[quote=@megatrash]
Buddha, first off, I’d like to say that you’re my homie and I always have an enjoyable time discussing shit like this with you. Not as much as our other stupid conversations, but almost. This was well-written and a good read, my die or die. 

2 WARNINGS:
I'm tired. I might read this tomorrow and realize its garbage.
I’m not going to comment on the democracy/political side of things.

Now, to continue on to my point, I believe the fact that your country does not exhibit the same level of homophobia as mine does makes our perspectives wildly different (as we discussed in our PMs.) The fact that I am also not a straight person also does give me some bias on the topic, which I am more than willing to admit. Our life experiences granted us completely different viewpoints, and I am utterly satisfied with that. 

However, I do love to talk about this.

The reason that many of us, especially in the United States, have such a strong opinion about homophobia is that is that it can often times not be limited to words. Protests, murders, and hate crimes are a very scary and real thing to people who are not heterosexual here. I’ve often not told people about my sexuality for this exact fear. On the internet under anonymity, why the fuck not?

That’s why homophobia and homosexuality are two different ballgames. Heterosexuals are not a marginalized group, as they are the norm. They don’t get their weddings protested. They don’t get the shit beat out of them for being seen with their significant other. Politicians aren’t discussing their bedroom affairs to see if it should be okay or not. Straight people do not go through struggles with their sexuality like those in the LGBT community, too. That’s why homophobia is wrong. And even though your country doesn’t witness that, it still doesn’t make it less wrong.

And oooooof course, they are allowed to speak their mind. To quote what I said to you in our PM:

<Snipped quote by megatrash>

People’s opinions on homosexuality are not the problem. Some people may not like my fucking hair cut and I’m not going to cry about it. It’s the fact that straight people get so [i]angry[/i] about it, either with words or with physical assault, that is wrong. It’s an advantaged group “attacking” (using that word liberally there) a disadvantaged group because of their opinion on the matter, an opinion that originated from religious books supposedly written thousands of years ago by a mystical man in the sky. 

I am not involved in the community. I don’t go to parades. I don’t sign petitions or wear bisexual pride colors head to toe on designated days. I just want to hold a hot girl’s hand down the road if I am so lucky, or be able to explain something about myself without fear. I’ve accepted a long time ago that homophobia will always exist. I just think that its form right now is cruel and barbaric. PEOPLE JUST NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THEMSELVES.

In regards to my status bar activity today, I don’t want to see kids discouraged from things that they probably get on the internet to run away from. I love the dumb insensitive part of the internet as well, but this is an open roleplaying forum that we all know damn well attracts a lot of young people. That’s why I can’t do a group smut roleplay in the casual section. The status that sparked all of this came off as “look at me I’m edgy” and that its sole purpose was to get some likes and make others feel bad.  As someone who has been told her whole life that my sexuality is wrong, if I see it happening, I’m gonna say something. Don’t like it? That’s okay.  

Do I think roleplays are completely over-saturated with non-straight characters now? Yes. I do. 
Do I join those roleplays? No. I know how to close my eyes and move on.

Anyway, I’m not mad about homophobes speaking their mind from a point of being open minded and not just mean. It helps me weed out the people I don’t want around me : - )

ANYWAY BACK TO SHIT POSTING

[/quote]

Most if not all your points are related directly to the whole US vs. EU debate where I can't really comment on it because I know the US is fucked up and this is just one of the 300 bulletpoint list of why the USA is not the greatest country in the world, has never been it, and will never be it either. 

The only point I have something to comment on is that heterosexual couples face their own troubles. Homophobia is just one of the many many things you can suffer from.

It's bad.

But at the same rate, it doesn't mean heterosexual couples have a perfect love life, have a perfect life in general. It sucks when you see homosexuals/bisexuals/whatever complain about how perfect heterosexuals life must be. They're not hated after all? Thing is that even in a heterosexual relationship you can face problems. 

That doesn't mean homophobia is good. It just means there's multiple perspectives, and the simple, easy to grasp 'muh homophobia bad, hetero couples = perfect lives' is an oversimplification.

The fact you don't go to prides makes me more likely to accept you, too.

