Does a explicit gay scene in the media affects you in a bad way?

AProudLefty said:
I understand. The point of my OP is that certain people born in the 50's to 70's were raised to feel that way. Hence the reason we have what we have today.

It isn't their fault so we should be careful to accuse them of hate and whatnot.
Click to expand...

Wasn't raised that way, born in 50' raised in the 50's and 60's never thought or taught to hate about it we knew kids who were gay , maybe a white christian American thing :thinking:
 
guno said:
Wasn't raised that way, born in 50' raised in the 50's and 60's never thought or taught to hate about it we knew kids who were gay , maybe a white christian American thing :thinking:
Click to expand...

You are very lucky. The Fundamentalist Christianity was the main religion at that time (60 to 80). (Course there are the next religions that are close to it). The Moral Majority was the height of it. As I have stated many times, I attended Liberty University. One of the requirements was that I have to go to Thomas Road Baptist Church every Sunday morning. There was one particular Sunday when my mom and other relatives came to visit me and we all went to Jerry's service on that period where the "Don't ask, don't tell" shit started under the Clinton Administration. As we were listening to Jerry bitching about Clinton (uh huh where have we ever heard that before???), he started talking about that policy after ranting about gay this, gay that. Then he made a weird movement.

To be continued......

+10 Internet points to whoever guess the next part correctly.
 
It does if it's gratuitous. That goes for any overt sex scene in media. If there's a reason for it being included, no problem, but often times of late such scenes are tossed in for no apparent or given reason. Gratuitous sex scenes in media are basically soft porn and nothing more.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It does if it's gratuitous. That goes for any overt sex scene in media. If there's a reason for it being included, no problem, but often times of late such scenes are tossed in for no apparent or given reason. Gratuitous sex scenes in media are basically soft porn and nothing more.
Click to expand...

It does not matter if it is "gratuitous". It seems that I wasn't clear in my OP.
 
AProudLefty said:
I am watching a PlutoTV movie that, of course, comes with commercials.

There's this scene in this commercial where two gay guys were riding a bike together, just sharing love and happiness.

I just saw it for the first time, I felt a very, very minor disgust rising from the bottom, no no no the BOTTOMEST OF THE BOTTOMEST of the pits of Hell.

"What the fuck?", I said. Then I realized I was raised that way and it's ingrained into my personhood since childhood.

"Yo that's how some people, especially honest Christian Republicans, were raised", I pontificated.

"Yup it is not their fault how they feel about it. It was how they were raised in a Fundamentalist Christian homes", nodding yes as I was thinking it.

Yo yep one of the sources of guilt, hatred, disgust, feeling sick, sinful, wanting to eliminate them (in this context, the source of the feelings), and so on.

So yuppers they are scared and afraid and they are extremely afraid of it.
Click to expand...

While I agree it's mostly cultural, there's a survival plus to being slightly xenophobic. Our species spent about 290,000 years running around as nomadic tribes and only the last 10,000 or so living in villages and farms.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
While I agree it's mostly cultural, there's a survival plus to being slightly xenophobic. Our species spent about 290,000 years running around as nomadic tribes and only the last 10,000 or so living in villages and farms.
Click to expand...

Well yeah. However, if the children were left alone without brainwashing, hate and any other ugly stuff during 50-80's, do you think we would have this problem today?
 
What bothers me is the Hollywood now almost completely refuses to make movies that appeal to good guys who lust/love women....WOKE does not allow that.
 
Yo dudes and dudettes sup yup this be happenin in the 80's. The fear mongering of gay people been there yo dudettes.

5JGBHhc.jpg
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It does if it's gratuitous. That goes for any overt sex scene in media. If there's a reason for it being included, no problem, but often times of late such scenes are tossed in for no apparent or given reason. Gratuitous sex scenes in media are basically soft porn and nothing more.
Click to expand...

For what purpose, Terry? Is it a Jewish Globalist socialist plan to turn you gay or is it all about the money?

Let's be honest; APL didn't see that ad on Tucker or Sean. Fox News has ads about "buy gold" and old people medicine.

Sane, educated people understand corporations place their ads where they believe the ads will profit them most. Same goes for the type of ads it runs.

