Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 59 of 59

Thread: Queer activists disrupt Pete Buttigieg event in San Francisco: 'We deserve better'

  1. Top | #51
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    3,237
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Perhaps it's just because I recently spent some time with some family members (by marriage) that I am most keenly aware of just how much hostility there still exists towards any woman with any sort of authority beyond teaching and being a nurse, administrative assistant, etc. So much fun.
    Absolutely true in higher education, I despair of the way female administrators are treated and related to when compared to their male counterparts, especially those who are also Latina. It's an embarrassment to our society that we still haven't learned to take people's qualifications seriously outside of spurious expectations connected to accidents of birth. Even teachers themselves. I have often observed students trying to call their professors, even those with doctorates, "Miss so-and-so" a double insult that appears to deny someone their proper title and seemingly assume non-marriageability at the same time. Trump doesn't need to take us back to the 1950s again, clearly plenty of us are still trapped there.

  2. Top | #52
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    5,101
    Rep Power
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    I recently had an interesting reminder of the degree to which gay men, even privileged white gay men, are still distrusted by the public at large. I was on a long drive with my mother, and the conversation turned to the past as things often go. When I was a teenager, I used to volunteer as a reading tutor at an elementary afterschool program that my mother was the director of at the time. My mother brought this up and commented, "Of course, I didn't know then that you were gay; even if I had been okay with it, the parents wouldn't have. It's a good thing you teach at the college level now." <pregnant pause> "What? It's nothing personal, there are just some things children shouldn't have to learn about until later. And you can't deny that a person who defines their life by their sexuality is going to be not the best minder of children. I wouldn't have wanted you to have a homosexual teacher either when you were little."

    This from a lifelong liberal who has voted straight Democratic tickets since Nixon and believes herself to open-minded and tolerant of all lifeways! It makes me wonder how commonplace such attitudes still are. I can see where, if even so-called moderate liberals equate homosexuality with paedophilia in a one-to-one relationship, electing a gay man president is going to be something of a long shot.
    Yeah that highlights another aspect where it may be even harder for a white gay man than a straight black man to be elected. Even among people that are not only liberal but even very left wing and generally accepting of gay rights, there are bigotries and assumptions about gays that impede their acceptance in roles of authority. As in your story, homosexuality is viewed has having relevance to "ethical" issues even by those who don't view it as a "sin". I think it's b/c it's related to sexuality and thus hang ups about sexuality bleed into feelings about homosexuals as role models, being around kids, etc. It's annoying that well meaning people like your mom view homosexuals as "defining their life by the sexuality", when in fact they are just projecting and they are defining homosexuals by the sexuality. That's a difference from race, where unless one actually holds a racial supremacist viewpoint, there is no relevance to ethical concerns.

    Another type of destructive assumption that well-meaning liberals/leftist sometimes make about homosexuals is that the harm they've suffered from bigotry is lesser because homosexuality is not visible, so they can "hide it" and avoid discrimination. I heard this from a very left-of-Bernie, left-of-BLM friend of mine in response to Buttigieg's comment that he empathizes with the black community and knows from experience how hurtful bigotry can be. This friend actually expressed anger at Pete and claimed Pete is a "privileged white male" who has no idea what being a target of discrimination is like, b/c his homosexuality is not directly observable. I told him that being able to hide your homosexuality is itself harmful, b/c to avoid bigotry, people do that, as Pete did most his life, and its causes immense psychological and social harm to a person to have to hide in fear and shame from everyone around them, including friends and family.
    My friend was basically engaging in turf-warfare about victimization as though their is finite sympathy in the world and none should be wasted on homosexuals, if they aren't also black or female. Even if a person views homosexual attraction as biologically innate and not a choice, there is a bias among many where actually living openly as gay is "a choice" and therefore bigotry against it isn't on par with bigotry for skin color.

  3. Top | #53
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    9,495
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    13,150
    Rep Power
    46
    Try reading objections to ANY female candidate.

    And yet almost everybody loves their mother.

  4. Top | #54
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    5,101
    Rep Power
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Try reading objections to ANY female candidate.

    And yet almost everybody loves their mother.
    True. It's like reading the twitter feed of any female public figure. There are many suggestions of rape from both men who like and who dislike the woman. However, I suspect that the vast majority of people that won't vote for a woman president are already not going to vote for any Dem. I think among Dems and leftists who generally support Dems, there are more that won't for a gay white male than for a straight white woman. Part of that is there are fewer gay men of any race than there are women.

