30 replies to this topic

[Jasi]

I was reading reddit today and an OP had posted a picture of a bumper sticker that she had put on her so-called homophobic dad's car that read "I'm so gay I can't drive straight". OP said that her dad had reacted terribly to her bringing her girlfriend home and introducing her to him. Obviously that's a shitty situation, but it's my opinion that that kind of action is pretty immature and only causes problems.

Yet it shocks me how many people on reedit say things like "family is just a group of people you are forced to know" and are quick to recommend abandoning your family, especially your parents, for the slightest fuckup. They tout that parents must support and love their children, and that if they fail to do that, they should be cut out of your life, and that one should not have to be patient with their parents.

Do people really believe this? I mean I understand that some people had really messed up childhoods, and were abused or neglected or whatnot. Obviously that is a case of having a toxic family, and yes you should obviously get out of that situation. But if we're assuming a pretty typical home life, where your parents did indeed love and support you the majority of the time, and provided a home and food and clothes for you, I think you need to give them a little bit of leeway if they mess up. Parents do not magically become perfect people when they have a kid. Sometimes they have messed up ethics and do terrible things. But if for the most part they have been good to you, I think you do owe them some respect.

When I got divorced so that I could be with my current boyfriend, my dad was furious, in a way not dissimilar from how he might have reacted if I were gay. He insisted that he would never be okay with my current relationship and that nothing my boyfriend could ever do would allow him to like him. He did not let me come visit him that summer because he said he was still coping with the fact that I was still with my boyfriend. It was really difficult, but by Christmas, my dad did let him come over for Christmas, and slowly my dad began to accept my boyfriend, probably because he realized that my boyfriend is a good person and not some home breaking evil mastermind.

It's tragic that some parents want to disown their children just because they are LGBTQ, and really terrible. But I think the way for the disowned child to combat that is not to be petty and vandalize their property, or to be dramatic and refuse to speak to them ever again. I believe these children ought to try to be as patient and understanding with their parents as possible (without damaging their own psyches), because I believe the cure to homophobia is really showing people that LGBTQ people are just as "normal" as straight people, not some kind of weird hellbeing. And as the saying goes, "don't give hate a reason", "it's easier to catch flies with honey than vinegar", etc. True, we should not tolerate hate on a grand scale, but I think family is a bit of an exception.

Also, at the end of the day, your parents love you and want you to love them back. They want to like you. My dad was upset too when he was more or less disowning me, but he was torn between his own morals and loving me. Given enough time, I think that tear can heal in a way that's beneficial for everyone, but twisting the knife through petty actions (or worse, through refusing to speak to them) will prevent that.

And again, just to emphasize, if a relationship is truly abusive, of course you should get out of it. I am talking about something that is more complicated—when a parent has otherwise been a good parent and then you hit a massive roadblock in your relationship, e.g. being gay when your parents are homophobic.

So I guess what I'm asking is, do you find my position reasonable or unreasonable? How do you feel about situations such as these?

[Kisseena]

I think your position is good.

I have completely cut my birth father out of my life, though. It's not like he had any part in it to begin with, anyways. When I was in 7th or 8th grade, he decided to "try and be a part of our lives again." Yeah that didn't work. He ended up not talking to us again or whatever and started being really rude towards me and my mom. So I decided I didn't need him in my life and I pretty much told me to leave me alone, that I didn't care and I didn't need him.

He's a pretty terrible person anyways. He was emotionally and physically abusive to my mom and claims that my younger sister isn't his. (Even though now apparently he's coming to her high school graduation? LOL YEAH RIGHT) And then he abandoned us and left us for some ugly bird lady. Whatever. So I think a situation like mine is another situation where it's okay to just up and leave "family."

He was a father, not a dad. And now he claims that he wants to be in my life again.
LOL NOPE YOU HAD THAT CHANCE ALREADY.

I'm better off without him anyways.
I have a new dad anyways. He's way cooler than he will ever be.

[Sir Deimos]

Personally, I think it's an over reaction born out of a community that is still dealing with the stresses of living at home. I know that feeling. I can't afford to move out, so I've been living at home. I will be 27 this year. Having to put up with the same nonsense every day makes you want to throw your hands up and scream "fuck you people, it isn't worth it!" But that's just frustration talking. Once you move out and don't have to see them everyday it gets easier to tolerate.