[sub]Also the reason you can't do group smut RP's in casual is not because of young people (not [i]only[/i] because of that) but also because there was some problems with google earlier which caused guildfall IIRC.[/sub]

[hr]

[quote=@SilentWriter83]
I respect your opinion, but like you said everyone has the right to live normally. That means, if we're talking about heterosexuality as the norm, non-het people should be able to be openly gay in all capacity as hetero people are allowed to be openly hetero. [color=red]Which is, more or less, how it is in the EU.[/color] Therefore the law you're speaking of is pushing non-het people to a no disclosure lifestyle that hetero people are not subject to. [color=red]It's the problem with democracy. I won't deny that this sounds unfair, but it's the harsh reality. I would like you to know that you can still be openly gay in Russia. Many of Putin's political allies are homosexual. They're protected, of course, but it's possible. It's not a total non-disclosure lifestyle, and you can tell people in the street you are gay. There is [b]no[/b] ban or law against this. The problem is homophobia, [i]not[/i] laws. And culture in Russia dictates that homosexuality = bad. Fun fact though, homosexuality originated not only out of Greece but also out of early Russia (when it was still Novgorod, Muscovy, Tver, etc.)[/color] But as you said don't live there if you don't like it, but this is an over simplification that many people use to bash a lot of movements. [color=red]I'm of the opinion that if you are below the age of 16, you should not make any decisions related to sex or sexuality anyway, so this point is kinda moot.

Sucks for them. There's many similar situations that have nothing to do with sexuality where you also can't move away until you are legally able to. Besides that I did offer an alternative - enter politics and change it.[/color]

You can't choose where you live. [color=red]Yes, you are right! You can't move to another country. In all seriousness, yes you can.[/color] LGBTQ people in Russia who grew up there didn't choose to live there [color=red]I mean, if you're over 18 and still decide to remain there despite an anti-homosexual culture, then that's your own choice.[/color] and until their legal, can't do a damn thing about it. [color=red]Noted. Sucks for them. It's reality, though. I mean, if you want to be 100%, you can move when you're 16. Before that, you have no business telling people all about your sexuality anyway. But I'm a little conservative. I can see why a more liberal person might disagree and I can agree to your reasoning. I just think this is life. You'll have to deal with it until you're 16/18 and then you can move. Sucks. Everyone deals with rough periods.[/color] I'm from America so I won't speak extensively on Russia cus lord knows I don't know jack shit about it and I won't pretend to. So, pertaining to BLM I am part of it. Obviously you have extremists in every group however when it comes to "others" (those who are not the norm) suddenly those extremists speak for the entire group. 

[color=red]Now this is a bad example you're giving and I'm going to tell you why:

The KKK does not speak for the entire group. White people hate the KKK.
White pride does not speak for the entire group. White people hate the White pride movement. (I mean shit, they stole my religious symbols for their logo, of course I hate them.)

We do not condone the actions of either of those two groups and whenever one of them acts violently, I can assure you 100% no doubt about it, white people [i]will[/i] speak out, they will protest these groups. I feel comfortable speaking in the name of all white people that aren't associated with these groups or any other, because I [i]know[/i] we as a 'ethnicity' (ethnicity isn't really biologically a thing more so than it is sociologically, but it helps create order in this debate) we are against these groups. I am sure of that.

The problem with it is, we live in democracy. These people have a right to have their groups as long as they behave non violently and just protest.

Which is what happens a large amount of the time nowadays. In fact the KKK have extensive selection procedures, and while many of their members are known to be violent and have track records, do you really think the FBI and police do not keep an eye on these people? 

Predominantly white male agencies?[/color]

For example, Dylann Roof shot and killed 9 African Americans in a church in order to insight a race war. However, all nonPOC clambered together to scream and shout he does not signify all nonPOC. [color=red]Cognitive bias, you're seeing what you want to see in order to further your point. Let me ask you if you think there wasn't 20x as much white people that simply felt bad that this happened? I know that in Europe, in my country and others, there was outrage over this and there was outrage that it even got as far for that guy to shoot up a culturally black church.

I know exactly what story you were talking about. The Netherlands as a country was outraged, it was in the news here and shit. Didn't hear anything about 'not all white people'. It was only when I went onto twitter and saw that black people were bashing white people that I saw that white people were defending themselves.

The issue with this is also that these type of stereotypes (black people = thugs) go both ways (white boys = school shooters.) I actually got called school shooter before. Granted I look a little bit like a school shooter so.. 

