Nowadays, do homophobics still exist because we let them be?

[BlinkOnce]

10 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

Discrimination gets a bad rap,  but in reality it is natural and necessary. We have the right to discriminate about hundreds of things.  I hate to eat okra and I love chocolate.

The problem arises only when we let our discrimination affect negatively other people.

I don't think I'm qualified to allow/disallow your attempts to define things. 

Anyway, Google says: In human social behavior, discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction towards, a person based on the group, class, or category to which the person is perceived to belong.

So in this case, discrimination will definitely affect people negatively. Your okra/chocolate example is better called "preferences/likings" perhaps?

So a "politically correct" sentence should be: Problems arise when we let our preferences (which is inside our head) affect our outward behaviors/judgement/decision making (morphing into discrimination) which as a results affect negatively other people.

 

Being politically correct sweats me out. Hard work posting as a Mod, eh? HAHAHAHA

[Steve5380]

4 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

 

Being politically correct sweats me out. Hard work posting as a Mod, eh? HAHAHAHA

 

 

AGREE!  And it must be especially hard blinking only once!  

 

[Dart]

On 9/28/2019 at 10:05 AM, Crispy96 said:

If you are referring to Indonesia, I feel you. It pains me everytime I read the news.

Are you referring to the gay persecution in Indonesia? Indonesia is only one example where many have been ingrained with hate doctrine. This remains a major deterrent to a changed mindset. I too feel the pain each time I come across reports across the world in regards to gays been hunted, imprisoned, tortured and executed in the most unspeakable manner. Let's do our part within our little capacity to eradicate homophobia. Great work begins with a little tugging on the heartstrings.

Edited September 29, 2019 by Dart

[Steve5380]

This morning I went to my gym as usual, but with the topic of this thread still fresh in my mind. 

 

My neighborhood is of good middle class whites,  but many Blacks work out in the 24 hour gym.  Many Black women here lift heavy weights and are extremely pretty, with some bubble asses to kill for    We see often big Black guys with their nice white women...  and it all seems very natural.  Amazingly, I find the Blacks even more courteous and civil than the whites, they say hello, they wipe their machine off after use while we don't.  There was a big hefty Black man working out besides me, lifting huge weights.  No problem.  We said "hi" and smiled.

 

More and more I see integration in America working.  When it is not,  it might be because of poverty.  Poverty is predominant with minorities, and this leads to lack of education, crime. Some progressive candidates for President have big plans to address the economic disadvantage of Blacks and I am all for it (for them).

 

This thread's topic comes in in that these Black Americans are totally visible.  Everyone knows who is Black and who is not.  I associate this with  BlinkOne's idea:  if we gays come out of the woodwork and don't hide our identity,  it is a message to the straight world:  "see how we are as capable, as intelligent, as strong, as successful as the best of you,  and therefore we are entitled to the same privileges and considerations you enjoy, without exception!"

[Guest Guest]

On 9/29/2019 at 2:25 AM, BlinkOnce said:

Till this point I'm very confused. There are at least 3 IPs who sound the same....

 

Whenever evidences contradicts personal hypothesis, people gets confused. 

[Steve5380]

14 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

 

Whenever evidences contradicts personal hypothesis, people gets confused. 

 

It seems clear that his confusion is not over contradictions to his hypotheses but over the profusion of Guest Guest-s.  How can one have a conversation with people whose name mean nothing and who cannot be held apart?  It's like talking with cyber-ghosts 

[LeanMature]

12 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

It seems clear that his confusion is not over contradictions to his hypotheses but over the profusion of Guest Guest-s.  How can one have a conversation with people whose name mean nothing and who cannot be held apart?  It's like talking with cyber-ghosts 

 

They made you guess guess. 🤔

[Guest Guest]

11 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

if we gays come out of the woodwork and don't hide our identity,  it is a message to the straight world:  "see how we are as capable, as intelligent, as strong, as successful as the best of you,  and therefore we are entitled to the same privileges and considerations you enjoy, without exception!"

 

The constant goading and taunting by members and Moderator for forummers to come out of the closet is really reckless and dangerous.

 

The consequences for those people coming out of the closet are for the individuals to bear. Despite how these vocal cheerleaders pushes for their own agenda here and cheer for people to be coming out, these people will only stand by the sideline to watch the show even if you are to drown and suffer your own toxic consequences if your individual environment turned out to be a non-accepting one. This is what "Throwing Someone Under The Bus" means.    

 

I urge everyone to make your own evaluation of your own environment before you come out of the closet to anyone. DO NOT MAKE SUCH CHOICES HASTILY JUST BECAUSE YOU READ THIS THREAD!

 

This constant goading and taunting for people to come out of the closet might just result in heavy penalties for those out-of-closet people in some countries, if there happen to be forum readers there: https://www.dw.com/en/gay-couple-caned-in-indonesia/av-38957749 

 

Please be careful! 

 

[BlinkOnce]

55 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

 

The constant goading and taunting by members and Moderator for forummers to come out of the closet is really reckless and dangerous.

 

The consequences for those people coming out of the closet are for the individuals to bear. Despite how these vocal cheerleaders pushes for their own agenda here and cheer for people to be coming out, these people will only stand by the sideline to watch the show even if you are to drown and suffer your own toxic consequences if your individual environment turned out to be a non-accepting one. This is what "Throwing Someone Under The Bus" means.    

 

I urge everyone to make your own evaluation of your own environment before you come out of the closet to anyone. DO NOT MAKE SUCH CHOICES HASTILY JUST BECAUSE YOU READ THIS THREAD!

