Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

It's official, the UK is the gayest nation in Europe! Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blazar)
    Because we generally think of Europe as being progressive in comparison to other areas of the world, but this map highlights the fact that even in Europe, some countries are shockingly behind on the implementation of basic human rights.
    I'm from the eastern side of Europe and it's a nightmare. Everyone is a racist, an anti-Semite and a homophobe on some subconscious level, the only exceptions being the urban liberal types which account for less than 1% of the populations of these countries.

    When people say Europe is progressive they think of Western Europe. They couldn't think of anything else since most people couldn't even point to Romania on the map, certainly not Western Europeans.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    I do actually think that on balance, UK is the most progressive and tolerant country in the world, lets keep it that way.
    So did I, until I looked at some of our index rankings :erm:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ucki)
    It's probably just a joke. I used to live in Slovakia and you know what? Some people there are now trying to organise a referendum to prevent LGB people from ever getting registered partnerships or marriages. Slovakia: 31%, Czech Republic: 34%. Well... it has been now many years that Czech gay people have registered partnerships and now they are even considering marriages and something very similar to adoptions. This map is ****!
    Interesting, thanks for the local insights :borat:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    I briefly dated a Czech girl at one point..

    Spoiler:
    Show
    ..and I have to say, she was very liberal :sexface:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Foo.mp3)
    Interesting, thanks for the local insights :borat:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    I briefly dated a Czech girl at one point..

    Spoiler:
    Show
    ..and I have to say, she was very liberal :sexface:
    And pretty, wasn't she? Czech and Slovak girls are really hot - and I'm saying it as a gay.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ucki)
    And pretty, wasn't she?
    Certainly carried her own 'unique appeal' :sexface:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Foo.mp3)
    Certainly carried her own 'unique appeal' :sexface:

    Spoiler:
    Show

    Impressive.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    we still only recognise 42 sexes
    42 sexes!?

    we still don't demand people give more gender options than just male/female on forms
    That would be both contrary to conventional conceptions/norms as well as anti-democratic, not to mention darn right confusing! :confused:

    we still don't take LGBT persecution into much consideration when considering asylum
    This is indeed pretty awful, although naturally we should also be encouraging host nations to adopt more healthy cultures, and neighbouring states with more progressive regimes to absorb the persecuted parties

    society here is still incredibly homophobic and sexist
    Agreed
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blazar)
    Because we generally think of Europe as being progressive in comparison to other areas of the world, but this map highlights the fact that even in Europe, some countries are shockingly behind on the implementation of basic human rights.
    I'm not sure we do - pretty sure most (adults) conceive of former Eastern Bloc countries as being rather more 'backwards' than their West European counterparts, n'est pas? :beard:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    they don't even live in our village...or in our country!
    Only gay in the village? :mmm:

    certainly a lot more tolerant than probably most/every other countries in terms of both legislation and the general attitude of everyday people
    Sure, but not as accepting as some people/such stats, might have us believe, methinks :beard:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    The methodology is still unclear and it'd be great if they could represent things in formats other than terrible infographics with meaningless percentages.

    The UK is, compared to other countries, fantastic for LGBT rights, but we do also still have a long way to go. We still have the spousal veto, we still only recognise 42 sexes, we still don't demand people give more gender options than just male/female on forms, we still don't take LGBT persecution into much consideration when considering asylum, and most of all our society doesn't always reflect our legislation. Ours statutes reflect LGBT right ok, but society here is still incredibly homophobic and sexist; it's much better in the university bubble but LGBT friends I have who have graduated and not decided to live in London realise how lucky they've been for the past 3-4 years.
    How on earth are there 42 sexes?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dr Pesto)
    How on earth are there 42 sexes?
    I think it's a typo, pretty sure they meant 2 haha.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dr Pesto)
    How on earth are there 42 sexes?
    (Original post by james1211)
    I think it's a typo, pretty sure they meant 2 haha.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    No, no. I meant 42 recognised intersexes. There's more than just male/female: http://oiiuk.org/752/intersex-faq/

    (Original post by Foo.mp3)
    42 sexes!?

    That would be both contrary to conventional conceptions/norms as well as anti-democratic, not to mention darn right confusing! :confused:

    This is indeed pretty awful, although naturally we should also be encouraging host nations to adopt more healthy cultures, and neighbouring states with more progressive regimes to absorb the persecuted parties

    Agreed
    Yes, it would be contrary to conventional conceptions/norms - that's the point. Being gay used to be considered against conventional conceptions/norms. It's not anti-democratic to ensure people's sex and gender can be fully recognised, especially if you're a public body for example.

    I agree - we totally should be encouraging host nations to do more. However it's pretty difficult to convince a state like Russia's that they shouldn't have laws which restrict 'preaching homosexuality' (as if this is even a thing), which in practice means the police beat you for being gay and vigilante groups are set up to trap you and degrade, humiliate, and assault you for your sexuality. It is precisely the LGBT people in such countries that we should be trying to protect and bring into a culture which we do have a direct say in and which we can make welcoming to people from all walks of life.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    No, no. I meant 42 recognised intersexes. There's more than just male/female: http://oiiuk.org/752/intersex-faq/



    Yes, it would be contrary to conventional conceptions/norms - that's the point. Being gay used to be considered against conventional conceptions/norms. It's not anti-democratic to ensure people's sex and gender can be fully recognised, especially if you're a public body for example.

    I agree - we totally should be encouraging host nations to do more. However it's pretty difficult to convince a state like Russia's that they shouldn't have laws which restrict 'preaching homosexuality' (as if this is even a thing), which in practice means the police beat you for being gay and vigilante groups are set up to trap you and degrade, humiliate, and assault you for your sexuality. It is precisely the LGBT people in such countries that we should be trying to protect and bring into a culture which we do have a direct say in and which we can make welcoming to people from all walks of life.
    Well I only recognise two. I'm sorry but you're either male or female. You can call yourself whatever you like, go for it, but it doesn't make you that.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by james1211)
    Well I only recognise two. I'm sorry but you're either male or female. You can call yourself whatever you like, go for it, but it doesn't make you that.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So someone who is born with both a penis and a vagina is classed as what to you?

    On a purely biological basis, not everybody can be categorised as male/female. But hey, let's not let science get in the way of things.

    The issue of self-identification compounds this of course, and leads onto gender being more than just man/woman.

    Of course what I'd argue here is that it's actually not necessary to classify people by their sex. I mean, if you go to the doctor's because you think you've found a lump in your testicle, your issue isn't male-specific, it's testicle-specific. At times this actually causes more harm than good, such as the surprisingly common perception that only perceived women should check their breasts; everyone with breasts should check them.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    Being gay used to be considered against conventional conceptions/norms
    This is true, but then binary sexuality is far more easily/readily comprehended/accepted by the masses than a multiplicity of more complex/nuanced genders/orientations. It's like people putting 'Jedi' down as their religion - one may chose to identify in 'weird and wonderful' ways but "ain't no-one ever gon' take you seriously boy" :bandit:

    It's not anti-democratic to ensure people's sex and gender can be fully recognised, especially if you're a public body for example
    It's antidemocratic if it is against the will of the people. Gay marriage went through relatively smoothly because it has popular support, from a presumed/polled majority, for example. Further inroads will likely need quasi-democratic backing methinks, now we are into a populist era of anti-PC, anti-liberal Westminster elite, and anti-top down policy

    It is precisely the LGBT people in such countries that we should be trying to protect and bring into a culture which we do have a direct say in and which we can make welcoming to people from all walks of life
    Agreed, provided every effort is made to do the other things I mentioned. Moscow is 1,500 miles from London, I'm not sure we should be their first port of call really, judging by that map t'would seem there are plenty of other relatively decent places they could go to along the way! :nyan:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    So someone who is born with both a penis and a vagina is classed as what to you?

    On a purely biological basis, not everybody can be categorised as male/female. But hey, let's not let science get in the way of things.

    The issue of self-identification compounds this of course, and leads onto gender being more than just man/woman.

    Of course what I'd argue here is that it's actually not necessary to classify people by their sex. I mean, if you go to the doctor's because you think you've found a lump in your testicle, your issue isn't male-specific, it's testicle-specific. At times this actually causes more harm than good, such as the surprisingly common perception that only perceived women should check their breasts; everyone with breasts should check them.
    Penis/vagina doesn't determine gender, chromosomes are. There are very few people that have chromosomes that differ from the XX/XY set and these don't really need defined in my opinion, they're neither gender.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    When people say Europe is progressive they think of Western Europe
    Correctamundo
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    So someone who is born with both a penis and a vagina is classed as what to you?
    Whichever is functioning more fully + whichever theme dominates their physical and psychological makeup + whichever they feel more like

    On a purely biological basis, not everybody can be categorised as male/female. But hey, let's not let science get in the way of things
    What proportion of the population does science tell us this relates to? :beard:

    The issue of self-identification compounds this of course, and leads onto gender being more than just man/woman
    Only in the minds of those whom subscribe to a spectrum, and most people do not subscribe to this view

    At times this actually causes more harm than good, such as the surprisingly common perception that only perceived women should check their breasts; everyone with breasts should check them
    True

    Spoiler:
    Show
    Note to self: Must check moobs more often
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by james1211)
    Penis/vagina doesn't determine gender, chromosomes are. There are very few people that have chromosomes that differ from the XX/XY set and these don't really need defined in my opinion, they're neither gender.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    This tbh.

    You can identify with whichever gender you like, I have no problem with folks being transgender and having surgery to imitate the opposite gender to themselves, but fact is biologically you're either male or female, okay very very veeeery rare cases there might be some oddity, in which case you could have a third category I suppose, but bar that no.

    If you want...

    Biological sex/gender : Male

    Identify as: Female/Male/Bigender/Genderless

    I suppose that could work.


    There are a lot of so called "genders" in the LGBT community but honestly I think a lot of them are reaching just to try and give some sort of behaviour an arbitrary designation. I mean Bi-gender for example, you identify with both genders and fluctuate between "male" and "female" behaviours. Now that's a psychological trait, that has no impact on your biological gender. if I was a Bi-sexual who at times dressed as I do now, but at other times preferred to dress as a woman and act rather more feminine, that wouldn't indicate having a new gender in my eyes, I am at a base level a male, even if I dislike that. I mean sure they can refer to themselves as Bi-gender in day to day life when the discussion comes up if they so wish, but on a passport? 42 potential "genders"? That's completely unrealistic and honestly ridiculous and I'd bet the majority of those who actually identify as unusual genders would agree. It's just not necessary, it's like those middle class white folks who decide to be offended on behalf of ethnic minorities/religious over issues where the actual minority themselves are saying "err..we're not complaining?".

    I mean if important aspects of your sexuality (since that's really what these sort of issues often are) have enough weight as to impact things like your passport and other official documentation, then I suppose there should be a section for you to pick a sexual paraphilia if you happen to have one? I mean I wouldn't particularly want the world to know my unusual kinks, but I guess I should have the recognition?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Moved to this thread so as not to derail t’other one

    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    (1) I don't expect someone to be a fan
    Good to know, but there are those out there who are: A) Pro-gay (agenda); B) Talk about ‘gay pride’ (inference being that being gay is something to be proud of e.g. a good thing, a badge of honour). I am not such a person, was the point I was making, and hence I am not beating the drum for homosexuality in critiquing Islamic doctrine/dogma with regard to homosexuals

    I expect indifference
    Perhaps one day we’ll get there

    (2) Homosexuality is natural because homosexuality occurs without human interference; occurs within nature
    What I conceive of as ‘natural’ is what is the norm, in nature, among homo sapiens (particularly pre-sedantarism) and comparable primate species a la behaviours surrounding our biological raison d’être (impetus to procreate)

    (3) Why should we appeal to nature?
    I am a pragmatist/realist, so our essential beings, and purpose, (ecologically thriving and surviving) is of primary concern to me (extends to concerns over human mental/physical health, animal welfare, and the environment). Also, my understanding of human (psycho)physiology inclines me to believe that (normal) individuals are (naturally) programmed to have the urge to mate with a virile/fertile partner with whom they may conceive life. Were this not to be the case then a given species would become extinct (pre-advent of central planning + UVF etc)

    I suppose hospitals must be bad
    Medical procedures that support life, especially those that work with some of nature’s miracles in the healing stakes, are very much congruent with the personal philosophy I have touched on above. I am quite the liberal use of synthetic/chemical agents btw, and think the pharmaceutical industry is gross

    rape can be good .. cannibalism can be good
    Many species exhibit forced sex and/or cannibalism, it’s true, but I’m not convinced this is/was particularly pervasive among pre-linguistic/societal homo sapiens groups and bands of comparable primate species really

    charitable work must be bad
    You could argue that the capitalistic systems in which the demand for charitable work has been created are, themselves, abominations of the laws of nature

    (5) Homosexuality is statistically abnormal but I see little reason as to why we should appeal to normality?
    That’s a question for you, not for me. I’m abnormal in a number of respects myself, and do not feel the need to appeal to normality/win anyone’s approval for my ‘different’ life choices

    There are clearly connotations to the word "abnormal"
    Depends on the kind of society you live in e.g. one that embraces/works with/protects/celebrates ‘diversity’ vs. a bigoted environment. Generally speaking, ‘difference’ (from the norm) only becomes problematic when it is viewed as some kind of threat and is allowed to become a basis for division

    (6) How fast the change has taken place is irrelevant to these issues
    I’m afraid you’re wrong, as normative transition/the normalisation of unusual (psychological) behaviours is, inherently, a phasic phenomenon (contingent on a shift from social stigma to broad acceptance/tolerance in the context of human nature coloured by stubborn quirks of behavioural psychology such as conditioning, imprinting, and loss aversion)

    (7) There is an excess of children who haven't been adopted and I would have thought life outside of adoption would generally be better
    I would have thought so too, but I would prefer to pilot gay adoption rather than simply rolling the dice where the welfare of large numbers of vulnerable/disadvantaged children at delicate stages of development is concerned

    a) How would same-sex parenting be worse than opposite-sex parenting?
    b) and how would same-sex parenting be worse than being in foster care?
    c) On those points, what are your thoughts on single parenting?
    It wouldn’t, necessarily (as above), be any worse but I have my reservations about:

    A) Development in the absence of clear masculine and feminine role models (not limited to gay adoption e.g. see awful outcomes for children a la fatherless crisis)

    B) The suitability of a large portion of people within the LGBT community regarding the provision of safe, stable, and secure parenting environments

    Spoiler:
    Show
    (unfortunately I can’t go into detail here as it would be considered upsetting/offensive but suffice to say it relates to my personal experience with many members of this community and fairly intimate knowledge of the various demons that they face)

    Same-sex parenting would I presume be better than single parenting, and single parenting foster care because in same-sex parenting, there are two adults, twice as many possible hours, perhaps twice as many incomes
    Unfortunately there is more to healthy parenting than hands on deck, time and money

    (8) Note: Marriage can be a non-religious institution; marriage even predates religion
    'Marriage' can be a game of ping pong on a Mars space station for all I care. In my country, founded on Judeo-Christian moral/institutional tenets, I would have liked to have thought that it was a sacrosanct, life long union of a man and a woman that paves the way, ideally, for the creation of a stable, secure, loving environment in which to raise a family

    marriage gives tax reductions
    So does civil partnership

    marriage gives better hospital visitation rights to one's partner
    So does civil partnership

    marriage is a milestone in many relationships and an intrinsic part of culture and society, don't cha think?
    Yes, and we are, traditionally speaking and for the time being at least, not a homosexual culture and society I’m afraid

    A priest can even legally refuse to conduct a marriage in the UK, making it pro-conscience
    Sure, until the EU or some other barmy body with a warped sense of progressivist zeal decides otherwise

    I don't see why legalising these things, even rapidly, is an issue
    In short: social friction vs. sustainability. Egalitarianism is best sustained by measured changes. The failure of state multiculturalism is a fantastic example of how spectacularly wrong things can go if you rush them

    (9) How many schools have done "gay" (ugh, not such a thing) sex education?
    I have no idea but am aware that those supporting positive same-sex 'guidance' are gaining traction centrally

    (11) About 50% of people who say they aren't 100% straight, perhaps it's because they believe they're only like 90% or 95% because they can recognise what's conventionally attractive and are getting confused?
    Standalone stats like that must be carefully interpreted, for sure. For further info, see the source | Youguv
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.