Point being, it's not one way traffic. The same thing you're pointing out now, you see it with every ethnicity.[/color] Then, when it comes to others such as ISIS, BLM extremists like the man who shot and killed cops on Dallas, and man-hating feminists, suddenly these movements/religions/people are all defined by the actions of the many. [color=red]Again, it's a no true Scotsman argument. You're comparing an entire ethnicity (which is a LOT of people) to groups of individuals that are grouped only because they choose to be. ISIS, BLM members, man-hating feminists.. they're all groups defined by association, NOT by ethnicity. They're defined by a CHOICE to be in that group, not because they were born in it.

And yes that's ironic because black people face the same thing, but that's the European vs. American bias, we don't have nearly as serious racial issues here in the Netherlands or in Europe in general, so I can see why there's need for a group like BLM. Which is why I agree with the ground works of the group, their ideals, but not their methods (which are borderline extremist, even when the 'regular' activists do them).[/color] It's completely illogical and has everything to do with prejudice. 

[color=red]Maybe if you tried to word it fairly, like a group vs. a group and not an ethnicity vs. extremist groups, it'd be more logical, but now your argument just boiled down to 'white people are also bad like ISIS and BLM extremists.' If you said that white people didn't want the KKK and White Power movement to speak for them, but seem to think that ISIS or BLM speaks for all muslims/blacs, I'd be inclined to agree if it weren't for the fact that we're speaking about American groups vs. Islamic extremists and a group that's built upon disruptive, militant behavior. 

Europeans don't have an active KKK or white power/pride movement. They're very small here and really only found in the east bloc (where there are little blacks or muslims anyway.)

Again, I see your point. I just don't think it applies here because you used a bad example.[/color]

About protests and pride. No one ever got anything done by being silent and accepting the status quo. MLK, although peaceful, protested. [color=red]Isn't that what I advocated? I'm sorry, I think I said peaceful discussion is the way forwards.[/color] Malcom X was more physical in his protests. [color=red]S-so you're saying it's bad when white people get physical, but it's good when black people do? Honestly can't follow your logic here. Maybe it's cause you typed it on your phone. I'd love to know more about what you mean.

I'm also not afraid of violence, so don't think I am saying 'muh violence is bad.' Violence is a good way to resolve conflict if you're willing to deal with the aftermath.[/color] Protests get things done. [color=red]I disagree in most cases. Protests rarely get shit done unless there's a lot of people/money behind them.[/color] By no means should anyone not protest and if you think that's counterintuitive to what these movements get done, name one person who made change without making noise. [color=red]Again, didn't I say peaceful discussion is the way forwards?[/color] Does that mean screaming on the Internet and saying kill all white people or kill all men. No. Not it does not and its up to these movements to call out these extremists in their own ranks. [color=red]100% agreed.[/color]

But like you said, people have the right to agree and disagree and everyone has the right to ignore them. You're not going to change their beliefs and screaming at people until you're blue in the face isn't going to change that. I agree with you on this but I don't agree that not protesting or having pride to let people know that their love is normal, is counterproductive or unnecessary. It is very necessary. Especially when kids still get death threats for not being hetero normative. [color=red]Told you above that I don't disagree that protest is neccesary, I don't think I said protest is futile. I just complained about the methods some groups use. You know... like the whole blocking off a freeway and then complaining when someone gets hit. Isn't that just counter productive? That's not protest, that's just being obnoxious.[/color]

On that note, homosexuality or non-hetero lifestyles really aren't being shoved in anyone's faces. [color=red]Generally? No. Which is something I am happy with. Not that I want hetero lifestyles to be pushed in peoples faces either - but it's just the largest market share and sex sells. Sorry, it's the facts. I hope this changes some day but I strongly doubt that.

On the flip side, gay prides are kinda 'shoving your sexuality in someones face' and unlike with heterosexuals, gay prides can get kinda.. shady with the sex things.[/color] Heterosexuality is the norm and has been celebrated for millennia. So who really gives a flying fuck of non-hetero people are showcased in television or in movies. [color=red]I don't. I generally don't really care for the sexuality of a television/movie character.[/color] Don't like it don't watch. It's really that simple. [color=red]Agreed.[/color] 

I hope I got my point across without sounding too preachy. I'm on my phone so I hope it's all cohesive. Thanks. [color=red]It was fine, thanks for your time.[/color]
[/quote]

[color=red]I'm gonna insert my opinions on what you write in red because it's easier for me.[/color]