Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
    In terms of any relationship to Objectivism, this story is not newsworthy and probably shouldn't have been posted on this site. However, in that there are few openly gay individuals in pro sports, I can understand SI considering it "news." I applaud him for coming out and applaud SI for giving him a platform to do so in a big way.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
      Why does he need a platform to do so and/or in a big way? This is not an accomplishment, he hasn't beaten any records, scored the winning basket, shot multiple 3 pointers...why is this worthy of SI's attention whatsoever? Open your eyes...it's straight up P.C. feel good bullshit.
      And...is their a list of things we can post on this site that I'm not aware of?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
        I consider myself to be fairly intelligent - the high side of 150 on standard intelligence tests, electrical engineer, published author, patented inventor and small-o objectivist (it's a mode of thought, not a religion). I'm also a 63-year-old gay man. I wasn't always gay, though as far as I can remember, I've been homosexual all my life. But there's nothing "gay" about self-hatred, I was raised in a much-more homophobic time - the 1950s and 1960s, when it was actually illegal to be gay in most states. Well, there are still a lot of people who would like nothing better than to return to the good old days of sodomy laws. I bought into society's homophobia. I tried to change. I tried prayer, attended St. Stephen's Lutheran Church and sang in the choir... and remained attracted to other men. During our involvement in VietNam, when some "straight" young men were claiming to be gay to avoid the draft, I volunteered: maybe the military would "make a man out of me." I served for over 9 years and received an honorable discharge, but was still attracted to men. I got married: "the love of a good woman would straighten me out." All that did was cause a lot of emotional pain for both myself and a woman I really cared about, but wasn't sexually attracted to. It took a lot of time with a good psychologist to get me to accept myself and reject society's judgement. I was over 40 before I became "gay" - which is to say, a homosexual man who is comfortable being one. It's okay to be gay. If you have a problem with it, YOU have a problem, not me. For him to come out so publicly may just save some kid from the self-flaggelation I went through, so I applaud him for doing so and I applaud SI for letting him do it in the pages of their magazine. And no, there's no list of things we can and cannot post, just a mildly-enforced prohibition against "flaming" other posters.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by khalling 13 years, 4 months ago
          I am tuned in on the EE and patents. That tells me something about you. Your struggles in life, well, that's for close friends and family, in my opinion. Everyone has to make their life work. Not reason to make others bend to your life, which you have not said they should do. Applauding his actions-go for it! I have never, ever shouted out to anyone that I am a hetero. I have been clear about my accomplishments.
          finally,
          "And no, there's no list of things we can and cannot post, just a mildly-enforced prohibition against "flaming" other posters. " that is your sense. Please recheck your premises. You are a producer in here, PRODUCE!
          whatever the hell you want to
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
            "I have never, ever shouted out to anyone that I am a hetero." - and didn't need to. Unless you're pretty obvious, people generally assume you're straight. And many assume you'll enjoy a good fag joke. Have you ever had to sit and listen to some jerk put down your sexual orientation because he thinks it's funny, and feel you have to pretend to agree with him or there'll be serious consequences - starting with the loss of employment? Long after it became politically incorrect to tell "Jew jokes" or "Pollack jokes or "Coon jokes" or "Irish jokes" it was still okay to tell "Fag jokes" - and in some circles it still is.
            Finally, there IS, if not an outright prohibition, at least a strong admonishment against "ad hominem attacks" - which is what "flaming other posters" is.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
              I've been called a breeder before. Does that count?
              To your point of "If you have a problem with it, YOU have a problem, not me." statement, the same is true for joke telling. Let that be a reflection on the joke teller, not you. However, everyone has a right to tell whatever jokes they like and laugh at whatever jokes they think are funny (at least the last time I checked freedom of speech was still upheld), whether others find it offensive or not. If tomorrow your boss told you a gay joke that you didn't appreciate how would you handle it? Are there ad hominem attacks in the gulch? Have we "flamed" posters? Are you flaming me?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
                Yes it counts. There's nothing wrong with heterosexuality other than that some heterosexuals (no longer a majority, in my experience) are rather vociferous in their proclamations that ther is something wrong with homosexuality.

                Curiously, my boss hasn't told a "fag joke" since I came out of the closet at work...the day after he gave me a 'walks on water' performance review. Timing is everything. Outside of work, a "fag joke" generally brings a response of "You're perpetuating a stereotype that I know is untrue, because I am one." That has cost me a few "friends" I didn't need, and has strengthened other friendships.

                I have yet to see an objectivist "flame" another poster. The debate may become spirited. Occasionally there is a post which, taken out of context could be construed as such, but in context is just playful teasing between friends. No, the only flame attacks I've seen have been from left-leaning visitors, and have been pretty quickly removed.
                I don't engage in "ad hominem attacks." If you feel I've attacked you, please show me where. I may disagree with a position you've taken. If I can't convince you and you can't convince me, we let reality be the final arbiter.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
                  I didn't think you attacked me I thought you maybe misunderstood me ("if you have a problem then YOU have the problem not me".) I thought perhaps that was "flaming", before I understood what that meant. Here's the thing... the gay guys that I know always seem to be in a fit that they can't convince everyone to accept them and they get very in-your-face with others over it...which is NOT going to convince anyone of anything that believes differently...and people do have a right to believe what they think is right...and they have a right to fight for what they believe. All parties. So I get annoyed with that aspect of it. Why waste the time on those who are NOT going to think the same way? Which is also what I believe about people who refuse, or are too lazy, or don't care to learn about freedom...and how we're losing it daily and how that will ultimately affect everyone. If they have proven to be unwilling to seek reason then I have no time for them. They are a zero. Not worth the effort or energy. I will keep an eye out for those who aren't sheep and talk to them instead. As difficult as it is find them.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by $ EitherOr 13 years, 4 months ago
            So kh, how do you separate John's material accomplishments in engineering from his intellectual struggle against (and eventual win over) the pervading societal beliefs of the 50s and 60s? I can think of one specific industrialist who was great with business but tried to conform to society's image of what he should be. It took him a couple years (and a few hundred pages) to stand up for himself, but when he finally did he came out stronger for it. And I'd say that makes him a better producer.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by khalling 13 years, 4 months ago
              eitheror,
              we all undergo struggles. seriously, if you want to look at champions from a sausage making perspective-go for it. You own yourself. I do not walk around giving people ticker tape parades over coming into that concept. enlighten me. move me forward. tweeting an "out" gets me nowhere I haven't already gone . shoot, there are huge philosophical challenges in the world. Science! Philosophy! History! your sexual struggles? your relationship hassles? the world turns
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ EitherOr 13 years, 4 months ago
                kh - I agree. coming out is a hot issue right now, but the newsworthiness of it is quickly fading. People will deal with it independently in their own lives.
                But I wasn't talking about smal, anecdotal relationship issues or sexual struggles. I meant the idea of a person trusting his or her own mind over the current beliefs of a society. That takes a bit of conviction, and is an accomplishment whether the issue is homosexuality, capitalism, racism, etc. An intellectual struggle over fundamental beliefs makes for a stronger, more intelligent person who is more valuable to society (should this person choose to produce).
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
          I didn't feel like replying to this before...but now I do. I seems like you're seeking approval. Your accomplishments, though impressive, have nothing to do with being gay. I think you misunderstand me. I don't care if a person is gay or straight...what bothers me is the in-your-face announcements that would NEVER be tolerated if the rolls were reversed. This is no longer the 1950's and people just don't care if a person is gay or not. Why is it even a topic? It's a NON issue. Many people, from all walks of life, have the difficult task of growing up and discovery who they are as a person, an individual, what they stand for, what they won't stand for, what will they accomplish in life etc. I only have one question. When did you read Atlas Shrugged and how did it change your life? (Okay, so that was a 2 part question.)
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
            I don't need your approval, or anyone else's. I'd like equal treatment under the law. That situation is improving, but we're not there yet. As far as someone announcing that he or she is straight, it happens pretty frequently when someone is, rightly or wrongly, accused of being gay. In most cases it's unnecessary: you're assumed to be straight unless there is some evidence to the contrary. It's true that today most people don't care, but the ones who do care, like the Reverend Phelps, are pretty vocal.
            About 20 years ago, a Libertarian friend pointed me toward Atlas Shrugged, and specifically toward John Galt's speech. But he admonished me to avoid Ms. Rand's other works, especially her non-fiction. After reading Atlas Shrugged - and thoroughly enjoying it, I tackled The Fountainhead, Anthem and We the Living. Once I ran out of her fiction, I went to work on her non-fiction. It all made sense! A lot more sense than any other philosopher I'd ever read. But it didn't so much change my life as provide me the philosophical grounding to understand my life: my feeling that altruism was wrong (charity is right and I can afford to give, but to allow someone else to decide how much and to whom is evil) and that government had grown too large and too intrusive... and too corrupt. My Libertarian friend was a bit embarrassed, because I finally realized what the Libertarians' problem is and why Ms. Rand was so dismissive of them: they had adopted her politics without bothering to study the philosophical underpinings.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
              What equal treatment under the law are you not getting?
              Who gives a shit about Rev Phelps?
              When you're sitting in a room/party (whatever) with a bunch of people who don't know, are you thinking who's gay or straight? I'm always thinking, I wonder who in here has a brain worth picking. I rarely find one worth it. :(
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
                Equal treatment under the law - I'm talking the "gay marriage" issue here, but I come at it a different way. Marriage has traditionally been a religious function. Government should butt out. The only way government should deal with marriage is as a contractual living arrangement, and gay couples in a long-term, committed relationship should have the right to establish the same sort of contract. If they wish to be married, I know of more than one denomination willing to perform the service and include among my friends a number of gay couples who are married in the eyes of their religious denomination but not in the ever-watchful eye of the government.
                With the failure of government to recognize my long-term committed relationship, if I were to die, my worthless brother would have more claim to my property than my lover of 20 years. If I'm sick and in the hospital, my sister has visitation rights unavailable to my lover, Little things like that.

