Forum for LGBT Members

Anything relating to the clubs associated with Cycling UK
User avatar
bikely-challenged
Posts: 159
Joined: 16 Aug 2008, 12:46pm
Location: Argyll & Bute

Postby bikely-challenged » 17 Oct 2008, 2:54pm

mhara wrote:
I know that many posters on this Forum enjoy criticisng the Government, but under Labour we have finally achieved the legal rights we need to protect us as we try to lead ordinary everyday lives just being ourselves.



I agree, this Governments been great for minority interests. Shame they don't give a toss about the majority. I've voted Labour all my life but never again. The Tories don't inspire me with confidence either. There's nobody to vote for.

On the subject of a LGBT separate forum I don't have an opinion as it doesn't concern me.
-----------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: The above constitutes my personal opinion only on any given subject. Other opinions are available.

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15184
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Postby Si » 17 Oct 2008, 3:40pm

Having a separate section of this forum has been mentioned once or twice.

Reasons for this?

I think that one reason for having a separate section of this forum for LGBT topics would be so that they don't get lost - I would speculate that if LGBT topics were made in some other parts of the forum then they'd soon disappear as they wouldn't receive the same amount of support as some of the more popular discussions. This was the reason given or the Funny Bikes forum - coupled with the fact that it was directly bike related.

But there is no reason why LGBT topics should not appear in other parts of the forum as long as they obey forum rules.

Another reason I could see for there being a separate LGBT forum section is so that its discussions could be "protected" from those with homophobic tendencies or those who just want to cause trouble (suggesting that one's choice of bike ('bent, MTB, etc) is unnatural might irritating but no where near as hurtful as similar suggestions about one's sexuality). But would this work as the only way that I can see to stop this would be too make entry to that section of the forum strictly controlled - and that ain't going to happen, and, indeed, could be very counter productive (eg "oh, that's just THEIR secret forum where THEY go to talk about US" comments are sure to show their ugly heads).

A third reason for the separate forum...to attract more LGBT people to cycling - let them see that there is a place for them here. But, again, if use level in that section is low then it could be counter productive: look at the MTB section - hardly any use makes it look as though the CTC is not the place for MTBers. And it may also lead to a call for specialist sections for everyone else as every one fits into some minority group.

So, looks to me like it ain't going to happen.

But that doesn't mean that LGBT topics in other areas of the forum are not welcomed. That, should a LGBT Member Group start up then, there there is no reason why it shouldn't have a thread going in the CTC Member Groups part of the board just as any other member group can. Or that there is any reason why LGBT rides shouldn't be advertised in the Rides and Events part of the board (as long as they are not commercial). Or even that there shouldn't be a "How to get more LGBT people cycling?" thread like the recent one for women, should anyone feel the need to have one.

So, although I'm not saying that you shouldn't discuss the possibility of a LGBT section of the forum I should warn you that your time doing so will probably be wasted. But feel free to discuss a LGBT Memeber Group or rides if you want to.
Last edited by Si on 17 Oct 2008, 4:07pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jimmy The Hand
Posts: 116
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 11:26am

Postby Jimmy The Hand » 17 Oct 2008, 4:04pm

Si wrote:A third reason for the separate forum...to attack more LGBT people to cycling.....

Shouldn't that be to ATTRACT more LGBT to cycling :lol:

Si wrote:So, although I'm not saying that you shouldn't discuss the possibility of a LGBT section of the forum I should warn you that your time doing so will probably be wasted. But feel free to discuss a LGBT Memeber Group or rides if you want to.

Pardon my ignorance but who actually decides what forums are added to this CTC Forum?

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15184
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Postby Si » 17 Oct 2008, 4:13pm

Jimmy The Hand wrote:
Si wrote:A third reason for the separate forum...to attack more LGBT people to cycling.....

Shouldn't that be to ATTRACT more LGBT to cycling :lol:

D'oh! correction made - am now going to write out 100 times: I must read my work before handing it in"


Jimmy The Hand wrote:
Si wrote:So, although I'm not saying that you shouldn't discuss the possibility of a LGBT section of the forum I should warn you that your time doing so will probably be wasted. But feel free to discuss a LGBT Memeber Group or rides if you want to.