 

This constant goading and taunting for people to come out of the closet might just result in heavy penalties for those out-of-closet people in some countries, if there happen to be forum readers there: https://www.dw.com/en/gay-couple-caned-in-indonesia/av-38957749 

 

Please be careful! 

 

Thanks for giving the thread another point of view so readers can make informed decisions on their own. However, your opinion will be much more respected if you didn't cloak your legit opinion with your accusations and personal attacks.

If there is goading and taunting in this thread, they mostly come from you. 

[Guest Guest]

1 hour ago, Guest Guest said:

 

The constant goading and taunting by members and Moderator for forummers to come out of the closet is really reckless and dangerous.

 

The consequences for those people coming out of the closet are for the individuals to bear. Despite how these vocal cheerleaders pushes for their own agenda here and cheer for people to be coming out, these people will only stand by the sideline to watch the show even if you are to drown and suffer your own toxic consequences if your individual environment turned out to be a non-accepting one. This is what "Throwing Someone Under The Bus" means.    

 

I urge everyone to make your own evaluation of your own environment before you come out of the closet to anyone. DO NOT MAKE SUCH CHOICES HASTILY JUST BECAUSE YOU READ THIS THREAD!

 

This constant goading and taunting for people to come out of the closet might just result in heavy penalties for those out-of-closet people in some countries, if there happen to be forum readers there: https://www.dw.com/en/gay-couple-caned-in-indonesia/av-38957749 

 

Please be careful! 

 

 

 

Think your post here should also be posted in this thread ..

 

 

Why the double standard?

[BlinkOnce]

6 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Think your post here should also be posted in this thread ..

Good laugh... LOL

[Guest Guest]

29 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

Thanks for giving the thread another point of view so readers can make informed decisions on their own. However, your opinion will be much more respected if you didn't cloak your legit opinion with your accusations and personal attacks.

If there is goading and taunting in this thread, they mostly come from you. 

 

It is beginning to become obvious of a personal vendetta here.

 

The Camp Metamorphosis started "Learn what it takes to fight your way out of prejudices and ways to love yourself in the journey of self-discovery" .. yet this guest isn't worry there but only in this thread?

 

Like his initial worry, it is definitely more worrying reading more of his posts only in this thread and not there.

[Fairplay]

On 9/29/2019 at 2:06 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

LOL! Isn't this getting increasingly hilarious? One Guest Guest claims that he is not the Guest Guest responded to.   Who knows how many different Guest Guest-s  post too?   Your choice of lacking identity means that your posts don't have any staying power.  You can be ANYBODY.  Yes, even the famous "Dirty Aunty", or one of the several "Disclose Yourself".

 

You value your posts so little that you want them to float around or go up into thin air lacking any identity? 

 

On 9/29/2019 at 2:20 AM, BlinkOnce said:

Okay, your name is also Guest Guest, sweated me out trying to identify which one is which one via your IP, LOL.

 

Anyway, I'm not sure if their attacks are due to ageism. If they are not, good. If they are, good too, because by displaying another type of discrimination, their arguments will lose credits.

I will choose to give them the benefit of doubt. After all, discrimination is not something terrifying to me, just fight lor.

 

 

 

On 9/29/2019 at 2:25 AM, BlinkOnce said:

Till this point I'm very confused. There are at least 3 IPs who sound the same....

 

3 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

 

Whenever evidences contradicts personal hypothesis, people gets confused. 

 

3 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

It seems clear that his confusion is not over contradictions to his hypotheses but over the profusion of Guest Guest-s.  How can one have a conversation with people whose name mean nothing and who cannot be held apart?  It's like talking with cyber-ghosts 

 

 

 

 

 

Eventually it remains too easy to disguise on a Guest "account" by using different IPs, but behind the different Guest posts is essentially the same person. This is another of the vulnerabilities of Blowing Wind. The following denial or the sort of "I am not that Guest but another Guest" strategy or seemingly pointing to being a different Guest person as another Guest seems quite familiar to me and has incurred all over the Forums, which permit Guest appearances. The resulting confusion by such person(s) is well intended and I personally having the feeling in many instances one single person being behind using such strategies. Guest(s) having their share of "fun" in playing out other Guest(s) or even Members. I do not wish to elaborate what the eventual gains or benefits of such Guest(s) are in using such strategies. A concurrent result of permitting such vulnerability by Blowing Wind is (innocent) Members or non-abusive Guests running against a wall, being played out by such abusive Guest(s) or being discredited by others or the Guest(s) itself as making wrong allegations against Guests and in the end turning out this member or innocent Guest being made to a bogeyman of the forum by the abusive strategies or means of such Guest(s). 

 

 

Putting these vulnerabilities to an end is long overdue.

 

 

Whatever the aims of the Forum initiators of Blowing Wind initially might have been (which had seemed well intended), but on times you need to jettison principles which you laid down if they had not materialized or in the worst case evidently being used to disguise or abuse by exploiting the vulnerabilities.

 

Surely, it doesn't serve the discussions.

 

[Guest Guest]

12 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

 

It is beginning to become obvious of a personal vendetta here.

 

The Camp Metamorphosis started "Learn what it takes to fight your way out of prejudices and ways to love yourself in the journey of self-discovery" .. yet this guest isn't worry there but only in this thread?

 

Like his initial worry, it is definitely more worrying reading more of his posts only in this thread and not there.

 

Simple: I don't read every single thread here, so the other thread escaped my attention.