                I doubt anyone in here on a regular basis gives a shit about Rev. Phelps. But he does have some pretty vociferous (I love that word) supporters. For evil to triumph, it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.

                While I'm rarely in a room or at a party with a bunch of people I don't know, I'm with you on that.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  -
                • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
                  We're probably going to butt heads here. First, I agree that the government shouldn't be mixed in with marriage. I think legal rights (contracts etc) should be the same no matter what....for inheritance, etc. Here's where I run into a problem though. Marriage already has a definition and I don't think we should change it. Gay marriage is not the same as straight marriage (don't blow her stack). Crudely put, straight marriage (or relationships), keep the human race going..so they shouldn't be named the same thing. All the legal benefits should be the same, just give it a new name. That is my one and only issue...to not change the definition of marriage.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    -
                  • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
                    Crudely put, sex keeps the human race going... and (I expect) was around a few years before the institution of marriage. If the rearing of children must be included in the definition of marriage, does the government then step in and annul those straight marriages which, whether by choice or because of medical problems, do not produce children? If so, how long should the government wait for this proof that the marriage is valid?
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
                      "Crudely put, straight marriage (or relationships), keep the human race going.." Notice I said also "relationships". Hetero relations are not the same as gay relations. One has the possibility of making another human and one does not. They are not the same and should not call them the same. Even if children do not happen, for whatever reasons, it does not then make it the same as a gay relationship. And of course the government shouldn't get or be involved in any of it.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
          "Flaming other posters".... what's that mean? And who did it?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by John_Emerson 13 years, 4 months ago
            "Flaming other posters".... what's that mean? Ad Hominem attacks - when you disagree with someone but can't refute what he says, attack his character or personality.

            And who did it? - it's pretty common among the left-leaning visitors who come to these boards just to try to disrupt them. Most of those posts get removed fairly quickly. (tip of the cap to Mr. Desapio & Co.)
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 4 months ago
              I know what Ad Hominem means lol I didn't know what "flaming others" meant. You will find the gulch doesn't have much of a problem with that. We are usually well reasoned but enjoy a good debate (and occasionally get goofy for fun's sake), but the best part is, or so I think, is that we speak our minds without worrying if others agree or not. We have all found our way here because we are like minded. The others get voted down to the point of being covered with an invisibility cloak of sorts. :) I don't visit other (left leaning or otherwise) sites, but I have heard that it's all name calling and little true conversation. But that kind of sums up the left in a nutshell.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 13 years, 4 months ago
    The prez just talked about this guy this morning in his news conference. He's so proud of him. Of course the prez knows nothing about the state departments muzzling of whistle blowers on Benghazi. I guess he has his priorities.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ EitherOr 13 years, 4 months ago
    First is always newsworthy. That's what they teach us kids in journalism school anyway.
    Apparently this guy is the "first active male athlete in a top-four American sport to publicly say he's gay." Pair that with the supreme court currently reviewing DOMA and... bam. news.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo