Originally Posted By gadzuux >> I've also read all of his criticisms of the GOP, and noticed that he seldom if ever criticizes the Democrats. Thus my skeptism of his claim. << You can't be a republican unless you trash-talk democratic values. And conveniently ignore GOP hypocrisy. That's what it takes these days to be a card carrying republican, and you're the example to us all, douglas.
Originally Posted By ecdc I'm willing to wager a fair bit that I've voted for more Republicans in the last 12 years than Douglas has Democrats. Of course, he'll just say he doesn't believe me, just like he said he didn't believe mrichmond was in the military.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Meanwhile, back at senator craig ... Now that I'm home from work, I'm rereading the thread, and 'ecdc' said - >> (I'm not convinced Haggart, or Craig et al, are gay.) << Hold up thar. In Haggart's case, we've got recordings of him telling the hustler to be sure to bring plenty of meth with him, cause they're gonna party down. 'Nuff said. In craig's case, he's going down on strangers in public latrines. You think maybe that isn't "gay"?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <You can't be a republican unless you trash-talk democratic values.> I would think Democrats would have to have values before one could trash-talk them.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Of course, he'll just say he doesn't believe me, just like he said he didn't believe mrichmond was in the military.> What I said was that I didn't trust mrichmond's judgement.
Originally Posted By ecdc There's a difference between being gay - as in, I want a relationship with men and am not attracted to women - and having occasional trysts with men because one is bi-sexual or bi-curious. I'll let those that are gay chime in, but my gay friends tell me there's a lot more to being gay than the gender of who you have sex with. Many will tell you they knew they were "different" at a very early age, long before they fully grasped sexuality. Again, consult some articles on the theory behind the Kinsey scale. Few of us are 100% gay or straight. I think that's why Craig can tell himself (and now us) tht he's not gay. He may very well be a closet homosexual. I'm just quibbling with the assertion that sex with men=gay
Originally Posted By gadzuux But I think in both cases they're so far over the margins that it's more than just 'curious'. And this goes back to 'ecdc's' earlier point - that these are the same people who are actively fighting tooth and nail to KEEP gays in the tearooms and dark alleys. They like suppression and they live it daily. Of course it doesn't work - it never has. This isn't something "new" that was invented recently. So instead of recognizing their own self worth and humanity, they go the other way and live their entire lives as a lie - trying to fool everybody - having their cake and eating it too. As any sensible person can understand, this internal schism in the soul of the person leads to instability - even a kind of insanity. All the things that they used to say about homosexuality. But guess what - it isn't the sexuality, it's living with the lies and the deceit and the dishonesty that makes you crazy - not the sexuality. Haggart and craig and the rest - they'll probably never "get it", and instead have committed themselves to living their entire lives suppressing their own true nature. Which is what makes them sad little people. The problem comes up when they suddenly decide that they're going to dictate morality for everyone else. And it seems to happen quite a bit. Here's the thing - if your parents did a halfway decent job raising you, you already know right from wrong, and you don't need these authority figures, whether in the pulpit or in congress, telling you what to do. And time and again these people are exposed for the charlatans that they are, and everybody thinks it's an isolated case. They only have as much power as we choose to give them. There's a democratic value for you right there.