 

Furthermore, now that I have read that thread, it seems to be one that coaches people to "Learn what it takes to fight your way out of prejudices and ways to love yourself in the journey of self-discovery". On the other hand, this thread here is one which draw and bait people out of the closet blindly without any life support system at all. And this baiting of people out of the closet might just be because someone with a juvenile mindset think we are living in some fairytale land where the rainbows crosses the skies everyday and gays and straights can immediately live happily together. Or worse, if this is someone with a mature mindset, it might be started of getting some kick to see people suffer in case coming-out-of-the-closet was not meant for those people to be.

 

Other than all the sideline cheerleading rah-rah about baiting people to come out of the closet, what else have this thread got? Where exactly is the Pied Piper leading the children to - the ravenous river, or a safety ship? If you have indicated any kind of a support system here, please show me the part where it says so. At least the other thread has said it will try to coach people on some ways to fight prejudices. As such, even now, I see no reasons for me to be concerned enough to post over there. 

 

There's no reason for me to have any personal vendetta here. It doesn't matter to me if people stays in the closet or come out of it. But at least, I have answered to my own conscience to remind people to be careful of the consequences and watch before they leap. On the contrary, the brown nosing to people in power is beginning to become obvious here. I wonder if this thread has not been started by a Moderator, will there still be brown noses around. 

 

23 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

Good laugh... LOL

 

The joke's on you. Moderation needs maturity, which you showed to be lacking by laughing here. 

[Guest Guest]

5 minutes ago, Fairplay said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eventually it remains too easy to disguise on a Guest "account" by using different IPs, but behind the different Guest posts is essentially the same person. This is another of the vulnerabilities of Blowing Wind. The following denial or the sort of "I am not that Guest but another Guest" strategy or seemingly pointing to being a different Guest person as another Guest seems quite familiar to me and has incurred all over the Forums, which permit Guest appearances. The resulting confusion by such person(s) is well intended and I personally having the feeling in many instances one single person being behind using such strategies. Guest(s) having their share of "fun" in playing out other Guest(s) or even Members. I do not wish to elaborate what the eventual gains or benefits of such Guest(s) are in using such strategies. A concurrent result of permitting such vulnerability by Blowing Wind is (innocent) Members or non-abusive Guests running against a wall, being played out by such abusive Guest(s) or being discredited by others or the Guest(s) itself as making wrong allegations against Guests and in the end turning out this member or innocent Guest being made to a bogeyman of the forum by the abusive strategies or means of such Guest(s). 

 

 

Putting these vulnerabilities to an end is long overdue.

 

 

Whatever the aims of the Forum initiators of Blowing Wind initially might have been (which had seemed well intended), but on times you need to jettison principles which you laid down if they had not materialized or in the worst case evidently being used to disguise or abuse by exploiting the vulnerabilities.

 

Surely, it doesn't serve the discussions.

 

 

The solution has long been there for you: The Member's lounge has been there for years, waiting for you to make it vibrant. Go ahead, be my "guest". 

[Guest Guest]

3 hours ago, Nightingale said:

No, the solution is to impose compulsory registration (membership) in order to post something, just like in the Straits Times and most other media websites.  That will do away with the need to separate Members from Guests, so that BW becomes Everybody's Lounge.  That will also greatly reduce the phenomenon of relentless trolling.

U known the position of BW yet you are here asking for compulsory registration. Sorry lor, register sonwhat, you think everyone like you to post their photo is it? Anyway, who knows who you are? Who knowa who BlinkOnce is? Registered also unknown. And have you thought why people troll you? You are blamless? You are spamming in the flamming room section too.

[FattChoy]

On 9/27/2019 at 6:07 AM, BlinkOnce said:

Disclaimer:

First and foremost, my apology for the poorly thought-out title. I think it might sound like victim-blaming. But my intention is to encourage each and every PLU, whom this ...!

 

 

I would like to sidetrack a little.   Rather than homophobia, I don't understand why some of us continue to take institutionalised injustices such as job related benefits which extend to an employee's married spouse and kids.

 

For example medical insurances coverage for the wife and kids as well as subsidy of international schooling fees for the kids.  Then you have the paternity /maternity leave.  (Who do u think is doing all the work when the guy goes off on a 3 month paid paternity leave???) All these benefits require money and it's coming out of the company's profits which would mean indirectly a gay employee's bonuses and pay raises are affected by.

 

Bottom line is, if you know you're never going to get married and have kids, would you negotiate for a higher salary in lieu of not enjoying these hetero-centric benefits?  (As if we all don't know that most companies are already paying dads more than single men because of their family burden)

 

I would love to hear the TS' thoughts on breaking these institutionalised injustices.

Edited September 30, 2019 by FattChoy

[Guest Guest]

27 minutes ago, Nightingale said:

 

Auntie, what is sonwhat?  Tell me which rule says you have to put your photo when you register as a member?

Another fine example of degratory terms use. Why is this registeree member use an older female term on me? I highly do not think he is praising but making a sterotypical sterotype of the older females to insult. Stop homophobia? Start with the gay community 1st.

 

And I did not insult that person. 

[BlinkOnce]

4 hours ago, Fairplay said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eventually it remains too easy to disguise on a Guest "account" by using different IPs, but behind the different Guest posts is essentially the same person. This is another of the vulnerabilities of Blowing Wind. The following denial or the sort of "I am not that Guest but another Guest" strategy or seemingly pointing to being a different Guest person as another Guest seems quite familiar to me and has incurred all over the Forums, which permit Guest appearances. The resulting confusion by such person(s) is well intended and I personally having the feeling in many instances one single person being behind using such strategies. Guest(s) having their share of "fun" in playing out other Guest(s) or even Members. I do not wish to elaborate what the eventual gains or benefits of such Guest(s) are in using such strategies. A concurrent result of permitting such vulnerability by Blowing Wind is (innocent) Members or non-abusive Guests running against a wall, being played out by such abusive Guest(s) or being discredited by others or the Guest(s) itself as making wrong allegations against Guests and in the end turning out this member or innocent Guest being made to a bogeyman of the forum by the abusive strategies or means of such Guest(s). 

