Finally the truth comes OUT. The mayor of Toronto is a homo.

[PreTTy PeTe]

 

[rotary]

Props for showing up and reading the declaration. The media absolutely hates this guy

 

[PreTTy PeTe]

Props for showing up and reading the declaration. The media absolutely hates this guy

no props for him. trying to suck up now is a bit too late.

bigots like him should eat themselves to an early grave.

oh yea he's doing that.

 

[rotary]

Maybe he'll show up this year? Shirtless with a leather harness? Rocking some chaps? Ginger bears have their following you know

 

[Musik2400]

Alright, first off: Why the thread title? He isn't a homo.

Second: While I agree he's an asshole, that is no reason to belittle what he did here. The fact that he showed up is worth more simply because he has such a problem with these gay events. After 18 months in office he's finally beginning to overcome whatever kept him away from these events. Hopefully that'll set an example to others, that maybe it IS possible for them to overcome their own prejudices. He doesn't deserve it, but he's helping us none the less.

Third: very tasteful, tossing the fat joke in there and all [/sarcasm]

 

[PreTTy PeTe]

Alright, first off: Why the thread title? He isn't a homo.

Second: While I agree he's an asshole, that is no reason to belittle what he did here. The fact that he showed up is worth more simply because he has such a problem with these gay events. After 18 months in office he's finally beginning to overcome whatever kept him away from these events. Hopefully that'll set an example to others, that maybe it IS possible for them to overcome their own prejudices. He doesn't deserve it, but he's helping us none the less.

Third: very tasteful, tossing the fat joke in there and all [/sarcasm]

how is he helping you.

reading from a script at a pflag event which he said he wasn't go to go to anyway.

he's the fucking mayor of the biggest city in canada. I'm a queer in said city and I know that we have the biggest population of lgbt people in Canada. He doesn't represent me.

tell me what he's overcoming. His homophobia??? or his fear of being a homo. lol

 

[Musik2400]

how is he helping you.

reading from a script at a pflag event which he said he wasn't go to go to anyway.

he's the fucking mayor of the biggest city in canada. I'm a queer in said city and I know that we have the biggest population of lgbt people in Canada. He doesn't represent me.

tell me what he's overcoming. His homophobia??? or his fear of being a homo. lol

Ya, I think that's exactly what he's overcoming. though I think to label it outright homophobia without any further information is lazy. People can have dozens of reasons to feel uncomfortable around gays... and their entitled to that. He has never openly vowed hate towards us, he simply doesn't go to gay events. Not exactly mature, but hardly homophobic either.

Lots of politicians read from scripts. Lots more just memorize the speech (which someone else often writes). The fact he changed his plans last minute is kind of the biggest reason he'd need a script. Last minute speeches off the top of your head don't tend to go well... especially if you're uncomfortable (which logically, Ford would have been...). The real point to it is that he saw the outcry in the city over this, and decided to suck it up and socialize with the homo's. This shows that if he can do it, anyone can. As far as him "not representing" the gay community, I couldn't give a flying fuck. So he doesn't wanna go to Pride parade... neither do I. Election time aside, it doesn't matte rif he "represents" gays, as long as he doesn't abuse his power to oppress them. Which he doesn't.

And he is helping. While it is nowhere near a huge impact, and I'm not about to label him some Gay-hero, his actions are beneficial. He's trying to become more accepting, and he's trying to represent you. Getting all pissy and butthurt over it isn't exactly the greatest approach. People make mistakes, there's no reason it should condemn someone trying to be a better person (or mayor)

The point isn't to get everybody to like gays, its to get everyone to tolerate us. Rob Ford seemingly doesn't like gays, but he's showing everyone that despite this, he can still tolerate us.

 

[Musik2400]

That's just a great viewpoint to have. I never thought I would have to convince someone to merely tolerate me as a citizen and a person. I don't know who this Mayor is or what he stands for (something I will have to look up and research more). But saying that we just need to get people to "tolerate" us is not beneficial for anyone.

This has to do a lot more acceptance if anything.

