBLEM: Whenever I write a hub on a controversial subject, a number of people create new, fake hub accounts solely for the purpose of posting negative comments and feedback on my hubs and/or threatening me anonymously....
by Austinstar11 months ago
To date, I have been denied permission to ask and/or answer questions because of revenge? mark downs by disgruntled hubbers. I get blocked for a while, then un-blocked, then blocked again. Also some of my Q&As are...
by NotPC3 years ago
Has anyone else noticed a serious drop in quality among the Question portion of HubPages? For the past several weeks, nearly every question that is featured in the "my account" section has been ripe with...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.