(07-20-2019 02:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I personally dont think OOs experiences are as uncommon as you all might think for those communities. But, that's just me.

No, not just you.

Exactly what I was thinking. I think the perceptions of liberals have been colored(can I use that word?) Do I need a permit?) by their own pet media so that now they believe that without them and their progressivism, life would be living hell for minorities.

No wonder they think half of us are in a basket of deplorables.

The only minority they might be half right on are the blacks. As you all can tell from my date of HS graduation, I grew up in the days of segregation, and during the days when desegregation was happening. I remember segregated schools, forced busing, Little Rock Central, Birmingham, James Meredith, lunchroom sit-ins, riots, all the stuff that went on. I don't think life in many ways was good for blacks back then. But back then was over 50-65 years ago, and I see the left still protesting things like it was 1952.

Jim was not a popular kid, but nobody was beating him up or burning his house. Harlan was more popular, but he was not as obviously gay as Jim. It helped that the popular girls liked Harlan.

I used to have a gay guy over to my house on Fridays to play poker. He was neither included or excluded because of his gayness. His sex life was unimportant to us, compared to his wallet. Ironically to some here, his name was Bubba.

I have worked with and been friends with all sorts of people. That is why the deplorables tag AND THE RECEPTION IT GOT HURT ME SO MUCH. Every fking minority I am accused of hating has been a friend at one time or another.

Laughing, clapping, cheering

THOSE are the progressives.

Hear any boos?

When you guys praise me and my HS for being so damned progressive, why does it feel like a pat on the head and a "good doggie"?

I guess everybody has their own story and their own viewpoint. That is mine.

Done and dusted.

(07-20-2019 12:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 12:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 10:19 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 09:08 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Watching ABC this morning. I have two two distortions of fact already, both about (surprise!). Trump

He told the four Congresswomen to go back to the countries from where they came from.

The other was the timeworn “He called Mexicans rapists”.

I thought new organizations were supposed to stick to the facts.

I guess this will continue as long as the left continues to tacitly approve the inaccuracies with their silence.

You bolded “to the countries.” Why is that?

Because Trump did not say "to the countries"
and ABC is quoting that he did. To the countries is an interpretation. ABC presents it as fact.

He did. He started his thread with how the four women come from countries that are this, that, and the other, so they should go back there and fix them and then come back.

I cannot find a quote that includes "to the countries". Maybe you can help me with that.

(07-20-2019 04:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I personally dont think OOs experiences are as uncommon as you all might think for those communities. But, that's just me.

No, not just you.

Exactly what I was thinking. I think the perceptions of liberals have been colored(can I use that word?) Do I need a permit?) by their own pet media so that now they believe that without them and their progressivism, life would be living hell for minorities.

No wonder they think half of us are in a basket of deplorables.

The only minority they might be half right on are the blacks. As you all can tell from my date of HS graduation, I grew up in the days of segregation, and during the days when desegregation was happening. I remember segregated schools, forced busing, Little Rock Central, Birmingham, James Meredith, lunchroom sit-ins, riots, all the stuff that went on. I don't think life in many ways was good for blacks back then. But back then was over 50-65 years ago, and I see the left still protesting things like it was 1952.

Jim was not a popular kid, but nobody was beating him up or burning his house. Harlan was more popular, but he was not as obviously gay as Jim. It helped that the popular girls liked Harlan.

I used to have a gay gay over to my house on Fridays to play poker. He was neither included or excluded because of his gayness. His sex life was unimportant to us, compared to his wallet. Ironically to some here, his name was Bubba.

I have worked with and been friends with all sorts of people. That is why the deplorables tag AND THE RECEPTION IT GOT HURT ME SO MUCH. Every fking minority I am accused of hating has been a friend at one time or another.

Laughing, clapping, cheering

THOSE are the progressives.

When you guys praise me and my HS for being so damned progressive, why does it feel like a pat on the head and a "good doggie"?

I guess everybody has their own story and their own viewpoint. That is mine.

Done and dusted.

It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community versus the US at large regarding acceptance of the gay community. Your community’s acceptance of an openly gay man is really great to hear, considering the history of discrimination against homosexuals in the country. It is a good reminder that, even when people were perpetrating evil against minority groups, there are communities of people willing to open their arms, and minds, without issue.

You have to remember the history of gay rights to understand why this isn’t a head pat. The first time gay sexual relations was decriminalized in America wasn’t until 1962, and some states had laws outlawing homosexual acts as late as 2003, when the Supreme Court struck down such laws. The Stonewall riots, considered the start of the gay rights movement, didn’t happen until 1969. Openly gay men were effectively barred from military service into the 2000s. And that doesn’t even touch on the issue of gay marriage, or the many hate crimes that have been committed over the decades, solely because someone was gay or lesbian.