    Thought experiment: Imagine a person with a modestly likable and liberal personality, history, policies, etc.. Imagine that person is either a white gay man, a white straight woman, or a black straight man. Which one is least likely to get the Dem nomination? Which one is least likely to beat the GOP in the primary?

    I think it's the white gay man. Which doesn't mean I think they have it harder in life in general, just that it's a bigger direct obstacle to gaining the support required among Dems, leftists, and moderates to win either the Dem nomination or the general.

    In fact, there is evidence to support this from studies showing that the traits most likely to automatically exclude you from presidential considerations by most voters are atheist, gay, then Muslim.

  5. Top | #55
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    3,422
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    6,333
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Try reading objections to ANY female candidate.

    And yet almost everybody loves their mother.
    True. It's like reading the twitter feed of any female public figure. There are many suggestions of rape from both men who like and who dislike the woman. However, I suspect that the vast majority of people that won't vote for a woman president are already not going to vote for any Dem. I think among Dems and leftists who generally support Dems, there are more that won't for a gay white male than for a straight white woman. Part of that is there are fewer gay men of any race than there are women.

    Thought experiment: Imagine a person with a modestly likable and liberal personality, history, policies, etc.. Imagine that person is either a white gay man, a white straight woman, or a black straight man. Which one is least likely to get the Dem nomination? Which one is least likely to beat the GOP in the primary?

    I think it's the white gay man. Which doesn't mean I think they have it harder in life in general, just that it's a bigger direct obstacle to gaining the support required among Dems, leftists, and moderates to win either the Dem nomination or the general.

    In fact, there is evidence to support this from studies showing that the traits most likely to automatically exclude you from presidential considerations by most voters are atheist, gay, then Muslim.
    There's a certain dirtiness, distrust, and stigma for someone who "defines themselves on the basis of who they have sex with". Of course that's not what gay people are or do. It's other people who define us that way. In reality, I don't define myself in those terms beyond the way I have been forced to so as to fight for my rights to be treated like anyone else.

    Really, the challenges to get elected come in that there are some cultures in the US who would otherwise support someone who look with suspicion on gay people. They are not merely religious communities but also black communities have a very low general opinion of gay people and young people don't tend to take gay people very seriously. It's an endemic and pernicious ideological infection in both cases, but both make it a challenge since both groups are generally necessary to win any large election in an urban setting. And don't get me started on what "Christians", even more liberal ones, get exposed to on a daily basis. Those messages WILL be internalized, even if consciously rejected.

  6. Top | #56
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    9,495
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    13,150
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Try reading objections to ANY female candidate.

    And yet almost everybody loves their mother.
    True. It's like reading the twitter feed of any female public figure. There are many suggestions of rape from both men who like and who dislike the woman. However, I suspect that the vast majority of people that won't vote for a woman president are already not going to vote for any Dem. I think among Dems and leftists who generally support Dems, there are more that won't for a gay white male than for a straight white woman. Part of that is there are fewer gay men of any race than there are women.

    Thought experiment: Imagine a person with a modestly likable and liberal personality, history, policies, etc.. Imagine that person is either a white gay man, a white straight woman, or a black straight man. Which one is least likely to get the Dem nomination? Which one is least likely to beat the GOP in the primary?

    I think it's the white gay man. Which doesn't mean I think they have it harder in life in general, just that it's a bigger direct obstacle to gaining the support required among Dems, leftists, and moderates to win either the Dem nomination or the general.

    In fact, there is evidence to support this from studies showing that the traits most likely to automatically exclude you from presidential considerations by most voters are atheist, gay, then Muslim.
    I think it’s the white woman. Sure, Hillary got the nomination but she ultimately lost. I will be surprised if a woman gets the nomination again in my lifetime, certainly a black woman will not.

    Nope. The media cannot do enough to bury Warren,overlook Klobuchar, has already driven Harris out. And can’t promote Mayor Pete enough to prove their liberal credentials. He’s certainly getting a lot of positive attention—real star treatment that Harris and Klobuchar haven’t gotten.

  7. Top | #57
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    26,527
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    123,279
    Rep Power
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Jolly_Penguin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    Why is Buttigieg even in the race? There's still too much anti-gay sentiment in this country, a gay isn't going to win a close election.
    A black guy did. Why not a gay guy?
    I don't think Obama could win now, the deplorables are too riled up.