That being said, I don't completely disagree with the sentiment. You can't choose your family. That's certainly correct. I learned in my childhood that family isn't really important. I never felt like I could go to my parents with... well, anything really. It taught me that friendship is more important than family. And I honestly believe that. While I don't quite think I would intentionally cut my family out of my life I know I would be less likely to answer the phone of they call, out of pure negative associaton.

[Jasi]

That being said, I don't completely disagree with the sentiment. You can't choose your family. That's certainly correct. I learned in my childhood that family isn't really important. I never felt like I could go to my parents with... well, anything really. It taught me that friendship is more important than family. And I honestly believe that. While I don't quite think I would intentionally cut my family out of my life I know I would be less likely to answer the phone of they call, out of pure negative associaton.

I think that's reasonable and I can definitely relate. What counters that, for me, is knowing that my parents do love me very much, and that it makes them happy when they talk to me and sad/upset when I ignore them. I feel like it's the least I can do to answer the phone at least most of the time.

[Selena]

Ohhh, feelings.


I agree that some people are too quick to dismiss family -- though, most of the time, I think they're just saying that to vent stress. Probably for the reasons that Synile described. Much like with sibling rivalries, greater family tension tends to melt away after people move out and make their own space. Even if they're living in the same town.

That said, I think there's a certain limit to how much love someone can sacrifice to another person. Like a bank balance, if you will. Loving someone obviously requires that you give part of yourself away emotionally. This is offset by the affection the other person is giving you. The genuine affection -- not shiny gifts or superficial gestures. Whatever you give away, the other person gives their own share back. So your "balance" is always stable, even if it occasionally dips in favor of one person for brief times.

In an unhealthy relationship, though, your balance can be depleted. Because you've given too much, and the other person has not reciprocated. When that happens, there's nothing left for you to give. The affection dries up. The relationship becomes hollow -- and sometimes it becomes difficult or impossible to fix.

I wouldn't yell at or become aggressive/insulting toward my stepfather. That's a fairly juvenile reaction to being upset. But my affection for him is simply gone, and I would not miss him if he left my life permanently. Likewise, I have no affection for my real father, as he left the family very early on and made no effort to be part of our lives. When that happens, I think it's better for all involved to just... move on and find genuine happiness elsewhere.


The LGBT issue can be touchy. I'm not "out" to my family. Primarily because we're just emotionally distant people and I've never talked about my personal relationships with them. But my stepfather is also a homophobe, and I would not want to deal with his reaction if he found out that I was dating a girl. Being gay is part of who you are as a person, something that you can only override if you outright lie to yourself, so it can be very damaging to find out that a parent - who is meant to love you unconditionally - is disgusted with you for something so fundamental to your identity.

That said, I agree with you. Don't give them a reason to hate, and make every effort to heal that relationship. Assuming, of course, your family was loving to begin with. I wouldn't exactly put out much effort to get back in my stepfather's good graces.


Ultimately, you've got to look out for yourself -- and find your own happiness if you can't get it from the "traditional" places. Family can be abusive, romantic partners don't always stay for the long haul, and even friendships can crumble, so you've got to be able to adapt. I've always been closer to friends than to family, but holding onto a friendship group means that you occasionally have to adjust (sometimes a lot) when one or more people leave that group. Because that almost always happens at some point over time. Whether it's from a falling out or from people going down different life paths.

[J-Roc]

I find your position totally reasonable.

However, I am totally estranged from all of my immediate family. The only person who doesn't deserve this is my mom but she won't let me be her in life unless I beg forgiveness of the other two, who physically and mentally abused me for years and have the audacity to publicly state that it is all in my mind (even went so far as to send 4 or 5 e-mails out to everyone, large crazy rants).

It hurts me everyday that I have no family, its not the biggest ache in my heart but its right there and it never stops. So when people casually meet me I try to avoid the topic, most people force it and then give me a line like "family is the most important" thing. I don't know why people feel the need to spew Hallmark wisdom ad verbatim.

At the end of the day I guess my point is, like you said in the OP, that every person's case is individual.

