Colorado baker sued again, this time for "gender transition cake"

submitted by WrongToy from self.GenderCritical

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

As you say, this just made a lot of homophobic people feel even more homophobic - and worse, it helped many feel justified for being homophobic too.

Yes, this is my most salient criticism of it. As for my characterization of other gays ("the community"), much of my impression therein stems from the fact that so many do not seem to understand this point, i.e. that forcing your ideology down anyone's throat will never foster acceptance and only encourages them to hate you.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I agree. So many people seem unaware of the basics of human psychology and how greater social acceptance is usually achieved. Bullying and being domineering are not very good methods of persuading people to take kindly to you and see your point of view.

So many activists today and in recent years also don't seem to get that different battles require different strategies and tactics. For example, angry shouting, extreme measures and lawsuits are appropriate in some circumstances. Such as when going up against major institutions doing evil things - like Big Pharma and the US government during the AIDS crisis. But when a local small business owner with churchy views won't make a wedding cake that's clearly labelled a "gay wedding cake," but he will make you any other kind of cake, including one you can put the writing and decorations on yourself, making "a federal case" over the horrible injustice he's supposedly done you seems a tad OTT.

BTW, I was one of the many protestors participating in the ACT UP demo outside St Patrick's Cathedral in NYC in 1989 outraged about the assholes in the demo who decided to go into the church and disrupt the service. Over many meetings beforehand, ACT UP had come to a consensus that the protest should stay entirely on the street coz going onto the church property or - god forbid - inside the cathedral would only get us a very bad press. Which is exactly what happened. I've heard that the current show Pose presents the guys who went into the cathedral and caused disruptive drama there as heroes. But honestly, that's not at all how it was. They were assholes who got ACT UP a whole lot of bad press and turned off many people who otherwise were sympathetic, or leaning towards being sympathetic.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

the assholes in the demo who decided to go into the church and disrupt the service

I'd heard of that incident referenced when BLM activists did something similar at a church last summer. That's interesting. Did ACT UP take a roster of names beforehand? Was there any way to distinguish whether those who did were part of ACT UP vs. oppos?

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There was no formal ACT UP membership and thus no list. The only lists were of people who signed up voluntarily to perform certain tasks. Also there was no way to confine demonstrations in public places only to people who had attended ACT UP meetings, gone through trainings & strategy sessions & agreed with the approach(es) decided on by the larger community who had attended meetings beforehand.

I haven't watched Pose but my impression is that it portrays the guys who went into the cathedral & made a huge scene as "trans" - which back then would've meant transvestites. But in NYC in 1989, transvestites didn't play a role in Manhattan-based AIDS activism, though many had AIDS. They were very much on the periphery. Just as they were in the era of the Stonewall Inn riots.

The guys behind ACT UP & GMHC were gay men who dressed and presented as "normal" men, not female impersonators. Even the "swishy" ones (excuse the term, but that's what was used) wore business suits to work and blue jeans & T shirts on the weekends, not mini-skirts, wigs and high heels. The men behind/in such orgs as GHMC & ACT UP were well-educated, middle-class mostly white guys with good jobs and successful careers. Lots of clever people in the arts. Those gay men lived in an entirely different milieu from the ball scene gay guys depicted in the 1991 film Is Paris Burning? and Pose today - who were mainly black and Latino, poor, from disadvantaged backgrounds and who made their livings from criminal activities like prostitution, drug dealing, shoplifting and other thefts, muggings and blackmail.

But I don't recall exactly who the guys who went into the cathedral were, though it's a pretty sure bet they weren't transvestites. There were a lot of "regular" gay guys in ACT UP who were given to acting rashly and rather crazily - for good reason. They were sick with a fatal disease or at high risk of it - and their lovers, friends, colleagues, neighbors were literally dropping like flies all around them. It was really a tragic time.

BTW, I've enjoyed exchanging posts with you.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

BTW, I've enjoyed exchanging posts with you.

Ha, thanks! Not that the original r/GC wasn't excellent, but I've found the Saidit version of this sub to be more willing to admit a male into the conversation (as opposed to at best politely redirecting to r/GCGuys, which is quiet even on its best days).

It's really refreshing to jump in here to get opinions and especially first-person perspectives like you're able to give, because none of these are remotely available from any mainstream news sources/media. I particularly appreciate the way that lesbians'/L-allies' voices are able to be heard in GC spaces, which might be the only place left where they're even allowed to anymore - gay men don't get to hear their female counterparts' inputs on much anymore these days, given how balkanized the acronym has become.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I like this forum for the same reasons. In the short time since r/GC was shut down, I've argued for persons of both sexes being allowed to post here. Please keep posting. IMO, the main way society advances is through different types of people with varying views and life experiences getting to know one another

BTW, back in the 70s and 80s, het (or mostly het) women like me sometimes were a bridge between lesbians and gay men. Back then, I was often the "token het" woman at lesbian and gay social events and in political circles. But a number of gay men and lesbians who were friends of mine met one another and began alliances after meeting at cocktail and dinner parties at my place.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

IMO, the main way society advances is through different types of people with varying views and life experiences getting to know one another

100%

And AFAIC, you hets are a-okay in my book. Literally anyone who understands that empathy, not violent activism, is what cultivates acceptance, is a-okay in my book.