All-gay community?

[bayern20]

That's because we're moving forward with multilateralism, internationalism and basic globalization. Statistically you will see an increase of Arabs, Indians, Chinese throughout the Western world in this millennium...just as they will see an increase of Caucasians in their lands. Segregation is moving backward.

I understand that but none of that has to do with my question. And you can't call some nations segregates based on the fact that you have different view of "diversity". I clearly see where we are heading, i'm asking you if there is a problem without this "diversity"? Many nations around the world are not diverse in the sense that its mainly dominated by one religion, one colour, one type of background, etc I love my home country because of that. We have a unique culture, unique history, unique foods, so forth. I don't feel we are less because of it.

 

[bayern20]

You clearly just stated we should not be diversifying, yet you want an LGBT society because it can still incorporate diversity all-the-while being segregated.

What?

You misunderstood. All I said is that you have a messed up/wrong view of what diversity is. So if gays did have their own city, we would not be much less diverse. Because there are nations out there that are the same religion, same colour, etc and they are still diverse. Which is my whole point.

 

[bayern20]

Both

...

Seriously, how am I trolling?

 

[bayern20]

Usually the hidden premise will be some kind of bias against gay people, but he thankfully just blew it right open in post #46.

Do you know what's a sign of an intelligent person?

A person that allows their mind to go to places that other people refuse or just naturally aren't prone to going. It gives us answers.

So if having a good solid discussion on this bothers you, because you can't handle "going there", just say so. But please don't call me a troll or insult my intelligence. I have a University degree and don't think of myself as a moron. (though I realize the pace at which I post doesn't help the writing or grammar)

 

[bayern20]

Seriously. All we see on this forum is a constant competition to lick ass and see who is more gay.

 

[bayern20]

 

[Speeds]

I wouldn't want that. I love diversity.

 

[saxaphonic]

If this thread and forum are any indication of a society composed of gay people only, I doubt you really want that...unless you're ready to pop psych pills on a daily basis.
But to address the point made in the opening post, I think unfortunate as it is, you can't really predict when you will need someone and who they will be. I can sort of see where you are coming from, but I don't believe a gay-only town/city is necessary or effective for what your aim seems to be. A homo-centric (as opposed to the heterocentric one we have now) society where the assumption of having a homosexual orientation permeates everything, would do the trick. Remember, being a "minority" refers to more than mere quantity.

 

[BabiGayPimp]

i hope youre not comparing the melting-pot situation in our contemporary cities with brutal, violent, inhuman colonisation. the meeting of cultures has not always been very... civilzed, to put it mildly. but how one can say willful blindness and ignorance towards "the other" is a good strategy for any culture, i just dont understand.

At least you do acknowledge that thoughtless intrusion upon native cultures does not always have positive consequences for the host culture.

I don't think you realize how imperialistic your views of "internationalism" at all costs is. Simply because a culture is cloistered, does not mean the people are ignorant or backwards. Tibetan culture, for instance, was very advanced and intricate before it was invaded and subjugated by outsiders.

Your typically western view that the whole world should be some open, mall-like marketplace, with cultural revolving doors is not particularly enlightened.

Multicuturalism and internationalism are great experiements, but there are some older social frameworks in existence that should also be respected and allowed to play out their individual destinies.

I would like to see, as an experiment, how a secluded gay society might evolve over a couple hundred years time; and what adaptive strategies they might learn, and employ, to maintain independence.

I really don't want to see us a one-world global shopping mall with everybody completely homogenized, 2200. What's the thrill in that?

 

[bankside]

Babi, you're making imperialism sound like a good thing.

The choice is not between shopping malls and the things that make us distinct. The choice for tibet is not isolation or oblivion.

You can't perpetuate old clefts or invent new ones to keep people apart just to see if they'll do something interesting. Mostly because you can't keep ideas out of each others' heads.