If you had told me you went to school in San Francisco in 1963, I would still have said the same thing.

(07-20-2019 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 04:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I personally dont think OOs experiences are as uncommon as you all might think for those communities. But, that's just me.

No, not just you.

Exactly what I was thinking. I think the perceptions of liberals have been colored(can I use that word?) Do I need a permit?) by their own pet media so that now they believe that without them and their progressivism, life would be living hell for minorities.

No wonder they think half of us are in a basket of deplorables.

The only minority they might be half right on are the blacks. As you all can tell from my date of HS graduation, I grew up in the days of segregation, and during the days when desegregation was happening. I remember segregated schools, forced busing, Little Rock Central, Birmingham, James Meredith, lunchroom sit-ins, riots, all the stuff that went on. I don't think life in many ways was good for blacks back then. But back then was over 50-65 years ago, and I see the left still protesting things like it was 1952.

Jim was not a popular kid, but nobody was beating him up or burning his house. Harlan was more popular, but he was not as obviously gay as Jim. It helped that the popular girls liked Harlan.

I used to have a gay gay over to my house on Fridays to play poker. He was neither included or excluded because of his gayness. His sex life was unimportant to us, compared to his wallet. Ironically to some here, his name was Bubba.

I have worked with and been friends with all sorts of people. That is why the deplorables tag AND THE RECEPTION IT GOT HURT ME SO MUCH. Every fking minority I am accused of hating has been a friend at one time or another.

Laughing, clapping, cheering

THOSE are the progressives.

When you guys praise me and my HS for being so damned progressive, why does it feel like a pat on the head and a "good doggie"?

I guess everybody has their own story and their own viewpoint. That is mine.

Done and dusted.

It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community versus the US at large regarding acceptance of the gay community. Your community’s acceptance of an openly gay man is really great to hear, considering the history of discrimination against homosexuals in the country. It is a good reminder that, even when people were perpetrating evil against minority groups, there are communities of people willing to open their arms, and minds, without issue.

You have to remember the history of gay rights to understand why this isn’t a head pat. The first time gay sexual relations was decriminalized in America wasn’t until 1962, and some states had laws outlawing homosexual acts as late as 2003, when the Supreme Court struck down such laws. The Stonewall riots, considered the start of the gay rights movement, didn’t happen until 1969. Openly gay men were effectively barred from military service into the 2000s. And that doesn’t even touch on the issue of gay marriage, or the many hate crimes that have been committed over the decades, solely because someone was gay or lesbian.

If you had told me you went to school in San Francisco in 1963, I would still have said the same thing.

Why do you pick San Francisco? Why not Laramie, Wyoming? Oh, I see, it is that stereotype thingie. Nah, my family would not have been welcome in SF, and could not afford it anyway.

If I had gone to school in SF in the 60's I may well have ended up in the Manson Family. Good thing I went to Redneck High instead. Go, Cowboys!!

Still feels like a pat on the head. Well done, Grasshopper. I must admit I was not politically minded in those days.

(07-20-2019 06:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 04:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I personally dont think OOs experiences are as uncommon as you all might think for those communities. But, that's just me.

No, not just you.

Exactly what I was thinking. I think the perceptions of liberals have been colored(can I use that word?) Do I need a permit?) by their own pet media so that now they believe that without them and their progressivism, life would be living hell for minorities.

No wonder they think half of us are in a basket of deplorables.

The only minority they might be half right on are the blacks. As you all can tell from my date of HS graduation, I grew up in the days of segregation, and during the days when desegregation was happening. I remember segregated schools, forced busing, Little Rock Central, Birmingham, James Meredith, lunchroom sit-ins, riots, all the stuff that went on. I don't think life in many ways was good for blacks back then. But back then was over 50-65 years ago, and I see the left still protesting things like it was 1952.

Jim was not a popular kid, but nobody was beating him up or burning his house. Harlan was more popular, but he was not as obviously gay as Jim. It helped that the popular girls liked Harlan.

I used to have a gay gay over to my house on Fridays to play poker. He was neither included or excluded because of his gayness. His sex life was unimportant to us, compared to his wallet. Ironically to some here, his name was Bubba.

I have worked with and been friends with all sorts of people. That is why the deplorables tag AND THE RECEPTION IT GOT HURT ME SO MUCH. Every fking minority I am accused of hating has been a friend at one time or another.

Laughing, clapping, cheering

THOSE are the progressives.

When you guys praise me and my HS for being so damned progressive, why does it feel like a pat on the head and a "good doggie"?