Is there any doubt they'd show a young naked woman with her legs spread to sell soda pop if they thought they could get away with it? It's all about the money. Anyone who believes anything else is a fucking moron.

Now tell me you want the Feds to do something about corporate greed. :rofl2:
 
AProudLefty said:
My OP is not about tastefulness, it is about how certain people were raised to react to those innocent acts.
Click to expand...

They don't see them as innocent though. Their upbringing taught them to find two same sex people showing physical affection as "abomination," "disgusting," "against nature," etc.

The first time I ever saw two guys walking along holding hands was in 1969, in San Francisco. We were there with the parental units on vacation. I saw my dad visibly stiffen but he said nothing. It was shocking to 16-year-old me, mostly because I didn't really know anything about homosexuality plus I felt the bad vibes from Dad. But I didn't think it was gross and still don't. I still don't like super "vigorous" public displays of affection though, no matter who the involved parties are. IMO these things are personal and private and precious and not to be publicly shared.
 
AProudLefty said:
Your usage of the term, "gratuitous", shows you do not understand my point.

I guess I'll have to clarify my point further, even if I have already attempted to do so in a few posts.
Click to expand...

It is you that doesn't get it. You want a binary answer, yes or no. I set conditions and exceptions to qualify my answer. You apparently don't like or won't accept that.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It is you that doesn't get it. You want a binary answer, yes or no. I set conditions and exceptions to qualify my answer. You apparently don't like or won't accept that.
Click to expand...

*Sighs*

Okay I will further attempt to explain my point since a few people are not smart enough to get it.
 
AProudLefty said:
You are very lucky. The Fundamentalist Christianity was the main religion at that time (60 to 80). (Course there are the next religions that are close to it). The Moral Majority was the height of it. As I have stated many times, I attended Liberty University. One of the requirements was that I have to go to Thomas Road Baptist Church every Sunday morning. There was one particular Sunday when my mom and other relatives came to visit me and we all went to Jerry's service on that period where the "Don't ask, don't tell" shit started under the Clinton Administration. As we were listening to Jerry bitching about Clinton (uh huh where have we ever heard that before???), he started talking about that policy after ranting about gay this, gay that. Then he made a weird movement.

To be continued......

+10 Internet points to whoever guess the next part correctly.
Click to expand...

Was it some kind of evil eye gesture?

I was raised as a Lutheran by devout parents; never once heard anything about homosexuality, hate, or any of that from our pastor.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
They don't see them as innocent though. Their upbringing taught them to find two same sex people showing physical affection as "abomination," "disgusting," "against nature," etc.
Click to expand...

See this, T. A.? She got the point clearly!

T. A. Gardner said:
It is you that doesn't get it. You want a binary answer, yes or no. I set conditions and exceptions to qualify my answer. You apparently don't like or won't accept that.
Click to expand...

You might need to learn from our very own wise Owl Lady. Hoot!

The first time I ever saw two guys walking along holding hands was in 1969, in San Francisco. We were there with the parental units on vacation. I saw my dad visibly stiffen but he said nothing. It was shocking to 16-year-old me, mostly because I didn't really know anything about homosexuality plus I felt the bad vibes from Dad. But I didn't think it was gross and still don't. I still don't like super "vigorous" public displays of affection though, no matter who the involved parties are. IMO these things are personal and private and precious and not to be publicly shared.
Click to expand...

T. A. Garbler said:
.
Click to expand...

I suggest that you learn from this Owl Jedi Master.
 
AProudLefty said:
Well yeah. However, if the children were left alone without brainwashing, hate and any other ugly stuff during 50-80's, do you think we would have this problem today?
Click to expand...

"This" problem? Who knows. Other problems? Most certainly. While "The Lord of the Flies" is fiction, what happened in New Orleans and other disaster areas when civil order collapsed is real...and why authors like William Golding have fact to base their fiction upon.

Children need "brainwashing" to civilize them. The form that behavior takes depends upon the culture in which they are raised. Consider watching "The Cult of the Suicide Bomber" free on Tubi.com for a negative example of brainwashing children. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0817498/

What our culture needs is more tolerance. Forcing people to hug each other is not teaching tolerance. It teaches bullying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top