LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends


LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends

Nontheist lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex people & friends.

Location: International
Members: 623
Latest Activity: Nov 18

Welcome to Gay / LGBTQI Atheists & friends!

The I in LGBTI

Discussion Forum

Gender Identity and Sustainability

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Oct 26. 0 Replies

Epigenetics and sexual orientation

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Oct 8. 0 Replies

Gaydar doesn't exist and it's bad?

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Daniel W Sep 13. 2 Replies

Homophobia as pathology

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Sep 11. 0 Replies

The Trans Issue

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Denise Deiloh Sep 3. 4 Replies

Does Obama's gay advocacy exclude trans

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Joan Denoo Jun 27. 5 Replies

Betty Bowers on PRIDE

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Daniel W Jun 5. 1 Reply

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of LGBTQI atheists, nontheists, and friends to add comments!

Comment by dr kellie on August 20, 2011 at 7:25pm
Ha, I was just thinking of this on Wednesday night when I had to wear my glasses for a fun night out at the gay bar with my bff.  We were in Fort Worthless, and I totally made out with a girl of a different ethnicity.  Hot!  She said she loved my glasses.  Score!
Comment by Daniel W on August 20, 2011 at 6:30pm
Dallas, you say that on the internet, but face it, in person men don't make passes at men who wear bifocals.
Comment by Daniel W on August 20, 2011 at 11:41am
I have to wear bifocals now.  And even then sometimes it's blurry.
Comment by Grace Fitzpatrick on August 20, 2011 at 11:39am
And you didn't go blind?
Comment by Daniel W on August 20, 2011 at 11:37am
I've seen some of them naked. They deserve pity.
Comment by Grace Fitzpatrick on August 20, 2011 at 10:46am
Nope, if I'm saying I have to put up with something really bad like the KKK, they should have to tolerate some mild ribbing.
Comment by Elyse on August 20, 2011 at 10:18am
Did you just compare "Draw Mo Day" to the KKK?
Comment by Grace Fitzpatrick on August 20, 2011 at 9:53am
I think it's wanting special rights that is the problem.  Muslims want to make it against the law to draw Mohummad while enjoying the heck out of blaspheming of other religions.  Another analogy would be Mormons forcing everyone to go without coffee or any type of caffeine because that is a big no-no for them and making drinking coffee against the law.  All other religious groups (including atheists) have to tolerate jokes about their religion or lack of religion in our case.  Frankly, I have to tolerate the Westboro Baptist Church and KKK rallies rallies which I detest, Muslims have to tolerate draw Mo day.  If they didn't make such a huge deal out of every imagined offense, maybe people would loose interest in drawing Mo.
Comment by Darren Taggart on August 20, 2011 at 2:48am

I get that it was a holocaust joke. I'm not trying to show that it was funny.  Other people's reaction whether light or serious doesn't change the facts or improve their position.  There are lots of very serious priests and lots of very humorous oncologists.

I'm sure that a muslim feels very justified in their real offence; it would be wrong though to think that you or I have a monopoly on what 'justifies' offence; people can choose to take offence at whatever they like.  Holocaust 'humour' is tasteless, I agree, and the extermination of people, whether wasteful or not is clearly horrific.  However the point is that why should people care that something offends you?  You haven't actually been damaged by it, have you?  Presumably you can tell the difference between killing people and joking about it can't you?

I'm certainly not telling holocaust jokes and the only thing I'm taking lightly is vicarious offence; I think it's as ridiculous as vicarious responsibility.

My worry would be that some idiot brings in laws to avoid offence, like the old blasphemy laws we had here.

Comment by Darren Taggart on August 20, 2011 at 12:23am

Hi Sentient, I didn't actually see what caused such offence, but you've hit the nail on the head.  When Muslims see pictures of Mo, they don't like it because it 'trivializes' what's going on in their heads and they expect us to all treat the same things the same.  This is a similar hair trigger thing I think. 

It's the people who take vicarious offence; on behalf of others, who expect the same treatment as those actually affected that are trivializing them.  It's like John Prescott (a Labour Peer) getting all offended that his work phone was hacked expecting the same level of sympathy that Milly Dowler's (Murdered school girl whose phone was hacked) family received.  It smacks of not being able to tell the difference and expecting to be indulged.

I think that a lot of the offendees claiming to be offended to the point where they think people are interested, often have no more been affected by the subject of the 'joke' than the teller.  It might be horrifically bad taste to draw pictures of prophets or whatever, but I'm not sure one can even equate the trivialized memories of an 'offended' 30 year old with the actual suffering of those who went through actual horror. If we gayers pandered to the 'offence' taken by others or took serious offence at all the slights against us, maybe we'd be called Dours!


Although maybe I was out when we all agreed on the list of things we're not allowed to joke about.


But then I worry that (apparently) a lack of empathy is a sign of a sociopath...



Members (620)


© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service