 

 

Putting these vulnerabilities to an end is long overdue.

 

 

Whatever the aims of the Forum initiators of Blowing Wind initially might have been (which had seemed well intended), but on times you need to jettison principles which you laid down if they had not materialized or in the worst case evidently being used to disguise or abuse by exploiting the vulnerabilities.

 

Surely, it doesn't serve the discussions.

 

I personally subscribe to non-Guest policy.

In order to prevent toxic Guests exploiting the forum's vulnerability while still respect its founding principles, I have come up with 2 rough ideas. Give me some time to brush them up before implementing.

Stay tuned 

[BlinkOnce]

4 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

If you have indicated any kind of a support system here, please show me the part where it says so

In my first post, I indicated that I will take actions. Maybe it wasn't clear enough, but yes, there is a support system brewing.

Stay tuned

[BlinkOnce]

43 minutes ago, FattChoy said:

 

I would like to sidetrack a little.   Rather than homophobia, I don't understand why some of us continue to take institutionalised injustices such as job related benefits which extend to an employee's married spouse and kids.

 

For example medical insurances coverage for the wife and kids as well as subsidy of international schooling fees for the kids.  Then you have the paternity /maternity leave.  (Who do u think is doing all the work when the guy goes off on a 3 month paid paternity leave???) All these benefits require money and it's coming out of the company's profits which would mean indirectly a gay employee's bonuses and pay raises are affected by.

 

Bottom line is, if you know you're never going to get married and have kids, would you negotiate for a higher salary in lieu of not enjoying these hetero-centric benefits?  (As if we all don't know that most companies are already paying dads more than single men because of their family burden)

 

I would love to hear the TS' thoughts on breaking these institutionalised injustices.

Please propose a title. I will make this a separate thread and ponder my thoughts too!

[FattChoy]

4 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

Please propose a title. I will make this a separate thread and ponder my thoughts too!

How about "Family-centric benefits treats singles and gays like they're second-class or invisible.  Can these organisations do better?"? 

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, FattChoy said:

 

I would like to sidetrack a little.   Rather than homophobia, I don't understand why some of us continue to take institutionalised injustices such as job related benefits which extend to an employee's married spouse and kids.

 

For example medical insurances coverage for the wife and kids as well as subsidy of international schooling fees for the kids.  Then you have the paternity /maternity leave.  (Who do u think is doing all the work when the guy goes off on a 3 month paid paternity leave???) All these benefits require money and it's coming out of the company's profits which would mean indirectly a gay employee's bonuses and pay raises are affected by.

 

 

One solution to employers having to give child related benefits to their married employees with children is that the State takes care of these benefits.  Because it is not unjust for parents to get monetary benefits since raising children can be quite expensive, not even considering all the other time and effort dedicated to one's children.

 

 

5 hours ago, Nightingale said:

No, the solution is to impose compulsory registration (membership) in order to post something, just like in the Straits Times and most other media websites.  That will do away with the need to separate Members from Guests, so that BW becomes Everybody's Lounge.  That will also greatly reduce the phenomenon of relentless trolling.

 

I agree that requiring compulsory registration to post is not a heavy burden, and practically all websites today require this. It still provides anonymity, just not within the site itself. 

But the way BW allows guests also adds some flavor to the conversations,  although such flavor can be quite bitter!

I think that the current system can be sustained, as long as Moderators recognize how this makes members vulnerable and are willing to have a lighter hand with members. 

[Steve5380]

33 minutes ago, Nightingale said:

"Family-centric   Benefits  at  the  Expense  of  Gays"

 

"Gays  Shortchanged  by  Family-centric  Benefits"

 

"Family-centric  Benefits  Treat  Gays  as  Outcasts"

 

And I would like another topic: "Why should not gays have family with children like anyone else?"

[JSW]

Reality is that humans are really hard to change... I mean even with Jesus or Buddha who have tried, our societies are still at wars and such.

 

I think the real issue is who has the most power. If you have power, some people will hate you, just not in your face.

 

Maybe we can split the issue into personal and societal.

 

In personal front, I think there is a self hatred that creeps into our soul because of our current environment. When you can accept yourself and be at peace, then coming out becomes more of a choice than necessity. Needing others to accept you before you love yourself is simply giving your power away. Everyone's situation is different, only you yourself can access the best way forward. I guess guys like Blinkonce will be good for those who need moral support for self acceptance. In situations like this, visible and outspoken people are very helpful.

 

If we want to change society and level the playing field, then it's simply political power. And I doubt our current leaders or the next gen leaders will be willing... I think Singapore's political landscape is not fluid enough for us to move forward any agenda. Maybe vote more liberal people in, I don't know...

 

I guess my point is, homophobia will always exist, because humans don't change easily. If you have power or display power, people will react accordingly, gay or not.

[BlinkOnce]

34 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

And I would like another topic: "Why should not gays have family with children like anyone else?"

You can create a topic on your own, since you haven't made any arguments just yet

[BlinkOnce]

33 minutes ago, JSW said:

Reality is that humans are really hard to change... I mean even with Jesus or Buddha who have tried, our societies are still at wars and such.

 

I think the real issue is who has the most power. If you have power, some people will hate you, just not in your face.