The world is a not some remote global marketplace of ideas, it is a personal one. My own capacity to choose is the context in which these ideas battle it out. I don't want those choices being limited by the quaint notion that a culture has a right to perpetuity. Maybe Tibet has something to teach me. Maybe it is the other way around. If we both learn from each other and wind up with the same ideas on a whole range of topics, I'm good with that.

Internationalism is essential.

 

[hylas]

Simply because a culture is cloistered, does not mean the people are ignorant or backwards.

i feel us drifting way off topic here, but what the hell, as long as its interesting, right? ^^

actually, i do think that shielding yourself off willfully is kinda ignorant. isnt that the definition of "ignoring" - not wanting to know? as opposed to opening up to other cultures, then making an informed decision, to what degree you want to follow the ways youve been brought up with (which are the product of a ever-changing cultural evolution themselves)

while its true that internationalism dilutes the "local colours" to a degree, im not concerned that the local culture will ever get lost. i grew up in switzerland, where almost every village has its own dialect, so much so that sometimes people from different areas of switzerland have trouble communicating. decades ago, linguists predicted that all local dialects will die out soon. yet here we are, the dialects are as healthy and alive (and ever-growing, ever-changing) as ever, and every swiss person is proud of their particular dialect. if anything, the increased mobility and availability of information has made people more aware, more proud of their heritage.

im sure you could find counter examples, especially in cases where violence was involved, which i of course dont approve of. but new cultures are being born all the time, so i guess sometimes an aspect of culture has to "die", too.

as for my "not paticularly enlightened, typically western view", ive had the luck of growig up with two cultures, and i can stand behind a lot of ideals with western origins, such as the human rights, feminism, separation of powers, democracy, or that the state should be seperated from the church. (yeah, there is some bad, bad stuff too. i didnt say i stand behind every western value.) but my original argument was that diversity is a good thing, so how exactly do you counter that by telling me im "too western"?

 

[BabiGayPimp]

Babi, you're making imperialism sound like a good thing.

The choice is not between shopping malls and the things that make us distinct. The choice for tibet is not isolation or oblivion.

You can't perpetuate old clefts or invent new ones to keep people apart just to see if they'll do something interesting. Mostly because you can't keep ideas out of each others' heads.

The world is a not some remote global marketplace of ideas, it is a personal one. My own capacity to choose is the context in which these ideas battle it out. I don't want those choices being limited by the quaint notion that a culture has a right to perpetuity. Maybe Tibet has something to teach me. Maybe it is the other way around. If we both learn from each other and wind up with the same ideas on a whole range of topics, I'm good with that.

Internationalism is essential.

Again, you are attempting to impose a particular point of view; namely, western-style individualism and cultural diversity on every culture (real or imagined), in every time and in every place. And that is flat out wrong and arrogant.

I am, like you, a self-actualized, multi-cultural individualist. That's how I was raised and that's a good description of early 21st century Canada.

But it would be foolish to think that every society needs to be that way to be functional or to thrive. History tells us a different story. Many cultures flourished for centuries without ever developing anything like our latter day notions of liberalism and diversity. They thrived until they were destroyed by people like us, insisting that our our ideas were superior.

And, sadly, we'll probably eventually destroy ourselves also. We might do well to test out some alternative social arrangements.

What sense would it make for me to intrude upon an isolated Tibetan monastery, trying to open a McDonalds and a Starbucks (and bring in some chicks too) because I think their culture is too closed and needs to be more like Downtown Toronto?


Silly, silly.