[Egann]

My sister and my parents might have never actually "cut" their relationship, but there was a period of 5-10 years when every time she came over dinner ended with her screaming at them as hard as possible.

I learned to eat quickly and get out of Dodge.

The problem wasn't just that my parents are/ were homophobes. They definitely are homophobes, but I've also gotten my father to say he wanted gays to get all the "cultural subsidies" marriage gets and would help them to get them so long as the word marriage wasn't involved. The thing is you have to be patient, understand them and what they want, and frame things so it's easy for them to say yes.

And you need to know where to call things good. My sister had no idea where to stop: all she wanted to do was watch Xena with her roommates, so she brought over her roommate and constantly referred to her as "her wife." Coming from a sixteen year old going to an all-girl boarding school. Ergo screaming match.

Personal opinion: in the 1/1000 case it's actually this extreme, introduce your S.O. as your room mate and work forward (patiently) from there. You want them to be in a position to say yes. Showing up with some complete stranger and flipping their universe head over heels? Makes it really easy for homophobe ordinare to say no.

[Nameless_Joe]

Uh... I'm just curious what the "Q" stands for. I looked LGBTQ up on Urban Dictionary and got at least two possibilities... So, what is the proper definition?

Edited by Nameless_Joe, 04 April 2013 - 04:50 PM.

[Hana-Nezumi]

I don't think it's fair to make generalizations and assumptions like that... Sure, there are people who are too hard on their parents. And many who are ungrateful or don't understand that their parents really do care for them... But there are also many who are not critical enough and will tolerate things like abuse and unfairness just because they are family... When you're looking from the outside, you can't tell. Only THEY know what their family life is like, what they went through growing up...

As a teen, my parents were definitely not accepting of the fact that I'm gay... They acted like it was the worst thing that could happen. I won't go into the details... but let's say it wasn't pretty, I ran away from home a couple times, and I definitely didn't feel loved.

It wasn't until after I moved out that my parents came to truly accept me. And it was only after then that I was able to forgive them, and have a good relationship with them.

I was lucky enough to have parents that would eventually come to love me for who I am. But some people are not so lucky... They have families who will always want them to be someone they are not. Who will never accept any relationship that their child has as being real and meaningful. Who will forever see them as a disappointment, maybe even feel like they must have made a mistake raising them for them to end up so "wrong". And then there's even those who would disown them...

If my parents hadn't come around like they did... I probably would have cut off communication with them. It's actually something I had planned to do. So it's not hard for me to imagine how someone would want to. And if a family doesn't truly accept, nurture, and support you as they should... there's no reason to strain yourself to have a relationship with them "just because they're family". I actually believe that can be pretty unhealthy. Better to have no family than one that thinks you are a mistake of nature.

And for things other than being LGBT... dissent, rejection, and emotional abuse for various reasons... I believe it can sometimes be the best option as well if it's severe. But the difference you need to remember... when parents reject their LGBT children, it's usually because of religious beliefs. And it's a LOT harder for someone who believes you have chosen a sinful life and are on the path to Hell to EVER come around and accept you than many other things that can cause a rift between family members.

But the most important point I want to make is that only the person who's in the situation knows what it's REALLY like. It's not fair to judge them based on the idea that "they're your family so they must love you" when that isn't necessarily true, and if it is true, doesn't necessarily mean that a good relationship with the other family members will ever be possible.

Uh... I'm just curious what the "Q" stands for. I looked LGBTQ up on Urban Dictionary and got at least two possibilities... So, what is the proper definition?

It can stand for "queer" or "questioning" depending on who you ask, there isn't a real consensus... tends to lean towards being "queer" more often, though. It basically just means "other". I personally find it unnecessary.

[J-Roc]

Uh... I'm just curious what the "Q" stands for. I looked LGBTQ up on Urban Dictionary and got at least two possibilities... So, what is the proper definition?

It can stand for "queer" or "questioning" depending on who you ask, there isn't a real consensus... tends to lean towards being "queer" more often, though. It basically just means "other". I personally find it unnecessary.

I always thought it stood for queer, not in the negative connotation that assholes use but more along the lines of having a sexuality which doesn't fit into any other categories. Perhaps to most you are a gay man or a gay woman but perhaps you don't see yourself as having a gender... then you'd fall under the Q.