I guess everybody has their own story and their own viewpoint. That is mine.

Done and dusted.

It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community versus the US at large regarding acceptance of the gay community. Your community’s acceptance of an openly gay man is really great to hear, considering the history of discrimination against homosexuals in the country. It is a good reminder that, even when people were perpetrating evil against minority groups, there are communities of people willing to open their arms, and minds, without issue.

You have to remember the history of gay rights to understand why this isn’t a head pat. The first time gay sexual relations was decriminalized in America wasn’t until 1962, and some states had laws outlawing homosexual acts as late as 2003, when the Supreme Court struck down such laws. The Stonewall riots, considered the start of the gay rights movement, didn’t happen until 1969. Openly gay men were effectively barred from military service into the 2000s. And that doesn’t even touch on the issue of gay marriage, or the many hate crimes that have been committed over the decades, solely because someone was gay or lesbian.

If you had told me you went to school in San Francisco in 1963, I would still have said the same thing.

Why do you pick San Francisco? Why not Laramie, Wyoming? Oh, I see, it is that stereotype thingie. Nah, my family would not have been welcome in SF, and could not afford it anyway.

If I had gone to school in SF in the 60's I may well have ended up in the Manson Family. Good thing I went to Redneck High instead. Go, Cowboys!!

Still feels like a pat on the head. Well done, Grasshopper. I must admit I was not politically minded in those days.

I am shocked at how difficult it is to have a conversation with you.

(07-20-2019 09:12 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 06:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 04:15 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I personally dont think OOs experiences are as uncommon as you all might think for those communities. But, that's just me.

No, not just you.

Exactly what I was thinking. I think the perceptions of liberals have been colored(can I use that word?) Do I need a permit?) by their own pet media so that now they believe that without them and their progressivism, life would be living hell for minorities.

No wonder they think half of us are in a basket of deplorables.

The only minority they might be half right on are the blacks. As you all can tell from my date of HS graduation, I grew up in the days of segregation, and during the days when desegregation was happening. I remember segregated schools, forced busing, Little Rock Central, Birmingham, James Meredith, lunchroom sit-ins, riots, all the stuff that went on. I don't think life in many ways was good for blacks back then. But back then was over 50-65 years ago, and I see the left still protesting things like it was 1952.

Jim was not a popular kid, but nobody was beating him up or burning his house. Harlan was more popular, but he was not as obviously gay as Jim. It helped that the popular girls liked Harlan.

I used to have a gay gay over to my house on Fridays to play poker. He was neither included or excluded because of his gayness. His sex life was unimportant to us, compared to his wallet. Ironically to some here, his name was Bubba.

I have worked with and been friends with all sorts of people. That is why the deplorables tag AND THE RECEPTION IT GOT HURT ME SO MUCH. Every fking minority I am accused of hating has been a friend at one time or another.

Laughing, clapping, cheering

THOSE are the progressives.

When you guys praise me and my HS for being so damned progressive, why does it feel like a pat on the head and a "good doggie"?

I guess everybody has their own story and their own viewpoint. That is mine.

Done and dusted.

It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community versus the US at large regarding acceptance of the gay community. Your community’s acceptance of an openly gay man is really great to hear, considering the history of discrimination against homosexuals in the country. It is a good reminder that, even when people were perpetrating evil against minority groups, there are communities of people willing to open their arms, and minds, without issue.

You have to remember the history of gay rights to understand why this isn’t a head pat. The first time gay sexual relations was decriminalized in America wasn’t until 1962, and some states had laws outlawing homosexual acts as late as 2003, when the Supreme Court struck down such laws. The Stonewall riots, considered the start of the gay rights movement, didn’t happen until 1969. Openly gay men were effectively barred from military service into the 2000s. And that doesn’t even touch on the issue of gay marriage, or the many hate crimes that have been committed over the decades, solely because someone was gay or lesbian.

If you had told me you went to school in San Francisco in 1963, I would still have said the same thing.

Why do you pick San Francisco? Why not Laramie, Wyoming? Oh, I see, it is that stereotype thingie. Nah, my family would not have been welcome in SF, and could not afford it anyway.

If I had gone to school in SF in the 60's I may well have ended up in the Manson Family. Good thing I went to Redneck High instead. Go, Cowboys!!

Still feels like a pat on the head. Well done, Grasshopper. I must admit I was not politically minded in those days.

I am shocked at how difficult it is to have a conversation with you.

Sorry, I didn’t realize it was a conversation. I thought it was just you explaining why I am wrong about it being a head pat.

(07-20-2019 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community

Smug, arrogant, condescension. And the left has no idea how badly that comes across.