 

[bayern20]

babi, screw them..lets start it up together

 

[BabiGayPimp]

i feel us drifting way off topic here, but what the hell, as long as its interesting, right? ^^

actually, i do think that shielding yourself off willfully is kinda ignorant. isnt that the definition of "ignoring" - not wanting to know? as opposed to opening up to other cultures, then making an informed decision, to what degree you want to follow the ways youve been brought up with (which are the product of a ever-changing cultural evolution themselves)

while its true that internationalism dilutes the "local colours" to a degree, im not concerned that the local culture will ever get lost. i grew up in switzerland, where almost every village has its own dialect, so much so that sometimes people from different areas of switzerland have trouble communicating. decades ago, linguists predicted that all local dialects will die out soon. yet here we are, the dialects are as healthy and alive (and ever-growing, ever-changing) as ever, and every swiss person is proud of their particular dialect. if anything, the increased mobility and availability of information has made people more aware, more proud of their heritage.

im sure you could find counter examples, especially in cases where violence was involved, which i of course dont approve of. but new cultures are being born all the time, so i guess sometimes an aspect of culture has to "die", too.

as for my "not paticularly enlightened, typically western view", ive had the luck of growig up with two cultures, and i can stand behind a lot of ideals with western origins, such as the human rights, feminism, separation of powers, democracy, or that the state should be seperated from the church. (yeah, there is some bad, bad stuff too. i didnt say i stand behind every western value.) but my original argument was that diversity is a good thing, so how exactly do you counter that by telling me im "too western"?

There are vast areas of the world, that used to have vibrant civilizations, but are now empty and dead because "international explorers" felt those regions should be globalized (colonized, actually).

The fact that Swiss villagers in one part of Switzerland still speak somewhat differently than Swiss villagers in another part of Swtizerland is small consolation considering the great nations in Africa and in the Americas that were destroyed upon contact with Eurpoeans flaunting "advanced" western values.

I love western values myself, but those lofty values can kill civilizations sometimes.

 

[BabiGayPimp]

babi, screw them..lets start it up together

I just hate it when gay men go about defending centuries of colonialism, imperialism, and western-driven genocide just because they're terrified at the theoretical idea of not having unilimited access to everybody and everything, all the time and everywhere. Somebody needs to pull their plugs quick! They're addicted to selfish sensation

They forget, that for 99% of human history, or world; our universe went no further than our local villages and immediate surroundings.

Not my preferred way to live. I'd live on a starship, if I could; full of male strippers of every race and ethnicity; and travel through time too. But that's still no reason to belittle or devalue everything that's come from that 99% of our history and that endures still.

 

[bayern20]

genocide just because they're terrified at the theoretical idea of not having unilimited access to everybody and everything, all the time and everywhere. Somebody needs to pull their plugs quick! They're addicted to sensation.

Exactly. You are much better at communicating this than I am but that is exactly what I'm saying.

 

[bankside]

Again, you are attempting to impose a particular point of view; namely, western-style individualism and cultural diversity on every culture (real or imagined), in every time and in every place. And that is flat out wrong and arrogant.

I am, like you, a self-actualized, multi-cultural individualist. That's how I was raised and that's a good description of early 21st century Canada.

But it would be foolish to think that every society needs to be that way to be functional or to thrive. History tells us a different story. Many cultures flourished for centuries without ever developing anything like our latter day notions of liberalism and diversity. They thrived until they were destroyed by people like us, insisting that our our ideas were superior.

And, sadly, we'll probably eventually destroy ourselves also. We might do well to test out some alternative social arrangements.

What sense would it make for me to intrude upon an isolated Tibetan monastery, trying to open a McDonalds and a Starbucks (and bring in some chicks too) because I think their culture is too closed and needs to be more like Downtown Toronto?


Silly, silly.

Except you might find that the Tibetans don't shop at McDonalds or Starbucks and they both end up closing shop. And they might then set the example for the rest of us.

Cultural exchange will blur one culture into another, and in a sense destroy them both, only by erasing the boundaries of history and the boundaries of shortsightedness. But what emerges will be richer, more robust, more nuanced even.

Every society is subject to this progression - it isn't a question of "ought." It isn't a description of Canada, it is an inevitability of the world. And it is a good thing. If we have any skill with it in Canada, we should share it with others to make the transition easier.

Sam Harris actually has some ideas that compliment this discussion, here:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj9oB4zpHww[/ame]

We're all in this together, and that is flat-out delightful. The only arrogance is in clinging to the forms of the past instead of the content.