[Selena]

I've mostly heard that it was "questioning," especially if it's used by LGBT youth groups, but it probably depends on who you ask.

[Hana-Nezumi]

Uh... I'm just curious what the "Q" stands for. I looked LGBTQ up on Urban Dictionary and got at least two possibilities... So, what is the proper definition?

It can stand for "queer" or "questioning" depending on who you ask, there isn't a real consensus... tends to lean towards being "queer" more often, though. It basically just means "other". I personally find it unnecessary.

I always thought it stood for queer, not in the negative connotation that assholes use but more along the lines of having a sexuality which doesn't fit into any other categories. Perhaps to most you are a gay man or a gay woman but perhaps you don't see yourself as having a gender... then you'd fall under the Q.

What you're describing is what they call "genderqueer". "Queer" by itself includes anyone who is not heterosexual or not gender-conforming, and also includes gender-conforming straight people who are into things like BDSM or polyamory. Basically anyone whose sexuality or gender identity makes them "not normal" by society's standards. The idea being that it's a catch-all that makes sure nobody is left out and will keep people from tacking countless unnecessarily specific things onto the end of the abbreviation.

[Jasi]

And for things other than being LGBT... dissent, rejection, and emotional abuse for various reasons... I believe it can sometimes be the best option as well if it's severe. But the difference you need to remember... when parents reject their LGBT children, it's usually because of religious beliefs. And it's a LOT harder for someone who believes you have chosen a sinful life and are on the path to Hell to EVER come around and accept you than many other things that can cause a rift between family members.

Yes, it's true that it's very difficult. But I think it can happen if people have the right dispositions (on both sides). It's very unfortunate that we have to "tolerate hate", as it were, but there we are. Hopefully by the time we're all 45 it will be a non-issue...

But the most important point I want to make is that only the person who's in the situation knows what it's REALLY like. It's not fair to judge them based on the idea that "they're your family so they must love you" when that isn't necessarily true, and if it is true, doesn't necessarily mean that a good relationship with the other family members will ever be possible.

Yes, I am fine with this. What I was reacting against most strongly was people who were saying that universally, children don't owe anything to their parents. I agree with you that there are no universals, including the universal that people don't owe anything to their parents. I think I definitely owe something to my parents, even if they've been crazy to me and hurt me and so on, because for the most part they have done good things for me. Kind of like what Lena was saying—the bank balance is positive. It's just always shocking to me how many people on reddit seem to believe that your parents should never fuck up, ever, and if they do, they are "toxic" and you need to cut them out of your life.

[Hana-Nezumi]

Yes, I am fine with this. What I was reacting against most strongly was people who were saying that universally, children don't owe anything to their parents. I agree with you that there are no universals, including the universal that people don't owe anything to their parents. I think I definitely owe something to my parents, even if they've been crazy to me and hurt me and so on, because for the most part they have done good things for me. Kind of like what Lena was saying—the bank balance is positive. It's just always shocking to me how many people on reddit seem to believe that your parents should never fuck up, ever, and if they do, they are "toxic" and you need to cut them out of your life.

Yeah... there are people who are like that for immature reasons, but usually in those cases, it's just a temporary rebellion, I don't know anyone who permanently cut off from their parents for something that wasn't truly reprehensible. And in some cases with overbearing parents, it's necessary for their child to do something extreme for them to come to terms with the fact that their child is now an adult in control of their own life.

[Steel Samurai]

Family is very important. Family is not everything.

If you think your family is constantly holding you back, always working in their own best interests rather than trying to work so everyone is content, then yes. I would cut them off.

If it's just a little bump in the road and everyone still cares deeply about each other, then suck it up. They're your family. You only get one real one. Maybe a group of friends will be able to provide a similar environment, but it's hard to beat the people who are still around after seeing you at all of your best and worst times.

[JRPomazon]

Parents have some rights when it comes to their children, after all they are responsible for making said children. But when they are young and adorable, it gets ingrained in their heads that their children are their property. That's MY boy, that's MOMMY's little girl, etc. And sometimes parents are proud that they successfully procreated and other times parents don't really care. So when a child begins to think for themselves, make mistakes, discover their own identity as they grow older and when these things differ from their parent's or family's mentality, that's when things sorta begin to get fucked.