  8. Top | #58
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    16,690
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    32,376
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    I think it’s the white woman.
    I think not.
    Sure, Hillary got the nomination but she ultimately lost.
    Hillary was a horrible candidate though. None of the political instincts of her husband. Too much entitlement and thinking that the presidency was owed to her.

    I will be surprised if a woman gets the nomination again in my lifetime, certainly a black woman will not.
    Depending on how long you expect to live, you will probably end up surprised.
    I think there is better than even chance that a woman will be on the top of the ticket for either Democratic or Republican nomination in either 2024 or 2028.

    Nope. The media cannot do enough to bury Warren,overlook Klobuchar, has already driven Harris out.
    Bull-fucking-shit. To start chronologically, Kamala Harris was not "driven out", least of all by the media. First of all, she did not have to quit before Iowa. Her poll numbers were about 3.6 Roentgen, not great not terrible. She could, and I think should, have kept going. She received a lot of attention early on, from both media and big Hillary-campaign donors. But she made a few strategic blunders. She eschewed her moderate credentials and tried to move to the left (she even raised her hand on M4A) and contest the progressive lane against Warren and Bernie. Voters did not buy it. Then there was her ill-advised attack on Biden re 70s bussing.
    So Harris' exit was a combination of the mistakes of her campaign and her decision to throw in the towel too early.

    The media is also not "burying" Warren and Klob. Klob received quite a bit of attention with her one great debate performance and then again when she finished third in NH.
    Warren received a lot of attention lately when she attacked Bernie, and then again just now when she attacked Bloomberg. Interesting that Warren can only generate attention by attacking her fellow Dems. And both times on alleged sexism - she is definitely playing up the gender angle which is not at all attractive to me.

    And can’t promote Mayor Pete enough to prove their liberal credentials. He’s certainly getting a lot of positive attention—real star treatment that Harris and Klobuchar haven’t gotten.
    Well, he finished 1st on delegates and close second on popular vote in Iowa and tied on delegates and close second in popular vote in NH. Right now, she is in the overall lead by delegates. That will change tomorrow, but it's still quite an accomplishment.

  9. Top | #59
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    9,495
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    13,150
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    I think not.

    Hillary was a horrible candidate though. None of the political instincts of her husband. Too much entitlement and thinking that the presidency was owed to her.

    I will be surprised if a woman gets the nomination again in my lifetime, certainly a black woman will not.
    Depending on how long you expect to live, you will probably end up surprised.
    I think there is better than even chance that a woman will be on the top of the ticket for either Democratic or Republican nomination in either 2024 or 2028.

    Nope. The media cannot do enough to bury Warren,overlook Klobuchar, has already driven Harris out.
    Bull-fucking-shit. To start chronologically, Kamala Harris was not "driven out", least of all by the media. First of all, she did not have to quit before Iowa. Her poll numbers were about 3.6 Roentgen, not great not terrible. She could, and I think should, have kept going. She received a lot of attention early on, from both media and big Hillary-campaign donors. But she made a few strategic blunders. She eschewed her moderate credentials and tried to move to the left (she even raised her hand on M4A) and contest the progressive lane against Warren and Bernie. Voters did not buy it. Then there was her ill-advised attack on Biden re 70s bussing.
    So Harris' exit was a combination of the mistakes of her campaign and her decision to throw in the towel too early.

    The media is also not "burying" Warren and Klob. Klob received quite a bit of attention with her one great debate performance and then again when she finished third in NH.
    Warren received a lot of attention lately when she attacked Bernie, and then again just now when she attacked Bloomberg. Interesting that Warren can only generate attention by attacking her fellow Dems. And both times on alleged sexism - she is definitely playing up the gender angle which is not at all attractive to me.

    And can’t promote Mayor Pete enough to prove their liberal credentials. He’s certainly getting a lot of positive attention—real star treatment that Harris and Klobuchar haven’t gotten.
    Well, he finished 1st on delegates and close second on popular vote in Iowa and tied on delegates and close second in popular vote in NH. Right now, she is in the overall lead by delegates. That will change tomorrow, but it's still quite an accomplishment.
    The media pushes who the media pushes. And this year, with no slight intended towards Mayor Buttigieg, they are pushing the narrative of small town gay soldier who grew up to become mayor and now wants to be POTUS. They've been doing it for a long while now. It lets everyone keep their libral cred without having to do anything so frightening as embrace a woman in charge of the whole show.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •