Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for Equality
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Well, at least with them, I felt like I was having a dialogue about this. Meister makes me feel like he thinks the whole issue is unimportant.
It's like, at least with the anti-gay Christians, you know they are gunning for you. I don't remember much of Meister's posts from before we got into this particular exchange, but in general, there's been a group of posters whose stance is they don't see why Tim Cook's announcement is a big deal. And they continue in their deliberate puzzlement even when we try to explain to them why it's a big deal. I feel deeply suspicious of such people. To me, it feels like they don't want to openly acknowledge their anti-gay sentiment, but they want to be perceived as liberal and enlightened, so they resort to belittling the issue by saying it's not a big deal, gays are already accepted, etc, etc.
Maybe it's just me, but I prefer open hostility to underhanded belittlement.
----------
It's an internet forum, it's all about bickering
This, I can agree with.
It's an internet forum, it's all about bickering
Yeah but no but yeah but something something sitting in a tree
-----
Two very short stories with a thought of equality at the end.
Years ago, me and an old mate, pleasantly drunk after a night out, early hours, drunk enough to have our arms over each other's shoulders, walking up a 'right on' street, I said goodnight to him, probably kissed him on the cheek he probably did the same. He heads off. Maybe a minute later I get a broken nose. Almost certainly not from locals; from out-of-towners (London, most likely.)
Fast forward to maybe a decade ago. Same town, sunny day, seafront, stood outside a gay pub with umpteen other people, nothing lewd, all minding our own business. A number of beer glasses arrive, airborne, courtesy of some yobs (probably Londoners again, down in Brighton purely for trouble) down the street a bit. Gay blokes sort of dodge the flying glasses, no confrontational response. From the quiet tea-and-scones café adjacent to the pub, a few other blokes steam out and thunder down the street to the larger group of glass-hurlers. Suffice to say, the homophobic yobs are dispersed before you can say boo to a gay goose. The blokes from the sleepy café did not respond primarily to the homophobic violence on a seafront in broad daylight (though they might have done). They were out and on it in a flash because the homophobes were too ****ing brainless to realise that their beer glasses were flying over push-chairs and small babies, outside the cafe, towards the gay targets. I can't recall exactly how it concluded but the heroes of the moment were suitably thanked (and obviously gobsmacked that the people who were chased off could have been so stupid). I reckon, at least one of those homophobic yobs learnt a lesson in equality the hard way. After being chased off they probably regrouped and did the laddish blah blah a little more, but later in private each one probably felt some shame at first, for doing something so dreadful without a thought for small babies and probably later, some shame for simply behaving like a tosser towards a bunch of people who were minding their own business. Their attempt to make each other feel big couldn't have gone more pear-shaped if they had tried.
I want people who are willing to engage in dialogue. And maybe it's some kind of cultural difference, but you keep saying you aren't joking, but to me it doesn't come across as you are being serious.
Not that we can't have some humor in our posts, but you say you are NOT joking, so I don't know how to take your comments. Because if your honest reaction to social rejection is "run away fast," that just doesn't compute in my head.
For what it's worth, I haven't picked up on an anti-gay sentiment from Meister. He's occasionally flippant, I'm occasionally flippant, and so on. And (without reference to Meister) I think it's fair for someone to say, with honesty, that being gay is not (to them) a big deal; for whatever reason, there's not gonna be a moment of enlightenment. I'm not looking for others to have that moment, it is (to put it bluntly) none of my business.
Priorities. The vast majority of people fall into the category of those who might swiftly challenge, without a second thought, an aggressor who recklessly endangers a small child. If Meister is not within that category, I'll be surprised
If I am not mistaken homosexuality is a sin in Christianity,Islam and Judaism.
this thread is christians vs atheists.
basically a bunch of name calling.
still, much more civil than what happens when the religious start arguing amongst themselves.
Yes, but I don't think we've heard from anybody objecting to homosexuality from the Judaic or Islamic pov.
Why didn't he disclose who his "husband" is? The should both come out and kiss on camera.
Is it Jony Ive? Is it Crag Federihi? Is it Eddy Cue?
Is it Jony Ive? Is it Crag Federihi? Is it Eddy Cue?
Ha! Joking aside, one doesn't need to have a "husband," or be in a long-term relationship, to be gay. Or to be straight, for that matter.
If someone trys to beat you up, there is only so many things you can do. Avoiding situations like that is an option, too. Many times shooting an assaillant is not the smartest way out, if not just because you will get in trouble yourself. So another option is to run/roll/drive away.