 

Maybe we can split the issue into personal and societal.

 

In personal front, I think there is a self hatred that creeps into our soul because of our current environment. When you can accept yourself and be at peace, then coming out becomes more of a choice than necessity. Needing others to accept you before you love yourself is simply giving your power away. Everyone's situation is different, only you yourself can access the best way forward. I guess guys like Blinkonce will be good for those who need moral support for self acceptance. In situations like this, visible and outspoken people are very helpful.

 

If we want to change society and level the playing field, then it's simply political power. And I doubt our current leaders or the next gen leaders will be willing... I think Singapore's political landscape is not fluid enough for us to move forward any agenda. Maybe vote more liberal people in, I don't know...

 

I guess my point is, homophobia will always exist, because humans don't change easily. If you have power or display power, people will react accordingly, gay or not.

I actually pondered about "power" before.

 

I'm not sure how analogous are bullying and homophobia, but I think the concept of "power imbalance" used to explain why bullying happens can be used for homophobia too.

So to counter homophobia, we need to empower ourselves first?

 

Regarding political landscape, I personally think Singapore will always be behind other countries like Thailand or Vietnam in terms of LGBTQ+ rights. I believe certain conservative races and religions leave political leaders with little leeway for policy making. I arrived at this thought looking at Indonesia and Malaysia whose societies are even much more conservative. Demographic diversity is the core strength of Singapore, which costs minority group our rights. Give and take I guess? Singapore is far more developed than other countries in the region anyway. 

 

On the other hand, political landscape will always reflect changes in the society. Society is made up of individuals. That's why I think instead of pushing the responsibility to political leaders, we can be more pro-active and take the matter into our own hands. We can change the mindset of people around us, one by one, collectively. Slowly but surely, we can see changes in the policies. This is also why LGBTQ+ activism targets at the public, not government. So do all other kinds of activism.

 

Homophobia will always exist, that's true. But we can make it less blatant (sorry for my lack of vocab). And I think those will less inner power can benefit from collective power.

[Guest Guest]

4 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

I actually pondered about "power" before.

 

I'm not sure how analogous are bullying and homophobia, but I think the concept of "power imbalance" used to explain why bullying happens can be used for homophobia too.

So to counter homophobia, we need to empower ourselves first?

 

Regarding political landscape, I personally think Singapore will always be behind other countries like Thailand or Vietnam in terms of LGBTQ+ rights. I believe certain conservative races and religions leave political leaders with little leeway for policy making. I arrived at this thought looking at Indonesia and Malaysia whose societies are even much more conservative. Demographic diversity is the core strength of Singapore, which costs minority group our rights. Give and take I guess? Singapore is far more developed than other countries in the region anyway. 

 

On the other hand, political landscape will always reflect changes in the society. Society is made up of individuals. That's why I think instead of pushing the responsibility to political leaders, we can be more pro-active and take the matter into our own hands. We can change the mindset of people around us, one by one, collectively. Slowly but surely, we can see changes in the policies. This is also why LGBTQ+ activism targets at the public, not government. So do all other kinds of activism.

 

Homophobia will always exist, that's true. But we can make it less blatant (sorry for my lack of vocab). And I think those will less inner power can benefit from collective power.

You had yet to address the issue of homophobia within the homos.

[BlinkOnce]

11 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

You had yet to address the issue of homophobia within the homos.

I have a reply stating definition of homophobia and how I interpret it earlier in this thread. With that, your examples of "homophobia within the homos" are not homophobia imo. It is discrimination, which should be addressed (in another post I guess), but not really homophobia.

Again, you may interpret homophobia differently - which makes an interesting topic on its own.

 

[Guest Guest]

10 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

I have a reply stating definition of homophobia and how I interpret it earlier in this thread. With that, your examples of "homophobia within the homos" are not homophobia imo. It is discrimination, which should be addressed (in another post I guess), but not really homophobia.

Again, you may interpret homophobia differently - which makes an interesting topic on its own.

 

So if a straight man said this

 

" I will feel disgusted by their guniang ways of walking or talking, despite their muscular frame. Even when they talk the voice is like a woman's...'

 

or if a straight said 'I am disgusted by ah gua'

 

its ok? Its not homophobia?

 

 

[BlinkOnce]

47 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

So if a straight man said this

 

" I will feel disgusted by their guniang ways of walking or talking, despite their muscular frame. Even when they talk the voice is like a woman's...'

 

or if a straight said 'I am disgusted by ah gua'

 

its ok? Its not homophobia?

 

 

If the straight man says "I'm disgusted by ah gua" --> homophobic

If the straight man says "I'm disgusted by their guniang ways of walking and talking ..." --> I would say he subscribes to toxic masculinity , not necessarily homophobic. A lot of straight guys nowadays are pretty effeminate, metrosexual as they call it. If he associates those traits with being homosexual, then yes, he is homophobic, but the thing is we don't know whether he associates those with homosexuality or not. To me your quote sounds more similar to "A real man must not cry, act tough, play with robots instead of dolls, like blue not pink, etc."

 

Also, I saw that you mentioned me in your comment in that post, which was hidden by another Mod. Other members have done a good job of calling out the TS's discrimination, I need not step in.

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, Guest Guest said:

So if a straight man said this

 

" I will feel disgusted by their guniang ways of walking or talking, despite their muscular frame. Even when they talk the voice is like a woman's...'

 

or if a straight said 'I am disgusted by ah gua'

 

its ok? Its not homophobia?

 

 

Homophobia is a PHOBIA:  an extreme irrational fear or aversion.  To just feel disgusted may not reach the level of phobia.