I could go on about this, but that's the general idea behind how I think parents think. It's been said before, a child does not choose his or her family. They get whatever is given to them. I was fortunate enough to have two parents and two siblings that generally care and frankly give a damn about me and about what I do and what I wish to do with my live. They aren't perfect but they aren't so screwed up to the point where I'd consider them dead weight and want to be rid of them. I question where I would be right now if I didn't have them when things went from bad to worse in my life over the years. You'd need a good fucking reason to cut someone (anyone) out of your life completely and when I hear about these redditors saying so easily that other people should cut off their family when it's strangers giving other strangers advice, I can't help but feel that it's merely an anonymous collective projecting their various personal issues unto someone who is just looking for a little advice and guidance.

But back onto family.

Parents aren't perfect, they are (gasp) human too. Just like their children. And being human means having short comings. And that's the thing about any family, it's a group of people (related by blood or not) that have seen the worse you can offer and the ugliest you can be and just the most venomous, hateful and disgusting person you can possibly become and for some reason or another, still acknowledge you and care about you, will still get right pissed off at you and disappointed at the things you do but by the end of the day love you. I feel that's what makes a functioning family with all circumstances aside. Now I feel that I'm sort of in the minority here since a lot of you seem to be coming from family situations that are far from ideal so I'm not sure just how much I can say without sounding too corny. I know plenty of people who have missing parents, miserable wretches for family and folks that are related by blood who are no better than vampires. And frankly, it's a damn shame. But when it comes to that lot, the only thing you need to acknowledge is that fact that they are your blood relatives and nothing more.

And I've read a few comments saying friendship is more important. Well I can understand the reasons behind that argument, we are talking about individuals that share more common interests than most people's family members. And frankly, most people have more friends than they do members of their immediate family. But who is to say that a group of strong friends can't become a support group for each other, a "family" if you will? (See what I did there? )

So on the final word about cutting off family? Any family? Always give them a chance, give them many chances if need be. Try to make a connection in some way. It might inspire them to do the same. If they can't reciprocate or choose not to participate or are all around toxic, then you don't have to do anything else. That's avoiding a situation you can't win and there is certainly no sense killing yourself over trying to make it work either. No, family isn't everything but it's one of the things I don't think people really can operate without in one form or another.

[arunma]

Heh, well here's one reason I don't Reddit. People on Reddit are morons. I can understand people not liking their families. But saying "family is just a group of people you are forced to know?" I don't know anyone who believes that. Even people I know who had abusive fathers don't say that.

Really, I think there's a balance to be had here. At the end of the day, your life is yours. If you're going to, say, have a relationship that your parents don't approve of (gay, divorced, live-in boy/girlfriend, etc.), it's ultimately your decision. At the same time, what your parents think should matter. They did, after all, raise you for 18 years or so. Now, I'm not really one to talk here. My parents are fine. Yeah, they've got some terribly annoying traits, but they're over all good, so compared to the other crap people have to deal with I don't have much in the way of parental hardships. Maybe I'm just talking out of my ass, but I think you should at least give your parents a fair hearing even if you think they're wrong. Sure, a dude who's gay for another dude may not feel he has to answer to the random homophobe on the street. But when the homophobe is your mom or dad, it's not just a random person anymore. You can hear your parents out even if you ultimately disagree with them, right?

Of course all this assumes you have a job and can pay your own way. If you're living with your parents...their roof, their rules, I guess. And if you're under 18, STFU you know nothing about life is probably what you're going to hear on a regular basis.

Personally, I think it's an over reaction born out of a community that is still dealing with the stresses of living at home. I know that feeling. I can't afford to move out, so I've been living at home. I will be 27 this year. Having to put up with the same nonsense every day makes you want to throw your hands up and scream "fuck you people, it isn't worth it!" But that's just frustration talking. Once you move out and don't have to see them everyday it gets easier to tolerate.

That being said, I don't completely disagree with the sentiment. You can't choose your family. That's certainly correct. I learned in my childhood that family isn't really important. I never felt like I could go to my parents with... well, anything really. It taught me that friendship is more important than family. And I honestly believe that. While I don't quite think I would intentionally cut my family out of my life I know I would be less likely to answer the phone of they call, out of pure negative associaton.

