jsbrook and brad seem to have a good handle on things. As a psychology student, though, I wanted to clarify some of the misinformation or misrepresentation of some facts in this thread.
(a)The “Homophobe aroused by gay stuff” study. It is true that the study found that homophobic men were aroused by viewing gay images (non-homophobic persons showed no responce), the study does not actually conclude that this means that homophobic mean are homosexual. An alternative explaination for their arousal could stem from the anxiety induced by having to view gay imagery. There are a number of studies which link anxiety to arousal. This could be the reason, or it could be something entirely different. The ONLY thing the study concluded was that homophobic men are aroused by gay images. It does not prove any reason why thats true.
(b)Impressionability: The arguement that college aged persons are any more impressionable than, say, a 30 year old is unfounded.
(c) lucasa: “Gay culture is a misnomer of promiscuity.” This is actually not the case. There are large parts of gay culture that actually have very little to do with sex at all. For example, one aspect of gay culture is simply word choice and vernacular. You go on to claim that gay culture is unlike, say, black or american culture because not all gay people partake in gay culture. You’re correct in saying that not all gay people do, but not all black people partake in black culture either. Its entirely possible to be “part” of a group genetically/physically, but not actually participate in the culture. And just because some do not participate does not mean the culture is nonexistant.
I’m betting what this course examines are the ways in which certain segment of homosexuals (mostly white, mostly urban, mostly affluent) create their own rites of passage, not unlike heterosexuals.
As far as leftists in college go; first off, most Republicans aren’t the least bit interested in dealing with the crappy pay - that’s why they have Wall Street;
second, college is about expanding those teeny tiny pea brains most of us have from going to shitty schools and watching shitty TV, it’s not a bad thing at all to have all your suppositions about what is and what isn’t possible challenged by a radical with a radically different way of looking at things and interpreting events;
Third, having all your preconceived notions of what is real and what isn’t tested, and being forced to defend them is what college is all about; the idea is to learn how much you don’t know, not how much you do.
Why would anyone get their panties in such a bunch over such a minor elective course?
(c) lucasa: “Gay culture is a misnomer of promiscuity.” This is actually not the case. There are large parts of gay culture that actually have very little to do with sex at all.[/quote]
What? Theater? Interior decorating? Women’s Pro Golf? All of those things can be quite easily partaken of by people of any sexual preference and may be a culture in-and-of themselves. If it has very little to do with sex, then how do you possibly orient it around people who are identified by sexual behavior? Unless your talking about sexual behavior, gay culture is as meaningless as saying ‘left-handed culture’ or ‘taller than average culture’ and even then, it’s quite a bit easier to identify members and activities associated with these other ‘cultures’.
Again, just because a man chooses to use the word delicious to describe anything but food or talks with a lisp a) isn’t a ‘rule in’ for him being gay and b) is useless as a ‘rule out’ for someone to be heterosexual. A very large counterexample to your assertion can you give some examples of “lesbian” word choice and vernacular?
Being homo/heterosexual isn’t branded to the outside of your skin, nor is it fixed at birth like racial characteristics and unlike American culture, isn’t easily verifiable unless you restrain it’s definition to sexual orientation (and even then, not very easily), which points us back to the start.
BTW- No matter how much a person acts like an American or acts black or white, that does not exempt them from there culture. The joke ‘Wayne Brady makes Bryant Gumbel look like Malcolm X.’ is funny for this very reason.
As an example, the ‘Gay Games’. What’s the point? It’s not the pinnacle of international athletics, the Olympians are the better athletes (regardless of sexual orientation). It’s not about sexual orientation as heterosexuals are allowed to compete and there’s no verification of sexual preference (and again, the Olympics aren’t exclusive). But we do things like lift the AIDS travel ban to accommodate people who are sub-par athletes and identify as or associate with homosexuals (whether or not they actually are). Truly a representation of the farce of ‘gay culture’.