The problem exists if homophobia makes the person homophobic, downloading their dislike and prejudice directly to the gays.

 

44 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

 

Also, I saw that you mentioned me in your comment in that post, which was hidden by another Mod. Other members have done a good job of calling out the TS's discrimination, I need not step in.

 

Ha ha ha,  good reciprocation to the Guest Guest-s making them confused and uncertain of who is who  

[BlinkOnce]

5 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

Ha ha ha,  good reciprocation to the Guest Guest-s making them confused and uncertain of who is who  

OH! HAHA. That was unintentional!

[Guest Guest]

1 hour ago, BlinkOnce said:

If the straight man says "I'm disgusted by ah gua" --> homophobic

If the straight man says "I'm disgusted by their guniang ways of walking and talking ..." --> I would say he subscribes to toxic masculinity , not necessarily homophobic. A lot of straight guys nowadays are pretty effeminate, metrosexual as they call it. If he associates those traits with being homosexual, then yes, he is homophobic, but the thing is we don't know whether he associates those with homosexuality or not. To me your quote sounds more similar to "A real man must not cry, act tough, play with robots instead of dolls, like blue not pink, etc."

 

Also, I saw that you mentioned me in your comment in that post, which was hidden by another Mod. Other members have done a good job of calling out the TS's discrimination, I need not step in.

Well you displayed double standard. Making excuses for these homophobic gays. Your type will not further our gay cause because you do not practice what you preach.

[BlinkOnce]

8 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Well you displayed double standard. Making excuses for these homophobic gays. Your type will not further our gay cause because you do not practice what you preach.

LOL whatever. This will be the last time I entertain your weakly constructed attacks that seem to be borderline personal. Moving on, I will hide any comments of the same nature as this, to keep this thread to-the-point and keep registered members happy since they have already expressed dislike towards comments like this.

Obviously, I will still reply to your comments (legit ones) whenever I feel like my sharing benefits other readers.

[Guest Guest]

18 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

LOL whatever. This will be the last time I entertain your weakly constructed attacks that seem to be borderline personal. Moving on, I will hide any comments of the same nature as this, to keep this thread to-the-point and keep registered members happy since they have already expressed dislike towards comments like this.

Obviously, I will still reply to your comments (legit ones) whenever I feel like my sharing benefits other readers.

Great. There are many comments made that is totally off point. Will you hide those too? Again, you as a mod is displaying double standards. But you will not hide those who are off point except mine because they agree with you? Feels good having 'power'? 

 

Weakly constructed? Nothing to construct as those points I pointed out to you are homophobic but done by gays instead of straights.

 

You started a topic, could not stand the heat, just 'hide' lor.

 

To your topic, answer is Yes, because you let homophobic comments made by gays slide. 

[Guest Guest]

22 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

LOL whatever. This will be the last time I entertain your weakly constructed attacks that seem to be borderline personal. Moving on, I will hide any comments of the same nature as this, to keep this thread to-the-point and keep registered members happy since they have already expressed dislike towards comments like this.

Obviously, I will still reply to your comments (legit ones) whenever I feel like my sharing benefits other readers.

 

Thank you for proving the validity of my first point and those of the other member's reposted below so quickly.  

 

On 9/27/2019 at 8:02 PM, Guest Guest said:

Instead of performing his "fiduciary" duties with proper and due diligence. he goes around abusing his authority and use it against anyone who dare goes against him there. As we can already see in the Singapore context, people in power can abuse it easily.  So why was this thread started using the Moderator's account, instead of his existing and personal Member account? Has the line between his personal needs and his duties on this forum already been blurred so quickly? Wow, this is scary ....

 

On 9/29/2019 at 12:42 AM, singalion said:

- I see this as essential to uphold impartiality if debates become heated. How shall a Moderator remain neutral if he interferred to the discussion itself?

- Plenty of discussions at this Forum become quite emotional, the Moderator would then position himself in a bad way avoiding to take sides. I don't think a Moderator would be still in a neutral position if he partakes to the discussions.

- I personally think refraining from joining into the discussions is crucial to guarantee best overview on the Forum and to make neutral decisions. Not joining into the discussions is the sacrifice a Moderator has to make to take up the position.

 

[BlinkOnce]

14 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Great. There are many comments made that is totally off point. Will you hide those too? Again, you as a mod is displaying double standards. But you will not hide those who are off point except mine because they agree with you? Feels good having 'power'?

True. There are off-points comments. They have been addressed by reminder - because they are registered members, so I can apply a range of actions on them depending on seriousness of what they do. You are using Guest account, warnings can't be issued. 

 

I left both For/Against comments intact - those without personal attacks, even yours - when they were legit and free of lame accusations.

 

If you see too few Against comments, maybe too many people relate to my thinking instead of yours. Don't be sad. Work harder on critical thinking.

 

Yeah, can't stand the heat. No one paid me to entertain your cheap thrills of attacking a Mod 🤷. Replying you while maintaining my courtesy and high standards of critical thinking takes effort and time.

[BlinkOnce]

17 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Thank you for proving the validity of my first point and those of the other member's reposted below so quickly

I know you think you laid out a well-designed trap waiting for me to fall in.

 

I ain't so simple and stupid 🤷 Key is timing. Try harder next time.

 

Anyway, thanks for helping me drive engagement and traffic to my debut thread. The numbers did well. Dramas and controversies always do well. I learnt from Xiaxue.

[Guest Guest]

15 minutes ago, BlinkOnce said:

I know you think you laid out a well-designed trap waiting for me to fall in.

 

I ain't so simple and stupid 🤷 Key is timing. Try harder next time.