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 <<There's a difference between being gay - as in, I want a relationship with men and am not attracted to women - and having occasional trysts with men because one is bi-sexual or bi-curious.>> Yes, there IS a difference between those extremes. But you're creating a false dilema here. There's a huge middle ground that you've ignored. Many, many men who are unquestionably homosexual can and do "function" with women. They may even get significant enjoyment from it. It doesn't change the fact that they're gay. They may be "8's" instead of "9's" on the Kinsey scale, but they're gay. Gay, gay, gay. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of my gay male friends have had successful, even mutually satisfactory sex with women -- whether it was because they "experimented" once or twice or because they got into a heterosexual relationship out of societal pressure. Just as your assertion that having sex with men does not mean that a man is gay, having sex with women does not mean that a man is straight. Or even bisexual on more than a functional level. <<my gay friends tell me there's a lot more to being gay than the gender of who you have sex with. Many will tell you they knew they were "different" at a very early age, long before they fully grasped sexuality.>> People (children) have some awareness of affectional orientation long before they fully understand the mechanics of sex or the societal rules around it. The fact that your friends felt "different" early on is not a good argument that being homosexual inevitably brings with it some other cluster of personality traits. <<there's a lot more to being gay than the gender of who you have sex with>> No. By definition, being gay is ONLY about (wanting to) have sex with someone of the same gender. "Gay" does NOT mean: being Democratic; having a bad relationship with a father; marching in parades; being strong enough to acknowledge to oneself or publicly that one is attracted primarily to the same gender; having fabulous taste; doing meth; enjoying disco music; etc. Nor does it preclude being: a devout football fan; more or less happily married; a loving father; "normal" appearing; a redneck jerk; introverted and boring; attracted to women on some level; unable to put together a simple outfit; deeply religious; etc. Of COURSE, straight men have sex with women ocassionally. (They experiment. They're secure enough to try to satisfy some curiousity. They're in prison. They're so close to one friend that at some point it somehow [Jack Daniels]makes sense to go to that level. Whatever.) So, no, a guy having sex with another guy doesn't make him gay. But, as regards Craig... C'MON! He has a twenty-year history of coming on to male subordinates. He risked his entire career by coming onto a guy in a very public toilet on a layover. This is not someone who's "bi-curious."
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 <<Of COURSE, straight men have sex with women ocassionally.>> Oh, buh-ROTHER!!! What I MEANT to type was: "Of COURSE, straight men have sex with men ocassionally." I'm sorry for the typo. I'm really sorry for all the straight guys who didn't notice it.
Originally Posted By ecdc Inspector, I agree with most everything you said. I do understand that I oversimplified the point - like I said earlier, I was just trying to combat this notion that anyone who has sex with a member of the same sex is automatically gay, and anyone who doesn't is automatically straight. I would only disagree with this statement: >>No. By definition, being gay is ONLY about (wanting to) have sex with someone of the same gender.<< For some gay people (obviously not all) being gay has little to do with who they actually have sex with. It's an entire perception of the world around them. It's a complex issue. Some gay people feel like they are trapped in the wrong body. Others completely disagree and feel very much like their gender is correct, they're just attracted to other people of the same gender. A gay person might go their whole lives and never have sex with a member of the same gender. My only point remains that there's *a lot* of gray area and many, many, MANY notches on the scale. Enough that yes, I think you can still question whether or not Larry Craig is gay. Note that I'm not asserting one way or another if he is, I'm merely questioning the surefire assertion some have made that he is.
