No Labels

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 9:31 am

Do you find this intructional or condescending ?

Love has no labels

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 9:48 am

I find it sweet.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 9:55 am

Ahso!;1475410 wrote: I find it sweet.

Did you explore further than the video ?

There is a whole website.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:04 am

Yes. Why? Looking for bias?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:07 am

Ahso!;1475418 wrote: Yes. Why? Looking for bias?

Looking for reactions to the website.......yours was "I find it sweet"

I personally found it trite and condescending

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:17 am

People do what they can to make the world a more accepting place. Opening eyes, challenging perception and prejudice is a worthwhile exercise. It might have been mostly staged for all we know, but so what, it's a progressive message and was probably meant to target people on the internet anyway.

Preconceived perception, or, prejudice, as it were, might be advantageous in some regard, though learning when not to allow it to skew fair judgments is good awareness exercise.

I found the video "sweet"

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:45 am

I have a black wife, and a gay son in law, I find the video sweet ........sickly sweet.

I think that putting such a twee site together is counter productive, I found it from visiting THE racist site.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:59 am

Bruv;1475428 wrote: I have a black wife, and a gay son in law, I find the video sweet ........sickly sweet.

I think that putting such a twee site together is counter productive, I found it from visiting THE racist site.

Okay, I admit that I sometimes have trouble putting 2 + 2 together, I can't figure out how one could have a gay son in law..I mean without having a gay son that is married to your gay son in law.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:04 am

YZGI;1475431 wrote: Okay, I admit that I sometimes have trouble putting 2 + 2 together, I can't figure out how one could have a gay son in law..I mean without having a gay son that is married to your gay son in law.

My daughter bore a child by a you fellow that later 'came out'. Technically not a son in law, but as the father of my grandson, I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:06 am

Bruv;1475432 wrote: My daughter bore a child by a you fellow that later 'came out'. Technically not a son in law, but as the father of my grandson, I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

Thank you, I truly thought I was daft not being able to figure out the gay son in law connection.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:11 am

YZGI;1475433 wrote: Thank you, I truly thought I was daft not being able to figure out the gay son in law connection.

My inside leg is 32 inches (Although I haven't confirmed that with the missus) and I dress to the right...........good job we are all friends here......with the things I make public.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:12 am

Bruv;1475428 wrote: I have a black wife, and a gay son in law, I find the video sweet ........sickly sweet.

I think that putting such a twee site together is counter productive, I found it from visiting THE racist site.Sorry, I don't quite understand your objection. Can you expand on why you dislike the site? Having a black wife and gay sil doesn't really explain your distaste.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:47 am

It's been all over facebook the last couple of days. I liked it the first time I saw it shared. then it got old.

The site itself seems to be just more of the same

here's a neat little video that shows what folks are capable of doing to help themselves.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:50 am

I thought it came across a bit condescending, but it has some good points to be made.

We all have our biases, and will always have them.

The problem is when we let them affect our interactions with other people.

Being aware is the first step to fixing a problem.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:05 pm

Ahso!;1475435 wrote: Sorry, I don't quite understand your objection. Can you expand on why you dislike the site? Having a black wife and gay sil doesn't really explain your distaste.

I have no objection to any of the messages individually.

I find it a little patronising that a site has been masterfully put together to cover all the bias that mankind might suffer.

As I have already said, I feel preaching to people might very well have the opposite affect.

People dislike being talked down to, and a site designed to combat bias on so many fronts feels like propaganda to me.

Let me be very clear about myself, I believe people should be treated as people regardless of their colour,religion,gender,sexuality, or disability.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:20 pm

Fair enough. It must be difficult to market a message like the one they've decided on.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:35 pm

Bruv;1475488 wrote: I have no objection to any of the messages individually.

I find it a little patronising that a site has been masterfully put together to cover all the bias that mankind might suffer.

As I have already said, I feel preaching to people might very well have the opposite affect.

People dislike being talked down to, and a site designed to combat bias on so many fronts feels like propaganda to me.

Let me be very clear about myself, I believe people should be treated as people regardless of their colour,religion,gender,sexuality, or disability.

Um, you didn't mention intelligence level. I am now offended..

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:57 pm

YZGI;1475431 wrote: Okay, I admit that I sometimes have trouble putting 2 + 2 together, I can't figure out how one could have a gay son in law..I mean without having a gay son that is married to your gay son in law.
What's to figure? Sexuality is not reliant on social stigma as far as marriage is concerned. Nor does it affect the biological aspect of things. For example, both Stephen Fry & Sandy Toksvig are openly Gay, and both of them are married with children.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:21 pm

Ahso!;1475491 wrote: Fair enough. It must be difficult to market a message like the one they've decided on.

Perhaps my point is you cannot market such a message, they are not selling chocolate bars, they are taking a hammer to bludgeon subtle changes in people's minds, the marketing campaign is ill advised.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:32 pm

They obviously disagree as do I. We'll need to agree to disagree.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 10:00 am

FourPart;1475499 wrote: What's to figure? Sexuality is not reliant on social stigma as far as marriage is concerned. Nor does it affect the biological aspect of things. For example, both Stephen Fry & Sandy Toksvig are openly Gay, and both of them are married with children.

Maybe it's more common over there to have a gay son in law than it is here (who knows). And yes (right or wrong) sexuality can and will affect biological aspects, it's only logical. Not saying it always affects it but it has to have some bearing.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 10:16 am

YZGI;1475527 wrote: Maybe it's more common over there to have a gay son in law than it is here (who knows). And yes (right or wrong) sexuality can and will affect biological aspects, it's only logical. Not saying it always affects it but it has to have some bearing.In what way are you thinking it might? I've done some research into sexuality but I haven't approached it from that angle.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 10:51 am

Ahso!;1475528 wrote: In what way are you thinking it might? I've done some research into sexuality but I haven't approached it from that angle.

I haven't done any research. It seems logical that gay people would be less likely to breed with the opposite sex. Hence biological aspects have been affected.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 11:47 am

FourPart;1475499 wrote: What's to figure? Sexuality is not reliant on social stigma as far as marriage is concerned. Nor does it affect the biological aspect of things. For example, both Stephen Fry & Sandy Toksvig are openly Gay, and both of them are married with children.

Stephen Fry has no children Wiki

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 1:07 pm

Bruv;1475531 wrote: Stephen Fry has no children Wiki
My mistake. I know he was married, though, and Sandy Toksvig certainly has kids. This means that both of them have Parents in Law, which means thay those PiLs have a Gay Son / Daughter in Law.

The point is that there are many Gay Men & Women who remain in the closet & go through the motions of a straight existence purely for the sake of the social stigma attached to it. The Physical / Biological aspect of such instances do not affect the ultimate outcome of reproduction. Whether or not they enjoy it, the ultimate outcome will be the same. Psychological effects are a totally different matter.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Mar 06, 2015 2:10 pm

YZGI;1475529 wrote: I haven't done any research. It seems logical that gay people would be less likely to breed with the opposite sex. Hence biological aspects have been affected.Got ya. I originally read you as saying that being gay could change future biology, but now I see you meant present as in behavior.