 

Anyway, thanks for helping me drive engagement and traffic to my debut thread. The numbers did well. Dramas and controversies always do well. I learnt from Xiaxue.

 

You are indeed, in your own words, simple and stupid, because you dug your own hole and jumped into it yourself. Don't blame anyone else for setting any traps for you, because nobody did that. In fact, we even left all the writings on the walls regarding the pitfalls of a Moderator starting your own thread, and you ignored all those writings completely. There's no need for any timing for you to fall into the hole you dug for yourself, because it's just going to happen sooner or later. And you really did that, without any need for anyone to look into any crystal balls to predict that coming at all,  

 

Thank you for your further admission that you were really trying to stir shit on this thread on Blowing Wind, like the way Xiaxue does on her blog, just so as to get traffic to your debut thread. And you know what else? You are doing exactly what a Moderator is tasked to guard against - prevent shit stirring. So much for your version of (or rather, lack of) critical thinking. As such, thank you once again for proving all our points once more: 

 

On 9/27/2019 at 8:02 PM, Guest Guest said:

nstead of performing his "fiduciary" duties with proper and due diligence. he goes around abusing his authority and use it against anyone who dare goes against him there. As we can already see in the Singapore context, people in power can abuse it easily.  So why was this thread started using the Moderator's account, instead of his existing and personal Member account? Has the line between his personal needs and his duties on this forum already been blurred so quickly? Wow, this is scary ....

 

On 9/29/2019 at 12:42 AM, singalion said:

- I see this as essential to uphold impartiality if debates become heated. How shall a Moderator remain neutral if he interferred to the discussion itself?

- Plenty of discussions at this Forum become quite emotional, the Moderator would then position himself in a bad way avoiding to take sides. I don't think a Moderator would be still in a neutral position if he partakes to the discussions.

- I personally think refraining from joining into the discussions is crucial to guarantee best overview on the Forum and to make neutral decisions. Not joining into the discussions is the sacrifice a Moderator has to make to take up the position.

 

So, the pertinent question comes: Who catches the policeman, when the policeman is doing something which he is supposed to be catching other people doing?

[Guest Guest]

1 hour ago, BlinkOnce said:

I know you think you laid out a well-designed trap waiting for me to fall in.

 

I ain't so simple and stupid 🤷 Key is timing. Try harder next time.

 

Anyway, thanks for helping me drive engagement and traffic to my debut thread. The numbers did well. Dramas and controversies always do well. I learnt from Xiaxue.

There is no trap laid out for you. You asked a question and I gave you my views...basically is if you want straights to accept us, lets clean up our house 1st. Instead of speaking out against homophobic gays, you created excuses for them.

 

I was not personal, but you are.

 

If there is any 'trap', you created your own hold and buried yourself by showing how bias and double standards you are.

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, Guest Guest said:

There is no trap laid out for you. You asked a question and I gave you my views...basically is if you want straights to accept us, lets clean up our house 1st. Instead of speaking out against homophobic gays, you created excuses for them.

 

I was not personal, but you are.

 

If there is any 'trap', you created your own hold and buried yourself by showing how bias and double standards you are.

 

I am fascinated by your ability to attack, attack, attack. You should be the supreme judge in a totalitarian government...

 

My suspicion is that you are an incognito member of the support and defense team of Donald Trump. In America we are living a extraordinary episode where it seems that the president has been caught red-handed in in impeachable crime.  Those who are responsible for protecting the Constitution and the Rule of Law have started logical and proper actions to investigate. In response, Trump and his team have done nothing but attack the investigation, calling it a "witch hunt", calling the whistleblower of Trump's crime a "spy, traitor" and other bad names. 

 

Sorry that this is what comes to my mind seeing your demonizing the new Mod who is trying to do something positive,  but perhaps there is something I don't already know about your reasons

 

[Grahf]

On 9/29/2019 at 12:42 AM, singalion said:

As much as I initially intended contributing to this discussion I decided against it. My reasons are the following:

- I don't mind if Moderators initiate threads but in my humble view Moderators should refrain from posting their personal views on the topic.

- I see this as essential to uphold impartiality if debates become heated. How shall a Moderator remain neutral if he interferred to the discussion itself?

- Plenty of discussions at this Forum become quite emotional, the Moderator would then position himself in a bad way avoiding to take sides. I don't think a Moderator would be still in a neutral position if he partakes to the discussions.

- I personally think refraining from joining into the discussions is crucial to guarantee best overview on the Forum and to make neutral decisions. Not joining into the discussions is the sacrifice a Moderator has to make to take up the position.

 

I digress. You sound like someone who expects moderators to come into a thread as a Confucius-like figure and say something that puts a smile on everyone's faces, alas, that's next to impossible. What is good for you may not be good for me. Let's not forget that there's a person behind that moderator account too, and he is entitled to his opinions just as anyone is. And so does he act with his own set of morals (which obviously should coincide with the conduct gudelines, i mean he was handpicked by the moderating team and all...). Much like you choosing not to partake in this discussion—by no means a wrong decision, he has decided it is beneficial to share his thoughts. All fine and dandy, IMO.

 

Which sort of answers the title question. It's impossible to entirely eradicate a perspective, unless we stop being human.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Grahf

[Guest Guest]

50 minutes ago, Grahf said:

 

I digress. You sound like someone who expects moderators to come into a thread as a Confucius-like figure and say something that puts a smile on everyone's faces, alas, that's next to impossible. What is good for you may not be good for me. Let's not forget that there's a person behind that moderator account too, and he is entitled to his opinions just as anyone is. And so does he act with his own set of morals (which obviously should coincide with the conduct gudelines, i mean he was handpicked by the moderating team and all...). Much like you choosing not to partake in this discussion—by no means a wrong decision, he has decided it is beneficial to share his thoughts. All fine and dandy, IMO.

