h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I have no idea what your Blake's 7 references are. And where is the procrastination you speak of?

If I can't see evidence of the points you are making, how on earth can I go any further than making that clear?

"You know full well that 'gender disguise' is now an issue where it wasn't before precisely because of gay liberation; when homosexuality was illegal, hardly anyone would dare declare themselves gay,-especially in a public communal area. Now ,however, gay people feel, quite understandably, emboldened to assert themselves in these communal areas." I don't agree. I'm not aware of this at all. Nor do I understand how you reach this conclusion. It seems to be based on the premise all gay men wanting to prey on all straight men, which clearly isn't the case. So how can I pursue the points you make from the basis of a belief that, to me, is deeply flawed?

I don't know what unfortunate experience you had with your son - nor is it any of my business - but I see no evidence of gay people 'asserting themselves in communal areas.' If the people who troubled you and/or your son used this argument to justify their behaviour, I hope you set them straight (pardon the pun). I certainly would have. Men showing an interest in children - male or female - isn't right, plus it's illegal. But it's nothing to do with equality for lesbians and gay men.

Whether or not what happened is the trigger for your discomfort with other people's sexuality, you seem to have developed an unusual interest in websites that I have even never heard of. Contrary to what you appear to believe, not all gay men hang round toilets, cruising areas or wherever, desperate for sex. We're not all like George Michael.

I've not arguing for anyone to have 'special treatment' - why do you keep foisting opinions like this on to me?

And, for somebody who is demanding that gay people be forced to wear badges (I seem to recall someone else using this tactic, way back in the thirties ...), I cannot take your requests for tolerance seriously.

This is my last post on this matter - good luck moving on.

Dear Liberator - although we do definately not see eye to eye, for some reason I warm to you; you seem in some ways to be a genuinely exasperated and a decent chap.
But, and how can I put this delicately, for all the tenacity of your arguments, there seems to be the whiff of denial and falsity about them ?

Then there's strange things - you've 'no idea' what my Blake's 7 references are, yet, as readers of this forum will have seen, you yourself introduced this as your nom de plume cloned from the 70's BBC Sci Fi programme (about the valiant few (Blake and the crew) of the ship Liberator vying against the suffocating all dominating 'Federation').

Put simply, this whole exchange is about your ability ( or inability ) to understand , from a gay point of view, the concerns that a heterosexual person might have about personal space and privacy. That is what started this thread.
And, unfortunately, like taking the proverbial horse to drink water, no matter how this is put to you, for some reason, - maybe years of experiencing prejudice or discrimination - you just seem unable to throw open that door to empathise with heterosexual concerns.
You expect them, however, to empathise with you ( which the vast majority do, and which is why the law in reference to homosexuality and gay rights have been transformed since the '60's ), but you can't, for some reason, reciprocate that.
The fact that the 97% of other men who are not gay might have some difficulty in mixing in changing rooms or toilets with men who might have a sexual interest in them ( note please I said 'might', and not 'always', as for some reason you insist on stating that I am saying ) is brushed aside as 'phobia', 'outdated, 'bigotry', 'right wing'- basically absolutley any epithet that you can attach to it so that you don't have to consider those feelings, and can invalidate them.
The fact that a small minority ( and I say small, not all, as you keep insisiting) of those homosexuals might have an enhanced opportunity in this liberated homosexual atmosphere to predicate upon the vulnerable young, -although you are totally yourself against it,- doesn't lead you to considering any responsibility of action which might prevent this, other than saying that it's illegal.
Heterosexual concerns over these situations are just 'plain silly'; examples of them are 'rubbish out of the Daily Mail', and , when clear examples are listed - another,(your latest attempt at invalidation) is trotted out - which is: that I seem to have developed an 'unusual'( note the attempt to invalidate the evidence) interest in websites that you have 'never heard of'. Really?? - you then promptly contradict yourself by talking about George Michael, Cottaging, and Cruising !
That Shakesperean quotation comes to mind - 'me thinketh that thou protesteth too much'.
Where do I get this idea of 'Special Treatment' Liberator? - from the politically correct demands of minority interest groups that forms of behaviour that would not be tolerated in the majority are demanded to be allowed by the minority, and, despite your protestations, I think you know full well what those are.

You are also, unfortunately, not above a bit of cavalier exaggeration when it suits you. For example: that I am someone who is 'demanding that gay people be forced to wear badges' For some reason you aeem to have forgotten that forum readers can simply re-read the postings for themselves, and see that I said that 'in some countries gays dress in a cerain way, or wear certain type of jewellry to make their sexuality clear'. And,I said this in the context of gays taking RESPONSIBILITY for who they are.

It is very hard, reading your postings, not to come to the conclusion that your defence of your sexuality is evasive, unable to acknowledge the concerns and feelings of others, and unwilling to really take responsibility for being who you are. In short, they are in denial.

Somehow I think that you could see this point coming, and hence your defiant 'this is my last posting on this matter, good luck, moving on'.
You've had the intuition Liberator, to jump before you are, under the collapse of your arguments, forced to be pushed into it.

Maybe this is the easy ( only?) way out for you, but a sad outcome for those of us who might have hoped to see a braver approach of meeting and understanding heterosexual's concerns from your side, and putting a responsible structure in place that would render uneccessary the need for the observation in the Review which started this posting.
Shame that the good ship Liberator had to cruise off into outer space.......

"You've had the intuition Liberator, to jump before you are, under the collapse of your arguments, forced to be pushed into it. "

His arguments were wholly coherent, I got no sense of him nearing any kind of collapse. My guess it's more a case of not enjoying the act of banging his head against a brick wall.