PCMilitia help keep the world safe

(07-20-2019 09:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community

Smug, arrogant, condescension. And the left has no idea how badly that comes across.

Give me a break. You’re telling me that we should have expected every community in the country in 1963 to embrace an openly gay man?

If so, why did we even have the gay rights movement?

There is zero arrogance or condescension in me saying that OO came from a good community, one that far exceeded and outpaced others in the early
60s, based on historical fact. Tell me, how that is arrogant or condescending? I’m fricking complimenting where he grew up - they had a better attitude towards gay men than mine did in the early 2000s. Jesus.

(07-20-2019 09:22 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 09:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community

Smug, arrogant, condescension. And the left has no idea how badly that comes across.

Give me a break. You’re telling me that we should have expected every community in the country in 1963 to embrace an openly gay man?
If so, why did we even have the gay rights movement?
There is zero arrogance or condescension in me saying that OO came from a good community, one that far exceeded and outpaced others in the early 60s, based on historical fact. Tell me, how that is arrogant or condescending? I’m fricking complimenting where he grew up - they had a better attitude towards gay men than mine did in the early 2000s. Jesus.

No, I'm telling you that you come across like telling your dog, "Good boy, Fido." That was actually the image that jumped immediately to mind when I read that.

I grew up in a small town in Alabama in the 1960s. Our church youth group had an openly gay boy as vice president, and our statewide youth group organization had a black vice-president, in 1963. The stereotypes are stereotypes, and patting someone on the back for not conforming does come across as smug, arrogant, condescension.

I'm quite certain that OO is extremely gratified to know that you approve of his high school in 1963.

I just don't think the left understands how their smug, arrogant, condescension comes across.

(07-20-2019 09:22 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  There is zero arrogance or condescension in me saying that OO came from a good community, one that far exceeded and outpaced others in the early
60s, based on historical fact.

I am responding to this independently from my other post.

Holy f***ing s**t. You really don't understand, do you?

The smug, arrogant condescension lies in positing yourself as the arbiter of what was a good community, I'm guessing some time before you were born.

(07-20-2019 11:34 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:13 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

Quote:

(07-20-2019 09:46 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 09:28 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I am astounded that you were that way, what, 20-30 years or more after I had a gay friend in high school? How regressive were you? I graduated in 1963.

I'm surprised that you are astounded by that fact. My experience was that this type of behavior was not uncommon. Maybe it was better in 1963? As I said... I am ashamed of it.

Quote:Yeah, Jim was not as comfortable in my country HS full of rednecks as he would be today, but he got by.

I'm glad he got by. Plenty of his people in his situation didn't get through unscathed.

Quote: His "friend" Harlan was one of the more popular guys in school. I guess my country school in 1962-63 was more progressive than your school. And we did it without being coerced.

Clearly your school was more progressive without any coercion. It would be interesting to me to hear from homosexuals in your area from that era to see if they felt the same way about the experience that you do.

In all honesty, I applaud you for being so progressive and having a gay friend in high school in an area that you describe as "redneck country". I too was friendly with gay people in school however that did not prevent me from using language amongst my non-gay friends that was wrong and unacceptable. All I can do is learn from my mistakes, teach my kids differently, and vote for politicians that support equal rights for everybody.

A little update for you. After graduation, Jim and Harlan moved in together. Ten years or so later, Harlan cheated on Jim and Jim committed suicide. Harlan later died of AIDS.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Quote:I wasn’t progressive. I did not not treat Jim as I did out of any political stance. He was mostly ignored in HS. I am sure you had leftist visions of the rednecks beating him up in the halls, because that is the way you guys think. You are pure, the others are evil.

You are a big fan of telling me what I think. If you want to know the truth, I think that neither side is pure.

Quote:I went to a small country HS. FFA was the biggest club in school. I say redneck, because that is the best way to communicate with progressives, using the same stereotypes, but cowboy would be a better description. My neighbor was a real redneck - a farmer who worked from before sunrise to after sunset. He still plowed with mules. His neck was very red.

I know what you mean by cowboy. You would probably say that a great percentage of my aunts/uncles/cousins are cowboys. It's sad that you think that a massive swath of people holds congruent attitudes that are completely alien to your experiences and point of view.

Quote:

Quote:I am just very surprised you thought being nice to a gay kid was something the Democrats invented. I am less surprised you think it praiseworthy.

OK.... when did I imply that Democrats invented that? I think you're talking to your SJW straw man yet again. Can we give your straw man a name so you can refer to him directly?