 

Which sort of answers the title question. It's impossible to entirely eradicate a perspective, unless we stop being human.

 

Do you say the same to judges and policemen as well, i.e. "come into a thread as a Confucius-like figure and say something that puts a smile on everyone's faces, alas, that's next to impossible. What is good for you may not be good for me. Let's not forget that there's a person behind that moderator account too, and he is entitled to his opinions just as anyone is. And so does he act with his own set of morals"?

 

So, can judges and policemen act out his own set of morals? And in the case when their own set of morals do not coincide with the guidelines, who judges the judges, who police the policemen? It is always convenient to think that people are of a "qualified caliber" simply because they were "handpicked" by another "qualified" team. But time and again in the history of Singapore, this has been proven to be false. 

 

If the shoes doesn't fit and/or the caps are too big, then don't wear them. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Steve5380 said:

 

I am fascinated by your ability to attack, attack, attack. You should be the supreme judge in a totalitarian government...

 

My suspicion is that you are an incognito member of the support and defense team of Donald Trump. In America we are living a extraordinary episode where it seems that the president has been caught red-handed in in impeachable crime.  Those who are responsible for protecting the Constitution and the Rule of Law have started logical and proper actions to investigate. In response, Trump and his team have done nothing but attack the investigation, calling it a "witch hunt", calling the whistleblower of Trump's crime a "spy, traitor" and other bad names. 

 

Sorry that this is what comes to my mind seeing your demonizing the new Mod who is trying to do something positive,  but perhaps there is something I don't already know about your reasons

 

 

It's funny to see you alluding to us to be the equivalent of Donald Trump's team, because I see the same of your team too.

 

From the way I see it, the most obvious similarity is how foreign powers were constantly supporting Donald Trump in his rise to power, much against the chagrin of some citizens. Guess who's the foreign guy in this case. who's the person who rose to power, and who are "some citizens" here. And as in the case of Donald Trump, the people have found him infringing some of the codes, and that's why he is getting impeached now. And the similarity is here too... 

 

There's no need to attack "Donald Trump" at all, when he's doing such a fantastic job himself...  LOL

[BlinkOnce]

1 hour ago, Guest Guest said:

Do you say the same to judges and policemen as well

You seem to only read my replies selectively, i.e. those that don't disable your attacks. 

A Mod's job is not to uphold justice. A Mod's job is to keep the forum lively.

First time it was brought up, I explained it.

Although you seem to follow this thread very carefully to nitpick on my words, somehow you missed out on a particular reply.

I take this chance to kindly reiterate my job scope.

Your analogy of Mod's job scope to those of police and judge is therefore considered a bad one.

 

 

[BlinkOnce]

3 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Sorry that this is what comes to my mind seeing your demonizing the new Mod who is trying to do something positive,  but perhaps there is something I don't already know about your reasons

It has been revealed here and there that he thinks I'm too young, hence a bad fit for the role.

This is definitely discrimination. Yet he calls me out on letting discrimination in this forum slide. See the double standards? 

I personally feel like calling out discrimination/nature of the attacks towards me doesn't add anything to the arguments. My standards are higher than that.

Although I won't let discrimination towards Members slide, I somehow let his discrimination towards me slide because of my argument principles. Also because the victim i.e. me isn't affected. 

Since this is a reply to you, not him, so I can kind of tell my "behind the scene" thoughts. Sort of waiting to see how he will jump in and twist his non-existent logics to defend. 

 

 

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, BlinkOnce said:

It has been revealed here and there that he thinks I'm too young, hence a bad fit for the role.

This is definitely discrimination. Yet he calls me out on letting discrimination in this forum slide. See the double standards? 

I personally feel like calling out discrimination/nature of the attacks towards me doesn't add anything to the arguments. My standards are higher than that.

Although I won't let discrimination towards Members slide, I somehow let his discrimination towards me slide because of my argument principles. Also because the victim i.e. me isn't affected. 

Since this is a reply to you, not him, so I can kind of tell my "behind the scene" thoughts. Sort of waiting to see how he will jump in and twist his non-existent logics to defend. 

 

 

You have the fortune to be immune to discrimination, attacks, slander at a young age,  without having to wait to be old like me to reach such blessed state  

.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Steve5380

[Guest incognito]

5 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

I am fascinated by your ability to attack, attack, attack. You should be the supreme judge in a totalitarian government...

 

sorry that this is what comes to my mind seeing your demonizing the new Mod who is trying to do something positive,  but perhaps there is something I don't already know about your reasons

 

 

Judge in a totalitarian country? too boring for him because he couldn't challenge the other to the extreme or close to heart attack. In addition he wouldn't require to write up a lenghty reasoning for his judgments in a totalitarian country.

 

But I recognise a trait to identify others either as hypocrite, liars, twisted logic, betraying principles, self-righteous, just something fishy...

 

What you need to know this Guest himself is never at fault but I guess my last statement was probably ironic.

 

Have a good day...

 

PS.: I m surely not the same Guest

as the Guest with triple identity above!

 

[Steve5380]

30 minutes ago, Guest incognito said:

 

PS.: I m surely not the same Guest

as the Guest with triple identity above!

 

 

I understand.  Like there are bad ghosts and good ghosts, there are bad Guests and good Guests.  And you simply choose to be incognito.

[Guest flower]

i would rather be ok with homophobs than being gay and racist.