Also if someone physically attacks people because he for some reason thinks they are gay, then that person has other issues and might attack for any other reason as well. I've witnessed unblievable situations, where a person escaped a very serious situation by simply running away. Part of the art of war is to know when to pick a fight and when to run.
----------
Part of the reason for aggressive homophobia on the one side and what seems to be an obtruse gay agenda on the other side is, that people take themselves way to serious.
I think what I have been trying to convey, perhaps not very successfully, is that fear of physical violence is only part of the problem. I think I used words like "disapproval" and "rejection." That's things like being stared at, people turning away from you, verbally abusing you, etc. Running away isn't very effective against those kinds of things. In fact, I don't know that there is any effective defense against things like that. So even if there were no threat of physical violence, some people may be afraid of doing things that might get them marked as gay, because they fear that kind of reaction.
hmm.. yeah. i'm not really disagreeing with the stuff you're saying.. or- i'm definitely not trying to argue something like "science is this.. no, science is that..etc"
science is pure.. it has facts.. and proofs.. probabilities.. it explains a whole lot of stuff which until relatively recently, humans didn't have a clue about.
but below that level, at the core, there is a leap of faith which must happen.. not entirely different than the leap of faith we see in religions.
the person(s) who wrote the science wikipedia said:
i'm not trying to discredit science one bit.. it's awesome.. what i am trying to say is just be a bit aware that "science" has never been proven.. at this stage, we could only prove science through the scientific method.. but you can't prove science with science so we're left with philosophy to do the proving
Last edited:
People have a right to stare and turn away. If someone abuses you verbally you can abuse him back.
The other humans on this planet are not obligated to make you feel psychologically comfortable.
I think you need what's called "thicker skin".
----------
Well put. I agree.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for ...
Serious question Meister - What point are you trying to get across? I can't tell from any of your posts. It looks like you're just trying to counter-argue everyone with no clear stance on anything. I'm not being facetious, I'm just genuinely curious.
Serious question Meister - What point are you trying to get across? I can't tell from any of your posts. It looks like you're just trying to counter-argue everyone with no clear stance on anything. I'm not being facetious, I'm just genuinely curious.
Meister and others are talking about different time frames.. both sides make sense.
• it's good to have some street smarts (how best to handle current state of affairs)
• eliminate petty intersocial threats altogether (what to strive (or fight) for)
but nobody is talking about the thing the other person is talking about
:-D
Last edited:
Well, Tim Cook did mention that being gay has helped him grow thicker skin.
And maybe it's a cultural difference, but I was taught that we shouldn't make other people feel psychologically uncomfortable. "Don't stare. Don't point. Don't make fun of people for being different -- it's impolite."
Religious faith is the absence of evidence, which is far different then faith in science. Faith that experiment X and/or evidence Y will backup theory A, sure there is a level of faith in that regard. But that level of faith ends if and/or when experiment X and evidence Y and possibly along with any other experiment and/or evidence shows to support theory A. It's no longer faith that it's correct, it's now evidence based.
Take the Big Bang for example, it's a theory with supportive evidence. It's not a complete theory and it has to be thought of as more of a puzzle with missing pieces. We don't know the size and shape of those pieces. If we find a new piece, we might think it fits in one spot of the over all picture but if new evidence comes to light, we might find that one piece isn't the size and shape we thought, it might be part of a different area of that over all picture all together. The thing about theories is that they can evolve as more evidence comes to light. So we may start out with a picture but in the end it could be a vastly different picture. The key point though is that the picture is always supported by evidence. Which is the complete opposite when it comes to religious faith, specially in regards to the supernatural aspects.
I know my ramble might not be the clearest but so here's Dawkins take on it.
As a Christian, I believe that homosexuality is indeed a sin. This is stated throughout the Bible thoroughly. However, that being said, the Catholic church has turned this into something like Christians hate those who are gay. That is not the case by an means. We are all sinners and sexual sins are all the same. We are not in a position as humans to judge others based off of their sins, only God can do that. It does not matter if you are a Christian, Muslim, or anything else, the basis that we should all share as humans is respect.
yeah, again.. i'm not disagreeing with any of that.. or, i don't feel like your counterpoints are really related to what i'm saying.. i'm talking about something different or a different point in the logic.. i think of it as the core but i know i shouldn't expect someone to hear 'core' and be like "oh.. i know what he's saying" (or whatever)
i don't know.. maybe take some acid or something then let's talk #
not sure if i have anything else to add at this point but i liked discussing it with you #
- Status