I'm surprised that the gay experience at your high school in 1963 was so positive. Not because there might have been a bunch of politically conservative families in your area, but because it was 1963. I would guess that most gay people that you talk to would say that things were tougher in 1963 than they were in 1989. And that things were tougher in 1989 than they are in 2019. I hope things are tougher for gay people today than they will be in 2039.

Did you grow up urban, suburban, or rural 93?

I think there is a major difference between the former two and the latter, 93. And, at least in Texas and the Southwest, it may not be in a way that I think that you and lad would expect.

Caring and fostering? Nope.

More laissez fair? My guess would be that.

We know that lad is colored by his suburban (apparently) upbringing and those bad experiences that he endured at his high school. How about you?

Squarely suburban.

I was talking to my parents earlier today. Both were in high school in the early 1960's. Dad in San Antonio and Mom in rural New Mexico. Both solidly right wing today FWIW. Neither of them knew any gay people who were "out" in high school. Both mentioned having one boy in the class that everybody "knew" was probably gay. Neither of them recalled any overt harassment towards these individuals but acknowledged that "nobody would really have anything to do with them".

(07-20-2019 10:24 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:34 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:13 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

Quote:

(07-20-2019 09:46 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I'm surprised that you are astounded by that fact. My experience was that this type of behavior was not uncommon. Maybe it was better in 1963? As I said... I am ashamed of it.


I'm glad he got by. Plenty of his people in his situation didn't get through unscathed.


Clearly your school was more progressive without any coercion. It would be interesting to me to hear from homosexuals in your area from that era to see if they felt the same way about the experience that you do.

In all honesty, I applaud you for being so progressive and having a gay friend in high school in an area that you describe as "redneck country". I too was friendly with gay people in school however that did not prevent me from using language amongst my non-gay friends that was wrong and unacceptable. All I can do is learn from my mistakes, teach my kids differently, and vote for politicians that support equal rights for everybody.

A little update for you. After graduation, Jim and Harlan moved in together. Ten years or so later, Harlan cheated on Jim and Jim committed suicide. Harlan later died of AIDS.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Quote:I wasn’t progressive. I did not not treat Jim as I did out of any political stance. He was mostly ignored in HS. I am sure you had leftist visions of the rednecks beating him up in the halls, because that is the way you guys think. You are pure, the others are evil.

You are a big fan of telling me what I think. If you want to know the truth, I think that neither side is pure.

Quote:I went to a small country HS. FFA was the biggest club in school. I say redneck, because that is the best way to communicate with progressives, using the same stereotypes, but cowboy would be a better description. My neighbor was a real redneck - a farmer who worked from before sunrise to after sunset. He still plowed with mules. His neck was very red.

I know what you mean by cowboy. You would probably say that a great percentage of my aunts/uncles/cousins are cowboys. It's sad that you think that a massive swath of people holds congruent attitudes that are completely alien to your experiences and point of view.

Quote:

Quote:I am just very surprised you thought being nice to a gay kid was something the Democrats invented. I am less surprised you think it praiseworthy.

OK.... when did I imply that Democrats invented that? I think you're talking to your SJW straw man yet again. Can we give your straw man a name so you can refer to him directly?

I'm surprised that the gay experience at your high school in 1963 was so positive. Not because there might have been a bunch of politically conservative families in your area, but because it was 1963. I would guess that most gay people that you talk to would say that things were tougher in 1963 than they were in 1989. And that things were tougher in 1989 than they are in 2019. I hope things are tougher for gay people today than they will be in 2039.

Did you grow up urban, suburban, or rural 93?

I think there is a major difference between the former two and the latter, 93. And, at least in Texas and the Southwest, it may not be in a way that I think that you and lad would expect.

Caring and fostering? Nope.

More laissez fair? My guess would be that.

We know that lad is colored by his suburban (apparently) upbringing and those bad experiences that he endured at his high school. How about you?

Squarely suburban.

I was talking to my parents earlier today. Both were in high school in the early 1960's. Dad in San Antonio and Mom in rural New Mexico. Both solidly right wing today FWIW. Neither of them knew any gay people who were "out" in high school. Both mentioned having one boy in the class that everybody "knew" was probably gay. Neither of them recalled any overt harassment towards these individuals but acknowledged that "nobody would really have anything to do with them".

So your parents are in my generation? And they are both solidly RW?

Not surprising.

(07-20-2019 10:24 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:34 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:13 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

Quote:

(07-20-2019 09:46 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I'm surprised that you are astounded by that fact. My experience was that this type of behavior was not uncommon. Maybe it was better in 1963? As I said... I am ashamed of it.


I'm glad he got by. Plenty of his people in his situation didn't get through unscathed.


Clearly your school was more progressive without any coercion. It would be interesting to me to hear from homosexuals in your area from that era to see if they felt the same way about the experience that you do.

In all honesty, I applaud you for being so progressive and having a gay friend in high school in an area that you describe as "redneck country". I too was friendly with gay people in school however that did not prevent me from using language amongst my non-gay friends that was wrong and unacceptable. All I can do is learn from my mistakes, teach my kids differently, and vote for politicians that support equal rights for everybody.

A little update for you. After graduation, Jim and Harlan moved in together. Ten years or so later, Harlan cheated on Jim and Jim committed suicide. Harlan later died of AIDS.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Quote:I wasn’t progressive. I did not not treat Jim as I did out of any political stance. He was mostly ignored in HS. I am sure you had leftist visions of the rednecks beating him up in the halls, because that is the way you guys think. You are pure, the others are evil.

You are a big fan of telling me what I think. If you want to know the truth, I think that neither side is pure.

Quote:I went to a small country HS. FFA was the biggest club in school. I say redneck, because that is the best way to communicate with progressives, using the same stereotypes, but cowboy would be a better description. My neighbor was a real redneck - a farmer who worked from before sunrise to after sunset. He still plowed with mules. His neck was very red.

I know what you mean by cowboy. You would probably say that a great percentage of my aunts/uncles/cousins are cowboys. It's sad that you think that a massive swath of people holds congruent attitudes that are completely alien to your experiences and point of view.

Quote:

Quote:I am just very surprised you thought being nice to a gay kid was something the Democrats invented. I am less surprised you think it praiseworthy.

OK.... when did I imply that Democrats invented that? I think you're talking to your SJW straw man yet again. Can we give your straw man a name so you can refer to him directly?

I'm surprised that the gay experience at your high school in 1963 was so positive. Not because there might have been a bunch of politically conservative families in your area, but because it was 1963. I would guess that most gay people that you talk to would say that things were tougher in 1963 than they were in 1989. And that things were tougher in 1989 than they are in 2019. I hope things are tougher for gay people today than they will be in 2039.

Did you grow up urban, suburban, or rural 93?

I think there is a major difference between the former two and the latter, 93. And, at least in Texas and the Southwest, it may not be in a way that I think that you and lad would expect.

Caring and fostering? Nope.

More laissez fair? My guess would be that.

We know that lad is colored by his suburban (apparently) upbringing and those bad experiences that he endured at his high school. How about you?

Squarely suburban.

I was talking to my parents earlier today. Both were in high school in the early 1960's. Dad in San Antonio and Mom in rural New Mexico. Both solidly right wing today FWIW. Neither of them knew any gay people who were "out" in high school. Both mentioned having one boy in the class that everybody "knew" was probably gay. Neither of them recalled any overt harassment towards these individuals but acknowledged that "nobody would really have anything to do with them".

Seems the common thread in rural/small town schools in the time pre-1995 kind of rings as a laissez fair attitude towards gays.

Dont know where your father's San Antoio/60's would fit.

Not a huge sample size, but the observation of the rural/small town schools 1960s - 1990-ish, South or Southwest being libertarian re: gay students certainly has zero outliers in the group of those who directly experienced them here in this thread/direct relatives.

(07-21-2019 12:35 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 10:24 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:34 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:13 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

Quote:A little update for you. After graduation, Jim and Harlan moved in together. Ten years or so later, Harlan cheated on Jim and Jim committed suicide. Harlan later died of AIDS.

I'm sorry to hear that.

Quote:I wasn’t progressive. I did not not treat Jim as I did out of any political stance. He was mostly ignored in HS. I am sure you had leftist visions of the rednecks beating him up in the halls, because that is the way you guys think. You are pure, the others are evil.

You are a big fan of telling me what I think. If you want to know the truth, I think that neither side is pure.

Quote:I went to a small country HS. FFA was the biggest club in school. I say redneck, because that is the best way to communicate with progressives, using the same stereotypes, but cowboy would be a better description. My neighbor was a real redneck - a farmer who worked from before sunrise to after sunset. He still plowed with mules. His neck was very red.

I know what you mean by cowboy. You would probably say that a great percentage of my aunts/uncles/cousins are cowboys. It's sad that you think that a massive swath of people holds congruent attitudes that are completely alien to your experiences and point of view.

Quote:OK.... when did I imply that Democrats invented that? I think you're talking to your SJW straw man yet again. Can we give your straw man a name so you can refer to him directly?

I'm surprised that the gay experience at your high school in 1963 was so positive. Not because there might have been a bunch of politically conservative families in your area, but because it was 1963. I would guess that most gay people that you talk to would say that things were tougher in 1963 than they were in 1989. And that things were tougher in 1989 than they are in 2019. I hope things are tougher for gay people today than they will be in 2039.

Did you grow up urban, suburban, or rural 93?

I think there is a major difference between the former two and the latter, 93. And, at least in Texas and the Southwest, it may not be in a way that I think that you and lad would expect.

Caring and fostering? Nope.

More laissez fair? My guess would be that.

We know that lad is colored by his suburban (apparently) upbringing and those bad experiences that he endured at his high school. How about you?

Squarely suburban.

I was talking to my parents earlier today. Both were in high school in the early 1960's. Dad in San Antonio and Mom in rural New Mexico. Both solidly right wing today FWIW. Neither of them knew any gay people who were "out" in high school. Both mentioned having one boy in the class that everybody "knew" was probably gay. Neither of them recalled any overt harassment towards these individuals but acknowledged that "nobody would really have anything to do with them".

Seems the common thread in rural/small town schools in the time pre-1995 kind of rings as a laissez fair attitude towards gays.

Dont know where your father's San Antoio/60's would fit.

Not a huge sample size, but the observation of the rural/small town schools 1960s - 1990-ish, South or Southwest being libertarian re: gay students certainly has zero outliers in the group of those who directly experienced them here in this thread/direct relatives.

I think "laissez fair" makes it sound more positive for gay high schoolers than it probably was. According to my parents, suspected gay people were treated as if they were radioactive. Not an especially healthy was to get through your teenage years. It was actually quite similar at my east coast suburban high school in the late 1980's. We had one male student that was pretty clearly gay but he wasn't out yet (he is now). Nobody was outwardly hostile towards him but none of the guys in my class actually made an effort to befriend him or include him in our activities. He mostly spent time with the girls in our class.

Lad, was that similar to your brother's experience in the 2000's?

I'm not sure that the treatment of gay high schoolers in the Southwest in the early 1960's was that different from other times/other regions. I would guess that it was much less likely for gay students to be out of the closest then as compared to these days.

(07-20-2019 10:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 09:22 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  There is zero arrogance or condescension in me saying that OO came from a good community, one that far exceeded and outpaced others in the early
60s, based on historical fact.

I am responding to this independently from my other post.

Holy f***ing s**t. You really don't understand, do you?

The smug, arrogant condescension lies in positing yourself as the arbiter of what was a good community, I'm guessing some time before you were born.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Maybe we have hit on a 'progressive'/'non-progressive' dynamic.

I noted:

Quote:Caring and fostering? Nope.
More laissez fair? My guess would be that.

and you responded:

Quote:I think "laissez fair" makes it sound more positive for gay high schoolers than it probably was. According to my parents, suspected gay people were treated as if they were radioactive.

Does this mean to to you that anything less than 'caring and fostering' is 'unprogressive'? If so, you probably need to backtrack your head pat of OO

I dont deny that the gay guy in Ruidoso didnt probably have a lot more 'guy pals' than most. But he certainly wasnt regarded with hate, nor actively shunned. Seems to be a pretty fluid definition of 'progressive' we have going now.

I guess your head pat wasnt meant to go far as it was taken.

(07-20-2019 09:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 09:22 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 09:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 05:59 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  It isn’t a pat on the head, it’s a honest assessment of your community

Smug, arrogant, condescension. And the left has no idea how badly that comes across.

Give me a break. You’re telling me that we should have expected every community in the country in 1963 to embrace an openly gay man?
If so, why did we even have the gay rights movement?
There is zero arrogance or condescension in me saying that OO came from a good community, one that far exceeded and outpaced others in the early 60s, based on historical fact. Tell me, how that is arrogant or condescending? I’m fricking complimenting where he grew up - they had a better attitude towards gay men than mine did in the early 2000s. Jesus.

No, I'm telling you that you come across like telling your dog, "Good boy, Fido." That was actually the image that jumped immediately to mind when I read that.

I grew up in a small town in Alabama in the 1960s. Our church youth group had an openly gay boy as vice president, and our statewide youth group organization had a black vice-president, in 1963. The stereotypes are stereotypes, and patting someone on the back for not conforming does come across as smug, arrogant, condescension.

I'm quite certain that OO is extremely gratified to know that you approve of his high school in 1963.

I just don't think the left understands how their smug, arrogant, condescension comes across.

Well ****, I guess I should just go back to assuming OO is some ignorant, racist, deplorable, huh? Seems like that would at least be less arrogant than, heaven forbid, commenting that his community provided a more positive environment for an out gay man in high school than the majority of the country in the 2000s, let alone the 1960s.