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 <<For some gay people (obviously not all) being gay has little to do with who they actually have sex with.>> Absolutely. Being gay is about being attracted to one's own gender. Acting upon that truth is a separate reality. Someone can be gay and have an exclusive relationship with someone of the opposite gender. (They'd be functionally bisexual, of course, but "gay" by orientation.) This is not uncommon. It could be that they're desperately trying to convince themselves that they're straight, or trying to become so. They could be between gay relationships and enjoying the opportunity of an opposite-sex "friend with benefits." They could be out s****f****** in a calculated attempt to convince their friends and family that they're straight. There are lots of reasons that gay men and women would have sex with people of the opposite gender. <<Some gay people feel like they are trapped in the wrong body. Others completely disagree and feel very much like their gender is correct, they're just attracted to other people of the same gender.>> Whoa, Nelly! You're confusing two separate things here. "Gay" is being attracted to people of the same gender. That doesn't involve the desire to be or to emulate the other gender. Feeling as though you were born into the wrong gender's body is something else entirely. That's "transexual." Okay, okay, it can get confusing. A person born into a man's body but who knows she's really a woman may fantasize about changing his/her body into a fully female form and having a relationship with a man. So does that -- while she's stuck in a man's body -- make him/her "gay"? Being gay is SO simple compared to being transexual. <<My only point remains that there's *a lot* of gray area and many, many, MANY notches on the scale.>> Again... Absolutely! Even Kinsey's nine-point scale is crude compared to the label-less variations that exist in real life. Sexual activity and sexual desire exist on an infinite spectrum. <<I think you can still question whether or not Larry Craig is gay.>> And I would argue that desperately seeking to blow the guy next to you in a public bathroom is a pretty good indication that one is gay.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder So anyway, Craig's "denial", now that this has become public, is absolutely pathetic. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/28/craig.arrest/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITI CS/08/28/craig.arrest/index.html</a> "Sen. Larry Craig said he "overreacted and made a poor decision" in pleading guilty to disorderly conduct after his June arrest following an incident in a Minneapolis, Minnesota, airport bathroom. Tuesday, in his first public statement on the arrest, the Idaho Republican said he did nothing "inappropriate." "Let me be clear: I am not gay and never have been," said Craig, who has aligned himself with conservative groups who oppose gay rights. With his wife by his side, Craig said he is the victim of a "witch hunt" conducted by the Idaho Statesman newspaper. "In pleading guilty, I overreacted in Minneapolis, because of the stress of the Idaho Statesman's investigation and the rumors it has fueled around Idaho," he said. "Again, that overreaction was a mistake, and I apologize for my misjudgment." He added: "I should not have kept this arrest to myself, and should have told my family and friends about it. I wasn't eager to share this failure, but I should have done so anyway." What.an.absolute.idiot. His "poor judgment" was trying to hook up with someone in the bathroom, it goes without saying. And he blames his guilty plea on a newspaper investigation? What kind of CRAP does he think people will buy? He kept this to himself because he knew he was guilty, period. Okay, show of hands. How many of you, whether you're a United States Senator or not, would plead guilty to something like this if you didn't do it? This has got to be one of the worst denials of all time. Kick his sorry a$$ out of the Senate, pronto.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Yes, it was a pretty spectacularly lame explanation. He's essentially saying the arresting officer (who had no idea who Craig was till after the arrest) is lying about the whole thing, for starters. He's also trying to make us believe that a "straight" man, who has faced and denied allegations of gay trysts before, and who would face major electoral trouble in Idaho at a minimum if it ever got out, would ever plead guilty to something like this if it didn't happen. But, taking up on the ecdc/I-57 discussion a little, I think Craig may have convinced himself (long ago) that he isn't really "gay." That being gay means being a hairdresser or at the least having long-term relationships with someone of the same sex. In his mind, it doesn't mean quickies in men's rooms or anonymous people's apartments. So when he states so emphatically "I am not gay!" I think, sadly, that part of him may even really believe that. He may be so self-loathing that he's convinced himself he's really just a straight man with this unspeakable "weakness." It's really very sad. But yet another example of how often the most homophobic among us doth protest too much.
Originally Posted By ecdc SPP, I read in one of the articles that part of his guilty plea stipulated that he not later deny his guilt and proclaim his innocence. (This may not have been specific to his plea, but part of Minnesota law, I'm not sure which.) Could his about-face mean future legal troubles? I-57, thanks for clearing up my confusion and for your excellent posts!
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Hey, I just saw this idiot on CNN and had to comment. I swear, everytime I turn on the news, its either another Repbulican sex scandal or another Bush administration resignation. It's almost like they are taking turns . And this Craig guy is so far beyoooound in denial, its sad. Like others have said and Bill Clinton's former aide (name escapes me at the moment), if he wasn't SO anti-gay and basically seem to have a homophobic stance, then maybe people could be a little more sympathetic. I don't think its easy being secretly gay and being a Republican Congressman. Can't be easy. But these guys are always in people's faces with their bible-thumping, conservative family value view of the world all the time, they don't help themselves when in the end the guy was just being human---but he was being a GAY human at that time, so his constituents can't be all too happy about that . It was no different than that hypocrite minister sometime this year who preached how wrong it was to be homosexual and the idiot with a wife and 5 children was caught having a gay prostitute who use to also sell him drugs lol. What's WRONG with these people???? And yeah, that 'denial' is classic. Almost sounds like a recent celebrity who tried to convince people the cocaine found in her pants was 'not hers' and she was wearing someone else's pants. LMAO, how gulliable do they think people are?? <<But, taking up on the ecdc/I-57 discussion a little, I think Craig may have convinced himself (long ago) that he isn't really "gay." That being gay means being a hairdresser or at the least having long-term relationships with someone of the same sex. In his mind, it doesn't mean quickies in men's rooms or anonymous people's apartments. So when he states so emphatically "I am not gay!" I think, sadly, that part of him may even really believe that. But yet another example of how often the most homophobic among us doth protest too much.>> Hmmm, such a great point and something that made me think about a personal experience I had with this issue. I had a friend in High School, a Black friend, who was as macho and aggressive as you can get. Got married to a girl right out of High School. Was one of my closes friends, but I had problems with him because he was VERY homophobic. Crack gay jokes all the time and accused EVERYONE of being gay basically, including me. Two reasons was I didn't have many girlfriends--guilty lol and not much has changed since High School lol and that I was comfortable around gay people and had Gay friends in college. Everytime he said a Gay joke, I felt uncomfortable and would even tell him to stop. BECAUSE I had Gay friends, didn't look at them any differently than any other human being, naturally I must be Gay . He would get defensive he was considered soft in any way. Part of the problem was that so people in Black people are still rampantly homophobic and its a shame. I don't understand WHY that is, but my friend was a perfect example of this and I wasn't homophobic or scared of Gay people enough for his tastes I guess. This went on for years and his homophobia never let up and he was 100% sure I was secretly in the closet. Hell, by this point, ALL our friends were. Well, I'm going to cut a huuuge middle part out of this to get to my point lol, but found out the guy had a secret fetish of watching porn video's with humans who had *both* organs if you know what I'm saying (this is LP, I'm trrrrrying to keep it within family standards even though ironically the topic is anything but ). His wife would find the videos all over the apartment. Of course he denied he was attracted to men or anything of the nature. Well, maybe a year or two later, the guy ended up getting a divorce, moved in with another girl for awhile, but I guess he couldn't deny who he really was. He was spotted going to Gay clubs in West Hollywood and even had a few 'shemale' friends' on the side. Last I heard he was living somewhere in Burbank with a Gay hip hop dancer in a one bedroom apartment. The closes I got to being Gay that he accused me of being was attending a friend's lesbian wedding once. So there you go ;D
Originally Posted By Mr X **Some gay people feel like they are trapped in the wrong body. Others completely disagree and feel very much like their gender is correct, they're just attracted to other people of the same gender.** Sorry, but I just copied this from Marc's post and I have to say...whoever wrote this is seriously misinformed and extremely ignorant. Must be a republican.
Originally Posted By Mr X **And this Craig guy is so far beyoooound in denial, its sad. , if he wasn't SO anti-gay and basically seem to have a homophobic stance, then maybe people could be a little more sympathetic.** And WorldDisney is someone who would KNOW for sure... He was recently spotted bathing nude with some Japanese guy!!
Originally Posted By inlandemporer No way this guy pleads guilty unless the cop had the goods on him. From what I'm reading, the only question the national GOP has is whether to ask him to announce he's not running again in 2008 or whether they ask him to resign earlier so the GOP governor can appoint someone else. Craig himself is in such denial, though, he may actually think he can deny his way out of this and win again.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<He was recently spotted bathing nude with some Japanese guy!!>> LOL, but we weren't naked actually .
