Why are gays the one privileged sexual minority? Suppose a fetishist proposed marriage on a school sign in a way that revealed his/her sexuality? "Mandy, will you marry me so that we can don our plushie duds and march off toward the sunset?" or "Tom, slap on your leathers and grab your whip. I want you to tie me to the bed and flog me as long as I live! To that end, let's get hitched. I'll even be your ponygirl."
I don't get why a very easy concept, such as equality for all people living in the United States, is a hard concept for people to understand. This is suppose to be one of the core values of our citizens.
For the above posters who for whatever reason want to distract from this very core point, I really hope you take some time this holiday season to develop your sense of empathy and goodwill towards others. People like you make me want to stay in bed all day.
Dear Cat & Beard, that is your opinion, but I'm sure many fetishists would tell you that they felt their fetish from their earliest sexual beginnings. And, why are you so prejudiced against fetishists, anyway, that you feel they don't deserve equal rights?
@Amanda: it's not about disclosing every particular facet of your sex life (no matter how central it might be to one's identity) in a public proposal, it's about allowing gay/straight people (be they vanilla or kinky) to not have to hide their sexual orientation. To your point, I'd be equally unimpressed with the case of someone saying, "Mandy, will you marry me so that we can have boring missionary sex once a month and march off toward the sunset?" Disclosing the sexual minutiae is orthogonal to the larger issue.
...unless you want to make the case for someone who wants to marry their feather handcuffs, I think Fruit Cup is right in having your argument pegged (ha HA!) as little more than a distraction.
No, I bet the thoughts "how would this play out if we were gay?" and "How will this action be viewed by our gay peers?" never crossed their minds. We can argue about whether or not *that's* okay, but to say that they did it to actively gloat to gay people is preposterous. Obliviousness, probably.... But to imply that there was any sort of forethought with regards to how this action would be perceived symbolically by the queer community is ridiculous.
For the above posters who for whatever reason want to distract from this very core point, I really hope you take some time this holiday season to develop your sense of empathy and goodwill towards others. People like you make me want to stay in bed all day.
...unless you want to make the case for someone who wants to marry their feather handcuffs, I think Fruit Cup is right in having your argument pegged (ha HA!) as little more than a distraction.
What if they afterwards they wanted to rob banks?
What if after THAT they carved their portraits in the moon with a laser!?!
In conclusion: best elementary school ever!
No, I bet the thoughts "how would this play out if we were gay?" and "How will this action be viewed by our gay peers?" never crossed their minds. We can argue about whether or not *that's* okay, but to say that they did it to actively gloat to gay people is preposterous. Obliviousness, probably.... But to imply that there was any sort of forethought with regards to how this action would be perceived symbolically by the queer community is ridiculous.