I usually bring up an analogy when people say that we have to get others to tolerate us... I can tolerate someone in an elevator with bad breath... I can tolerate an obnoxious person... see my point?

Tolerance just doesn't go far enough.

Yes, and I don't see why we're entitled to more just because we're gay. Acceptance and tolerance are basically the same thing. When you tolerate that guy in the elevator, you accept him, same with the obnoxious person. You accept him for who he is, and tolerate it. You may not like it, but you put up with that, and you let him do him, while you go about doing you.

I don't expect every single person I meet to like me... or to like the idea that I'm gay, or the idea of "gays". Some people just can't handle it. But as long as they tolerate me, the same as they would someone with bad breath, and the same as they would an obnoxious person, I don't see why we're entitled to anything beyond that.

Acceptance is what happens once everyone tolerates us, but until then, every tolerant person helps imo.

 

[Telstra]

He looks too heavy !!

 

[Musik2400]

Acceptance and tolerance are most certainly not the same thing. They certainly are NOT. And if you are equating gay people to that guy in the elevator or an obnoxious person, that doesn't make sense. People can change their ways, but not their sexuality. There are big differences between tolerating someone, and accepting them as a person. Tolerating has nothing to do with accepting... two different things.

Tolerating could just mean turning a blind eye to someone around you... it has nothing to do with actually accepting and embracing someone.

Okay, assuming they aren't connected, then why do people have to "embrace" homosexuality? If someone wants to turn a blind eye toward homosexuality, how is that bad? especially if that person who learns to turn a blind eye, used to be a homophobe? When I see straight people making out in public, I don't like it. I don't "accept" it, or "embrace" it, but I tolerate it because I know they have the right to do that if they want. That's all I ask in return. That's all we're really entitled to. We're never going to get everyone to accept us. Women, Blacks, Asians, and basically every other minority in existence have been trying longer than us, and none of them have reached complete "acceptance". There's still misogyny and racism in the world. There's still inequality. The point is that the majority, whether they like it or not, TOLERATE those minorities.

And how many people have you met who ACTUALLY change their ways? How many adults especially, change their ways? People get set in their ways quickly, and don't often change. I'm sure that obnoxious guy you tolerate isn't going to wake up and be completely different the next day. I'm guessing the guy with bad breath won't improve his hygiene overnight either.

 

[JJW234]

Can someone explain me why people hate him?

 

[Musik2400]

Can someone explain me why people hate him?

As far as I can tell it's because he's the mayor. No one's ever happy with the person running the show, and always critical of everything they do. Look at the way a lot of people feel about Obama's programs....

If you're in charge, its hard to do anything right, cuz you're always pissing someone off.

 

[Musik2400]

It's bad because it does nothing to help gay people in society. Being a turned a blind eye towards is bad. It doesn't help us or our position in society. I accept and embrace straight people because they are human beings. It has nothing to do with making out. I accept others because they are human beings. What are we entitled to? Just mere toleration? I don't think so. That's not all we are entitled to.

People are changing their opinions and perspectives. There has been a significant opinion shift in this country the last decade alone.

So hygiene is comparable to sexuality? wow.

Bolded: Alright... so the two examples who you only tolerate... you accept them now? What happened to turning a blind eye, and "enduring". Actually, don't bother answering. this has been fun, but I'm gonna finish this argument right here:

First of all... if Tolerance and Acceptance are NOT the same thing, explain to me why "acceptance" comes up as a synonyms for "tolerance" in a Thesaurus? Last I checked, being synonyms means they're.. well pretty much the same thing.

But let's just completely IGNORE that fact, and assume they're different ya? For the sake of the argument.

Firstly, I didn't actually compare sexuality to hygiene, I simply decided to keep using the analogy you introduced, because I THOUGHT it would help you see my point easier.The reason my analogy is weak, is because yours was. You took a one-sided, incomplete definition of tolerance, and used that to represent it as something that isn't enough for the homosexual community, and something different from acceptance. Tolerance isn't only "turning a blind eye". In fact:

tol·er·ance
   [tol-er-uhns] Show IPA
noun
1.a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2.a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3.interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.
4.the act or capacity of enduring; endurance: My tolerance of noise is limited.
5.
Medicine/Medical, Immunology .
a.the power of enduring or resisting the action of a drug, poison, etc.: a tolerance to antibiotics.
b.the lack of or low levels of immune response to transplanted tissue or other foreign substance that is normally immunogenic.

