Are homosexuals different values \u200b\u200bthan heterosexuals? Does it make the acquisition of civil rights for that group to subvert the values have advanced society?
These two questions remain dormant in the exchange of views, for me, always interesting and didactic emerged Luis H. Arroyo, on the notebook Arena, who lives up to those words of Hayek said that "an economist is a good economist should know not only of Economics."
As always, in an exchange of views will marginalize the matches to sink his teeth into the discrepancies, an attitude far more honest and fruitful than the gush watermelons in making mutual ball matches. I'm in wide disagreement with some of the statements of Louis and all with what can be derived from two or three points of view remains, but try to go step by step without neglecting any aspect of the debate. HOMOSEXUAL EXHIBICIONIST
In my last entry and made clear that the exhibition is not only gay but it is much less tolerated for obvious reasons:
1) is less suggestive Because the majority of the population, is heterosexual.
2) Because it has traditionally been much more frequent exhibitionism heterosexual (and still is, there is more to do advertising, film, TV series ...) so that there is a social grounds or species "street" culture that sees the permanent display of heterosexuality as something endemic to the social landscape.
3) Because homosexual exhibitionism is much more aggressive, due precisely to the situation of concealment and from discrimination against gays. It's like if you suddenly have to "catch up" and revenge against those who discriminated against them or see them with prejudice as if to say "I know you hated, because I'll have to endure for noses." But this is predicated only a minority of the gay community, but unfortunately its image projected on the majority.
Luis says he has recently "discovered" by the comment of Violante Cabral not bother you but private sexual proclivities public exhibitionism. It seemed to me obvious that this was the case (like many to tell me more or less intensity), so I used the quotes as discovered. But it is obvious that Louis, like most everyone (including me) will spend much more inadvertent exhibitionism heterosexual constant and pervasive and / or he / bothers us less.
Moreover, I have not even read a single sentence Luis acknowledging what seems to me obvious: the rides ranging in Gay Pride, nor are all gay and all gays are in the parade. needed until exhaustion that most homosexuals are not trumpeting their status, not because they are ashamed of it but because they consider it a personal issue and are increasingly more wary and weary carnival and totalitarian drift from the gay community (the close to power, by the way). I think it is essential to discuss this as often as needed, precisely so that the germ totalitarian Luis rightly denounces the lobbies gay count on a victory that will not be allowed: we consider that they are all homosexuals that represent them all, that there are no homosexuals do not think at all as they do. We usually make this exception elemental with the nationalists and the inhabitants of regions that aspire to bullying, why not do it with a group much more fragmented as it can not be derived from a specific geographical area?
Moreover, against the vice of the exhibition is the virtue of indifference or "did not look." I have gone several years to see the monotonous and politicized (by liberals) Gay Pride parade with a mixture of curiosity and bewilderment. When I got tired of seeing famosillos (all of the sect of "Zeja") and half-naked bodies swaying to the music maquinera (and is easy to get bored quickly because time is all the same) I left the mess with my friends and we went to bars, either at or adjacent Chueca. I prefer that kind of wiggles occur in situations much more intimate and more of my music taste. I understand that
lobbyists have achieved a level of presence that is tiresome, but never as today we have so many entertainment possibilities that allow us to disconnect from the fields of social reality that we are weary. But the Gay Pride Day has long since led to a new excuse that this society is given to break the routine for a few hours and if it is crowded is not meeting the many homosexuals but heterosexuals attending / came, even occasionally, in the company of friends or couples, to a place where you know there's more partying than normal. As mentioned earlier, has more to do with the hedonism that the gay movement, the first is an even broader power than the latter.
FREEDOM AND MIGRATION
addition, Luis I made an interesting comment that I would say. In my previous post and the replies to the replies, I mentioned that today, despite no official discrimination, persists in many areas a clear homophobic prejudice (hopefully Pio Moa not scold us for using the word happy, but I doubt they would go through this blog, sorry ... for him, of course). This causes a migration of people into larger villages looking for comfort and freedom that just drifting in the establishment of districts like Chueca or Gayxample. Luis said this:
[...] and finally, on the migration of people is not the first time to seek freedom in the city, the cradle of her. In a village not pretend to take the cosmopolitan ways, neither this nor any. The fate of anyone who points out, whatever, good or bad, is long. Ghetto And they further their own! parades, carnivals , neighborhoods taken (not that they have been held there ...) but please, is that Chueca is a ghetto! I compare this with the Jewish ghettos , Carlos, please.
At no time Chueca I wanted to compare the Warsaw Ghetto or another of that ominous kind, of course. I'm sorry if something similar has been derived from my use of the word "ghetto" (I give great importance to this explanation, which he considered unnecessary, for my personal appreciation to the Jewish people), but I think Luis exaggerates a little. He recognizes something that we agree: the more freedom inherent in large cities, which also recognizes that if there are places where homosexuality is still difficulty in developing who feels vital. About
the ghetto is fostered by its own members, I think they should clarify that it is easier to settle in a place where there are more people like you, as happens to Latin Americans, the Maghreb, the Romanian ... Has a positive side, it can accelerate the integration process without too many traumas, and negative, is that too much social isolation of that group getting just the opposite effect, a lack of integration that may eventually become a series of conflicts that are much worse. The examples are numerous French outer suburbs. In the case of homosexuals, it has nothing to do, there is a language barrier or cultural, usually not economical (in fact, Chueca has become a neighborhood "good" after being taken as "urban site" of the gay community before it was quite complicated and a neighborhood with high crime rates). By the way, a fact for reflection and to shift Zerolo irritates them a lot and try to hide it: in the district of Chueca, wins the elections the PP, not by much.
And again, the words of Luis "The ghetto foster it themselves" is a generalization very much in the lobbies roses. There are homosexuals who do not want to live in such neighborhoods precisely because they want their residence is a "social bookmarking" of their condition sexual.
THE "SECURITIES GAY"
But the question I think is most relevant comment Luis, is given in the following lines:
gay Whose values? What are? Does this imply that there are some "heterosexual values" opposed? But I, as a heterosexual, I acknowledge my ignorance of the latter. Do personal values \u200b\u200bare determined by their sex?
A parent homo will do everything to be proud of your child a, and homosexuals will inevitably inculcate values. I can not imagine a parent hetero encourage homosexuality (though resigned to accept if your child is). Let's see: You're confusing the terms. And do not deny the right to exercise the inclination which nature has given him, but then to think that adoption is guai, is an abyss.
Luis reading these lines, it seems obvious that some gay parents will want their child to inherit their sexual orientation. I do not doubt that there will be, but unless you see homosexuality as negative, this should not be worrying. I think it's easier than some gay parents, who may have suffered by their orientation, are more respectful of your child's sexual orientation to what the company was under the guidance of them sexual. It is common to all parents want for their offspring a better world than they have been around. This is not always true, of course, but it is a proven trend. As is that of heterosexual parents are born and raised gay children. O children of honest parents dishonest, or vice versa (this is more difficult because it is always easier to spread evil, but unless we considered and clearly negative to homosexuality should not worry.)
addition, Luis can not imagine a parent hetero promoting homosexuality, thus, suggests that not imagine a gay foster father in his son's heterosexuality. What I see is that neither imagine a parent who does not encourage and instill a particular sexuality on their children but tries to encourage freedom of choice, whether "rational" or following the irrational instincts child.
I am not a father and Luis it is, so I must be extremely careful because I do not want to believe that I make the audacity to comment on its performance as a father, something which I would not and also I have no reason to doubt of its good performance, quite the contrary. But what I mean, I do not believe that all heterosexual parents "resigned acceptance of homosexuality in your child if there is" , and here I can speak from experience because I know cases where parents have supported their children when they have "come out", not with joy by his homosexuality and resignation, but excited by the more or less free election of his son.
I do not think that being heterosexual has to have certain values \u200b\u200bthan those that would be homosexual . My values \u200b\u200bare confined to classical liberalism with a touch, sometimes very intense (I would like to be eclectic) of more modern authors, even today. If a "value heterosexual" is to consider homosexuality a disgrace, not prosecuted and respectable, but a disgrace to the end of the day, declined to partake of this "value heterosexual." categorically deny that my sexual condition suppose that my ideology is determined by my all hormonal reactions. Among other things because that would mean that my beliefs would changeable with a particular drug treatment , for example, hormonación needed to acquire female physical characteristics (hormonación conducting transgender men who are born women). That option to exchange ideas with drugs, it seems more typical of a futuristic nightmare novel of Aldous Husley and all my reason rebels against it.
Luis
This makes me consider "rational" something we do not consider pejorative (something different is to be "hyperrationalism" I guess that's what he meant.) Then he made interesting comments on the irrational basis of society, Hayek and von Mises. Issues on which I would return in a future post, interesting and because he and I have stayed too long, so I apologize.
Greetings.
0 comments:
Post a Comment