Heh, well even though I disagree I can relate. Like I said my parents are overall good, but have their annoying traits. Primarily it's their overbearing nature. Even though I live a couple hundred miles away, have my own job, pay my own rent, and so forth, they behave as though I'm still a child living at home. For example, once a few years ago when I was home for Christmas break, they actually tried to forbid me from going out partying with my friends. Mind you, it's not because they have any problem with me drinking. They know I'm responsible that way. It's because they thought I should be staying home and "focusing on school." My first thought was: what the hell does that even mean? I'm on break. Don't they know that grad school isn't "school" in the same way as high school in that I don't take classes, have a job, and (most importantly) get paid? And more to the point, even if I did have classes, I'm quite old enough to not be micromanaged, and it really isn't their place to do so. Long story short, I went out and partied anyway, and told them the next day that if they ever tried to control me again I'd cut them off completely. It was an idle threat of course; this isn't typical behavior for them, and I'm too nice to actually stop speaking to them. But they sort of understood that they'd crossed a line, as evidenced by the fact that whereas I used to visit them every month, I decreased this to more like four times a year and made sure they knew why. Now they've backed off. And I actually have a pretty good relationship with them.

Sorry for the long story, but my point is I get what you're saying. When you're a kid you don't mind parents controlling you so much, because at some level you know it's their job. When you're in your twenties, you start to feel that it's not their place to treat you like a child. Maybe it's not power struggles you're dealing with, but my guess is that in some sense your parents' behavior to you hasn't changed much over the past ten years. When dealing with friends, the relationship is more one of equals. It's hard for parents to treat you like an equal when you've been under them for 18 years, and that's the only way they're used to dealing with you. Again, I believe in giving parents some leeway for this. But it is immensely frustrating.

Uh... I'm just curious what the "Q" stands for. I looked LGBTQ up on Urban Dictionary and got at least two possibilities... So, what is the proper definition?

Heh, sorry to be a bit off topic here. While I'm all for gay equality and the like, I have to say that I think the "Q" is completely stupid. There comes a point when you try to be so inclusive that your message loses all profundity.

[Twinrova]

Heh, sorry to be a bit off topic here. While I'm all for gay equality and the like, I have to say that I think the "Q" is completely stupid. There comes a point when you try to be so inclusive that your message loses all profundity.

That's a shitty thing to say. There's no harm in being inclusive, but there IS harm in making people feel like they don't belong or like the LGBTQ fight isn't fighting for your rights too.

I've always understood the Q to mean 'Questioning', for people who think they may be something other than a cisgendered heterosexual but aren't sure yet, and also 'Queer' as sort of an umbrella term for anyone who doesn't feel Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgender accurately describes them. There are A LOT of people (like Fin!) the Q applies to that have just as much of a right to be part of these issues as the LGBT people too.

[arunma]

That's a shitty thing to say. There's no harm in being inclusive, but there IS harm in making people feel like they don't belong or like the LGBTQ fight isn't fighting for your rights too.

I've always understood the Q to mean 'Questioning', for people who think they may be something other than a cisgendered heterosexual but aren't sure yet, and also 'Queer' as sort of an umbrella term for anyone who doesn't feel Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgender accurately describes them. There are A LOT of people (like Fin!) the Q applies to that have just as much of a right to be part of these issues as the LGBT people too.

Well, no, I'm not trying to be shitty here. I'm really on these guys' side. And that's why I think the Q is stupid. It takes away quite a bit of power from the message, in my opinion. Think about the analogy of the Occupy movement. Whether you agree with those guys or not, the reason they've fallen into irrelevance is because they refuse to actually take a specific stand on anything.

So back to the Q. If the LGBT crowd is fighting for gay people to be treated the same as everyone else, that's a specific message with some definitive goals and solutions. But queer? Again, I'm not even quite sure what that means. Sure, there are people who are questioning their sexual orientation, and that's fine. But equal rights for gay people already subsumes them, because someone who's questioning and actually tries to find answers will end up gay, bi, or straight (or maybe transgender). In either of those three cases, equal rights is beneficial. By adding the Q, the message and goal of the LGBT movement becomes confused. If you keep adding letters, at some point the movement is inclusive of everyone and becomes irrelevant.

Keep in mind that inclusivity isn't an end in itself. Any group, club, cause, etc. that includes everything sort of loses meaning by definition. You've actually got to be standing for something specific to be relevant. This is why I feel that the Q is totally unnecessary and not helpful. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being confused about sexual identity. But it's kind of pointless to argue for the right to question your sexual identity. By saying that it's OK to be gay, you're already saying that it's OK for the right to question.

[Twinrova]

Straight, gay, lesbian, and bisexual aren't the only sexual orientations that exist. Asexual and pansexual are two more I can name off the top of my head. I don't even feel like any of those labels are right for me. Some people prefer to call themselves "Queer" because they don't feel any of the current terms fit their orientations. Sexual orientation can be way, way more complicated than "I have a penis and also like penis, therefore gay".

The Q is there, like I said, as a sort of umbrella term for anyone that doesn't fit into LGBT, but you seem to be saying there aren't people that don't fit that. I disagree which is why it pisses me off that you say the Q is pointless. The T for Transgender doesn't even include everybody that doesn't fit the traditional man/woman roles, what about intersex people? What about people that feel NEITHER gender is right for them (I *think* this is where the term "genderqueer" comes into play, somebody can correct me if that's wrong).

If you omit the Q you omit a ton of people that are otherwise mostly invisible in the public eye and without raising awareness about them they will continue to be mistreated. Everybody knows about gay people by now, but I know for example asexual people are still extremely misunderstood and they will continue to be unless the rest of the world is educated about them. They may not have to worry about things like gay marriage, but they still struggle with acceptance of their orientation.

[canas is back]

YEAH don't forget fin in all of this, even though he hasn't appeared for a while

[Selena]

Think of it as a long and short form acronym. The Q is usually omitted, and it's usually just shorted to LGBT, so it's not that big of an issue. Longer forms can also include an "A" for allies or asexuals, depending on who you ask. The acronym isn't perfect, simply because English doesn't have a suitable phrase to properly describe all these lifestyles as a whole.

But see Egann's thread for an actual discussion that issue, since it'd just be derailing here. There's more room for discussion that way.

(Though if it's any consolation, I hate labels so much - but they do tend to make other people happy, if only because they know they're not alone.)

[arunma]

Yo Rova, I'm going to address the Q thing in the other thread.

[Mark]

...

Edited by Mark, 12 April 2013 - 09:01 AM.

[Mark]

Parents have some rights when it comes to their children, after all they are responsible for making said children. But when they are young and adorable, it gets ingrained in their heads that their children are their property.... So when a child begins to think for themselves, make mistakes, discover their own identity as they grow older and when these things differ from their parent's or family's mentality, that's when things sorta begin to get fucked.

I agree.

I think it is a bit of an open question for parents though, as to how much freedom to give a child, at what stage, and when.
it is like there are continuous degrees of guidance: from feather-light verbal encouragement all the way through to iron-footed domineering and manipulation.

I think that most people think that parents have a responsibility to exert guidance and influence over a child; - for the purposes of bringing up the child in the way in which they believe best.
including teaching them about the world and of themself - to guide them to have a healthy view of the world (aka. Worldview), how it is proper for them to fit in it (morals), and to encourage them to best beliefs about themself (aka. their Identity) etc.
and for a time a degree of control is appropriate to achieve these ends.

parents often seem to have a special relationship with their children, where they have tendency to invest themself into the children in -at least- this way; and invariably such investment lends itself to further attachment. (possibly sounding like possession)
And the stronger the attachment the harder the separation.

As the child grows up and out of the home: the child chooses their own worldview (and hence rejects that of the parent), the child becomes the judge of their own behavior (possibly against the parents morals), re-defines and express themself (erasing parts of what the parent spent investing) and becomes an independent person (by detaching and moving away)

any attempt to slow or stall the process is atleast counterproductive.
the more the parents place their own clouding feelings aside and keep the wellbeing of the son/daughter in focus the better.
perhaps even having the strength to encourage the independence.

I am given to believe that raising a child is huge responsibility and a little bit of an emotional catch-22 in this regard.

I can't help but feel that it's merely an anonymous collective projecting their various personal issues unto someone who is just looking for a little advice and guidance.

never underestimate just how much a person can detest themself - or their own qualities.

OR, lets blame the folks!

(though honest reflective critique is fair game)

Parents aren't perfect, they are (gasp) human too. Just like their children. And being human means having short comings. And that's the thing about any family, it's a group of people (related by blood or not) that have seen the worse you can offer and the ugliest you can be and just the most venomous, hateful and disgusting person you can possibly become and for some reason or another, still acknowledge you and care about you, will still get right pissed off at you and disappointed at the things you do but by the end of the day love you.

I am with this, I LOVE my family.
they have been very helpfull. Very...

So on the final word about cutting off family? Any family? Always give them a chance, give them many chances if need be.
....
No, family isn't everything but it's one of the things I don't think people really can operate without in one form or another.

I make no comment about chances... that is complicated.

go JR.

Edited by Mark, 12 April 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Khallos]

I think your parents shape you, by the presence or lack of, by their kindness or cruelty. The person created is not necessarily shaped for the worse by negative actions or well by positive ones from what I've seen of people anyway. I personally reckon friends are more important, as surely you're the one who chose them but it's not as if you should scorn your family in some sort tough guy/gal move as the redditors seem to desire. The average parent has dedicated a large amount of time and money to their child and their should be some gratitude.

On the other hand children should know when to cut that contact. Sometimes family can be hurtful or hateful, if I found that someone hated me for my beliefs or acted in a despicable way in my family I would ostracise them completly. In the same way I'd like to say I would love my children unconditionally, but I'm not sure I could - if my child was a white supremacist I would disown them (them and their skewed views of their racial purity).

It hurts me everyday that I have no family, its not the biggest ache in my heart but its right there and it never stops. So when people casually meet me I try to avoid the topic, most people force it and then give me a line like "family is the most important" thing. I don't know why people feel the need to spew Hallmark wisdom ad verbatim.

Considering that most of my family are alive and those that are like me, I still hate such phrases. The condescention of such people truly riles me, possibly as I cannot see myself as having a children, let alone being a family man. Maybe I hate saccharine statements that sadly seem to regularly cover up a bitter truth (too many people I know seem to desire to set up a family while holding such disdain for their parents just feels unatural).

[Crimson Lego]

If I might pose a hypothetical questions, since it sort of relates to this thread...


Let's say your parents gave you up as a newborn or when you were at a very young age for various reasons (eg. lack of money to raise you, they were kids, etc, etc.), and you were raised well by the people that adopted him. If your biological parent(s) then reached out to you when you were older (17+) would you be interested in trying to forge some sort of a relationship with them?

[Jasi]

I don't see why not, but it would definitely be more of a friendship (if anything at all) than a parent/child relationship.

Edited by Jasi, 30 April 2013 - 05:40 PM.

[Selena]

It would depend on the reasons for which they gave me up. If they were young/impoverished, a friendship may be possible, but not a parent-child relationship. But it would still be unlikely, because... well, I wouldn't really care much and that would probably be more awkward than anything else. If they were deadbeats who just didn't want to deal with me (as is the case with my actual father), then no.

[arunma]

If I might pose a hypothetical questions, since it sort of relates to this thread...


Let's say your parents gave you up as a newborn or when you were at a very young age for various reasons (eg. lack of money to raise you, they were kids, etc, etc.), and you were raised well by the people that adopted him. If your biological parent(s) then reached out to you when you were older (17+) would you be interested in trying to forge some sort of a relationship with them?

Hmm...hard to imagine since I'll obviously never be in that situation (unless I someday discover that my parents brought home the wrong kid, or something). That said, you don't need to personally experience something to intelligently comment on it, so let me take a stab.

I would definitely subscribe to the philosophy that your parents are the ones who raise you, not the ones who pop you out. I rarely think about the fact that I share genetic code with my parents; my relationship with them is based far more on prior experience. So if I were adopted and my bio parents tried to contact me later, I certainly wouldn't mind talking to them. But I wouldn't really care to have any serious relationship with them, since I don't imagine I'd feel much of a connection to them to begin with. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be pissed at these guys for ditching me, since they obviously left me with better parents. It's just that I don't think biology counts for that much.