Gays and lesbians are amazing when you come to think of it; their resilience and strength of character shines through when you consider what many are put through and have to overcome, just to simply share and enjoy their lives with that special person.

Innuendo, labelling, abuse and bashing are realities for too many, but still they continue to contribute in work, sport, parenting and a host of other creative endeavours that nurture and enhance the communities of which they are a part.

Do they think of themselves as victims; no! They live their lives like each and every other person. Accepting the negatives of life that they have to experience, as norm, because of their being.

However there is a limit to the acceptance of these negatives in the 21st century. Same sex couples will no longer accept the status of second class Australian citizens. Nothing less than their recognition in the Australian community, is acceptable.

By this recognition, maybe the negatives that gays and lesbians have to experience will deminish. Then we might live in a country of a fair go for all

Great post, Doug, but I reckon we’re not going to get away that easily with ignoring the connection in some people’s minds between homosexuality and anal sex. (Lesbian readers are probably rolling their eyes and tearing their hair out at this point.)

So here’s Anal Sex and Homosexuality 101.

People aren’t gay because they like anal sex: people are gay because they are attracted to people of the same sex. Some homosexuals like anal sex; some don’t. Some heterosexuals like anal sex; some don’t. Homosexuals who don’t like anal sex are no less homosexual for that (which will no doubt be a relief for many of our lesbian friends). Heterosexuals who do like anal sex are no less heterosexual because of that, either.

People’s sexual orientation is not determined by which specific acts they may or may not like. People are attracted their partners primarily, and only then decide on what sex acts might be appropriate, depending on how each feels about his or her own body, and the… well… the available equipment. Sensible people also consider such things as the risk of unwanted pregnancy or of sexually transmissible infections.

Now if you want to know what it feels like, why people like it, or how to deal with the …ahem… hygiene issues, then you will have to sign up for Anal Sex 102.

Jim you're neither average nor normal. I don't see why you use this header.

Joy, from a few posts ago,

Thanks for your very incisive comments.

Now that I think of it, the debate over acceptance of homosexuality has definitely shifted. The phobia that is being expressed by the religious crowd is nowadays mostly about sexual acts, not the right to have a different sexual orientation.

This is definitely a step forward in our social maturity

Interesting that the anti gay crowd, have a thing about anal sex.
Could it be they aint getting any?
Could it be they may sort out their sexual problems by talking to a sex counsellor?
Sad really, that there are people who are so more interested in other peoples lives, other than their own.
If they only tried they would have a happy life. There again, some people enjoy carrying negative baggage in their life.

(continued from previous posts)

The second argument against the equality Jim Woulfe calls for, seems to me to be the ultimate expression of the conservative fatalistic position- like it or lump it.

This may not be a separate argument from the first point that homosexual relationships are unequal, but merely instructions about how you should respond to this first point, assuming it is correct-i.e.- homosexual relationships are not the equal of others (point 1), therefore, you should accept point 1…

As a debating point, this is pretty inadequate; saying effectively “I’m right, no really, I am” as a further justification to an argument rather than expanding upon that argument, for example, by answering some of the questions posed in my previous posts.

Because of this inadequacy, I will interpret the arguments as more logically making a case against Woulfe’s article. But rather than disagreeing with the point that homosexual relationships are unequally treated, this argument is saying that this unequal treatment is either-

a)unimportant
(“Homosexuals need to … be thankful that they are not treated far more harshly by society”, “There are many aspects of our society that many of us feel discriminated against, but we accept them and get on with living”)

or

b)is a consequence of choice, so should be accepted as a consequence of choice
(“You chose to have a homosexual relationship knowing the legal circumstances, so why whinge about it?”,” People who stray far from societal norms should expect to be treated differently… The author complains of ‘homophobia’ in Australia, so perhaps he could move to one of the five other countries he has lived in without problems”)

On point a), the unequal “consequences” are unimportant because either we have more important things to worry about, or we should be more fatalistic. I’m not sure why a respondent believing either of these things would bother writing a reply, surely they’d have more important things to worry about, or could just accept that others want to “whinge”.
(continued)