Now... if you'll notice, those first three definitions, are pretty much EXACTLY what we want.. right? Pretty much exactly the way I used the word tolerance too... funny how it even goes so far as to re-word that first definition (my use of the term) 2 more times, before it speaks of "enduring" (or "Turning a blind eye" let's say... ie. your use of the word).

On the other hand we have:

ac·cept·ance
   [ak-sep-tuhns] Show IPA
noun
1.the act of taking or receiving something offered.
2.favorable reception; approval; favor.
3.the act of assenting or believing: acceptance of a theory.
4.the fact or state of being accepted or acceptable.

Hmmm... none of this really seems like it would be that beneficial to the gay community.

With Tolerance, we get:

1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude...freedom from bigotry.: Okay... so no more homophobia...no hate crimes... equal rights... Sounds pretty awesome.
2. interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint: Alright, so people will actually care about our existence... and no more homophobia base don religion. Well this keeps getting better :0
3. the act or capacity of enduring; endurance: My tolerance of noise is limited: Oh ya, and after that's done, those who still don't like us, will "endure" us or "turn a blind eye"... well I dunno... with no homophobia, and equal rights...someone turning a blind eye towards me doesn't seem so bad.

With Acceptance, we get:

1.the act of taking or receiving something offered: Well this doesn't really apply much does it... we're not really offering ourselves to society, we're already here.
2.favorable reception; approval; favor: Oh, here we go.... people will like us. Yay.
3.the act of assenting or believing: acceptance of a theory: Damn. We're not a theory
4.the fact or state of being accepted or acceptable: Okay, here we go right... this is where we get something more than tolerance right?

But what's "accepted" mean? Oh, here it is:
generally approved; usually regarded as normal, right, etc: Well... first of all, its a little silly to think we're "right", as that would have to mean heterosexuality is "wrong" so let's just take that one out now. As far as "normal" goes... who's to say what's normal? It could easily be argued that homosexuals, by their very nature, are not "normal" as "normal" would be finding a partner of the opposite sex to procreate, and further the species.

Well alright... what about "Acceptable"?

ac·cept·a·ble
   [ak-sep-tuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.capable or worthy of being accepted: Alright, that's cool.. but we've already seen how "accepted" can be a pretty vague term... so let's go onto the next definition.

2.pleasing to the receiver; satisfactory; agreeable; welcome. Alright so... Homosexuality is "agreeable", or "welcome"? That doesn't sound so bad I guess... next?

3.meeting only minimum requirements; barely adequate: an acceptable performance: Well shit. that doesn't sound like much fun. I don't want to be barely adequate. Sound shitty. let's see what's left then...

4.capable of being endured; tolerable; bearable: acceptable levels of radiation.
Holy shit!!1 Wait... did they just use a form of the word tolerance to define the word acceptable?!? No way!! AND they used the word Endure!?!? Holy Fuck!! What is going on here? I'm so confused. If the problem with tolerance is that people enduring us isn't enough... why is acceptance better, when being "acceptable" just means "capable of being endured"?

So I guess maybe... Tolerance and Acceptance ARE the same thing after all? Well damn. looks like your whole argument was pretty pointless

that must suck a little.

[/vocabulary lesson]

 

[Musik2400]

Time to pick this one apart... tolerance isn't the same thing as acceptance and I will explain why. Turning a blind eye helps nobody... and is not any way to live. And there is no need to be condescending.

Not really. Definitions change over time, as do words. One word has stronger meaner then the other.

You're right, words do change meaning over time. But that takes a long time (hence why so many people still have a problem with the use of the term "gay" to mean stupid). Words also don't change their meaning simply because you're talking about homos. It doesn't work that way, I'm sorry. If you're so smart, then show me where tolerance even comes close to your weak "turns a blind eye" definition.