Fricken thought police over here, acting as if the entire country in the 1960s was a haven for gay individuals.

The fact that you think it's arrogant or smug, is just mind boggling, because I explicitly shared how I did not come from a community like OO's. I would have much rather not dealt with the blatant homophobic issues I did growing up in high school.

(07-21-2019 06:51 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 12:35 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 10:24 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:34 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 11:13 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I'm sorry to hear that.


You are a big fan of telling me what I think. If you want to know the truth, I think that neither side is pure.


I know what you mean by cowboy. You would probably say that a great percentage of my aunts/uncles/cousins are cowboys. It's sad that you think that a massive swath of people holds congruent attitudes that are completely alien to your experiences and point of view.

Did you grow up urban, suburban, or rural 93?

I think there is a major difference between the former two and the latter, 93. And, at least in Texas and the Southwest, it may not be in a way that I think that you and lad would expect.

Caring and fostering? Nope.

More laissez fair? My guess would be that.

We know that lad is colored by his suburban (apparently) upbringing and those bad experiences that he endured at his high school. How about you?

Squarely suburban.

I was talking to my parents earlier today. Both were in high school in the early 1960's. Dad in San Antonio and Mom in rural New Mexico. Both solidly right wing today FWIW. Neither of them knew any gay people who were "out" in high school. Both mentioned having one boy in the class that everybody "knew" was probably gay. Neither of them recalled any overt harassment towards these individuals but acknowledged that "nobody would really have anything to do with them".

Seems the common thread in rural/small town schools in the time pre-1995 kind of rings as a laissez fair attitude towards gays.

Dont know where your father's San Antoio/60's would fit.

Not a huge sample size, but the observation of the rural/small town schools 1960s - 1990-ish, South or Southwest being libertarian re: gay students certainly has zero outliers in the group of those who directly experienced them here in this thread/direct relatives.

I think "laissez fair" makes it sound more positive for gay high schoolers than it probably was. According to my parents, suspected gay people were treated as if they were radioactive. Not an especially healthy was to get through your teenage years. It was actually quite similar at my east coast suburban high school in the late 1980's. We had one male student that was pretty clearly gay but he wasn't out yet (he is now). Nobody was outwardly hostile towards him but none of the guys in my class actually made an effort to befriend him or include him in our activities. He mostly spent time with the girls in our class.

Lad, was that similar to your brother's experience in the 2000's?

I'm not sure that the treatment of gay high schoolers in the Southwest in the early 1960's was that different from other times/other regions. I would guess that it was much less likely for gay students to be out of the closest then as compared to these days.

At my high school there wasn't really any sort of intentional radioactiveness to the guys who were suspected to be gay, but none were out of the closet publicly and most weren't really welcomed with open arms into the male social circles. As you said, most gay guys were closer with the girls in school than any guys.

Kids were ****** as high schoolers can be, and would make homophobic comments in passing or when in private to each other, and wouldn't think twice about casually dropping homophobic slurs. Maybe the general ******-ness is a sign of the times?

(07-21-2019 07:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Maybe we have hit on a 'progressive'/'non-progressive' dynamic.

I noted:

Quote:Caring and fostering? Nope.
More laissez fair? My guess would be that.

and you responded:

Quote:I think "laissez fair" makes it sound more positive for gay high schoolers than it probably was. According to my parents, suspected gay people were treated as if they were radioactive.

Does this mean to to you that anything less than 'caring and fostering' is 'unprogressive'? If so, you probably need to backtrack your head pat of OO

I dont deny that the gay guy in Ruidoso didnt probably have a lot more 'guy pals' than most. But he certainly wasnt regarded with hate, nor actively shunned. Seems to be a pretty fluid definition of 'progressive' we have going now.

I guess your head pat wasnt meant to go far as it was taken.

My post pointed out that our anecdotal stories of the treatment of gay students in the rural Southwest in the 1960's doesn't sound that much different from that of other eras/regions. Not sure how you are making the leap you did but go for it I guess?

By "unprogressive" do you mean that my parent's description of their classmates' treatment of suspected gay people in their midst wasn't especially ahead of its time? Then yes.

*edit* Any by the "pat on his head" that OO is actively recoiling from... I was simply surprised/impressed that OO had a friend that was out of the closet in 1963. To me... that took some cojones and self-confidence to be friends with a gay student back then. Even more so to be out of the closet in high school in 1963. I had neither of those attributes in 1989 (I would have been way too worried about what other guys thought if I spent time with the guy in our class). I'm not actually sure if OO was actually friends with him or simply was pleasant to him when passing by in the hall (which would be more akin to my and my parents' experience and less of an outlier).