My analogy was not weak. I'm didn't take a one-sided incomplete definition of tolerance. Even in the regard of sexuality, tolerance and acceptance are two different matters. Tolerating gays simply isn't enough for anyone, and not even myself.

Funny you say that. I remember you saying

Tolerating could just mean turning a blind eye to someone around you... it has nothing to do with actually accepting and embracing someone.

And have stuck to that one-dimensional definition. You claim tolerance has nothing to do with accepting someone... and yet "tolerate" is used to define the word.

It seems like this is the best one to describe the situation with sexuality. A word can have varying definitions. People can merely tolerate homosexuals, but never really accept them. People can tolerate homosexuals, yet still vote for anti-gay propositions.

2.favorable reception; approval; favor. [/I][/SIZE]

And this seems like the most accurate definition of acceptance when it comes to gays. Why? Because it's the one that fits the best. It doesn't really mean enduring now does it?


You're twisting definitions and words. In the English language, a word can mean more then one thing... but you're just mixing each definition to prove a non-existent case. The only right thing I am talking about is accepting others. I didn't even argue normal so you just went off in a red herring subject.

Bolded: Really!? Wow. You've blown my mind... because to me:
1.a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2.a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3.interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.
kind of means the opposite of that. I mean... I don't know what definition of "Fair" "objective" and "permissive" you want to use here... but I don't think voting to take away someone's rights, could fit any of those definitions... which means it couldn't fit the definition of tolerance. Explain to me how these tolerant people, can act intolerantly in their voting? If they vote for anti-gay propositions they're not tolerant. Simple. Intolerant tolerant people is an oxymoron.

As I mentioned, people will like us. Big whoop. A "favourable reception", "approval" and "favor" aren't enough, and are much less than "tolerance". Really acceptance seems the weaker option, even in your chosen definition of it. I also have yet to "twist" a definition as you accuse. All I've done is lay the definitions out before you, and provide a commentary on them. If that commentary is distracting to you and seems a red herring, that's hardly my fault. I'm simply trying to keep you entertained long enough to focus on the information, and allow it to seep in. Is it working yet?

Your argument is absolutely horrendous and it completely falls apart here. Enduring and barely tolerating someone is simply not any way for anyone to live. Acceptance means: 2.favorable reception; approval; favor. (taking from your own definition list) - This isn't "capable of being endured". Favorable and approval are different then endured.

And you claim I have done the twisting? First of all, I love how this went from "tolerance" to "barely tolerated". I love how you snuck that in there. It makes your post MUCH more convincing. Both enduring, AND tolerating are part of acceptance. Accept it. Tolerate it. Endure the fact that it's true. (psssst. Those mean the same thing ) Plus: Maybe you should read a little more carefully. Nowhere did I claim "acceptance" meant "capable of being endured". I realize I may have gone a little fast for you, so I'll repeat myself.

Acceptance means someone's acceptable, and someone/something that's acceptable can be described as "capable of being endured"

See how that fits together? You skip a step and its not really the same. If you want to talk fallacies, let's talk Straw-Man shall we?

Actually they simply aren't. Tolerance and acceptance are not the same thing and your argument completely collapsed. Next time try not mixing definitions. The English language often employs words that have different meanings. You are trying to take one definition and mixing it with others and that doesn't make any sense.

Wow... condescending as ever. You know what must suck? You not paying attention to the inconsistencies to what you just posted.

I didn't see my argument collapse. i didn't see definitions mix. I saw you dance around, write a little fluff here and there between quoted chunks of my message, and claim to have proven some falsity in my writing. You never pointed out where it falls apart, you simply rely on the same point that:

"Acceptance isn't the same as tolerance. Its better. You're lying cuz you're not using the definitions right. Just cuz its a synonym means nothing their the same. because you can define one using the other means nothing... there still the same"

You have proven nothing. You have twisted my words in order to accuse me of twisting definitions. None of this surprises me. I saw it coming really. It's sad that you can't see it, but I've given up here. I wish I could talk you out of your mixed up backwards definitions, but some people can't be helped.

PS. I tried to tone down my condescending attitude. How'd I do?