Pardon my ignorance but who actually decides what forums are added to this CTC Forum?


It's down to Fonant (admin) to do the work so he has the final say. Things usually get discussed between the moderators before hand too.

For the Funny bikes forum (sorry, can never remember what it's really called) the process was:
Someone suggested it.
Moderators discussed whether it was a reasonable possibility and decided that it was.
A poll was placed on the forum to see if the rest of the forum users were for it. Overall the answer was yes.
Fonant did a bit of code monkeying and there it was.

Also, note that there is an imminent software upgrade - chances of getting anything changed (eg even fixing the forum search facility) before this are very low.

workhard

Postby workhard » 17 Oct 2008, 4:43pm

bikely-challenged wrote:I agree, this Governments been great for minority interests. Shame they don't give a toss about the majority. I've voted Labour all my life but never again. The Tories don't inspire me with confidence either. There's nobody to vote for.


Having been a member since my early teens I tore up my "New Labour" membership card when Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara took us to war. Have spoiled my ballot paper at every election since.

I know how you feel but the majority of the population of the country have never been better off, by almost any indicator that you care to mention, than they are now, surely, or did I miss something?

thirdcrank
Posts: 30840
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Postby thirdcrank » 17 Oct 2008, 5:42pm

Since the OP was not addressed to me I've kept my peace but it has now become so wide I feel less constrained.

Overall, I think meic has covered the general points very well.

Mr Hippo

I know you have mentioned your speech impediment before and knowing how cruel people can be, especially schoolchildren, I'm sure you must have had some horrible times. That fact that you feel you have put that behind you is great - we are increasingly coming to understand how may people do not cope with being bullied.

I suppose we have all had our share and when we look back if we are honest we have probably sometimes been glad of being in the bully's gang rather than on the receiving end, and for that we should be ashamed.

My own experience of being on the receiving end as an adult is so trivial that I was either too thick-skinned or too thick to realise it was bullying. I am 'only' 5' 8" - average height for a man in my day - but in a workforce of big men, you can be seen as an invader from Lilliput. For example, I was once one of 30 odd men paraded in front of a certain chief constable. He had me marched out to the front 'so he could see me.' To use a bit of canteen humour 'it went right over my head.' Even in those now far off days (1974) some of the others sniggering behind me later confided how ashamed they had felt even though I had truly not been bothered.

It did take me a while to realise that not everybody can 'take it' and often those quickest to dish it out have the thinnest skins.

So just because you have thankfully got over being bullied that is no reason whatsoever why other people should be expected to do so.

You said something about 'What do you have to win to be a champion' but I'm sure you know this is nothing to do with rainbow jerseys (and if I can allow myself a touch of canteen humour, it's even nothing to do with the maglia rosa :wink: ) and yet when I looked at my dictionary 'someone who defends a cause' also seems a bit OTT - it seems to me that what we want is for people to show a bit of solidarity and I'd like to express mine with anybody on the wrong end of bullying.

Si has made the point about the impracticality of a separate but open section of the forum. In fact, anybody can start their own mini-forum by starting a topic on just about anything they like in the Teashop - Archery being a recent example.

Finally workhard:

You said

I know how you feel but the majority of the population of the country have never been better off, by almost any indicator that you care to mention, than they are now, surely, or did I miss something?

Yes- The recent thud of the credit card statement on the doormat.

User avatar
Simon L6
Posts: 1382
Joined: 4 Jan 2007, 12:43pm

Postby Simon L6 » 17 Oct 2008, 5:49pm

Kirst wrote:I don't think it's up to straight people to tell LGBT people they don't need a separate section, any more than it's up to men to tell women or white people to tell black people they don't need separate sections. If the individuals/groups in question feel it would be helpful or useful or valuable, that's up to them. .


exactly. The rest is neither here nor there.

kwackers
Posts: 15461
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Postby kwackers » 17 Oct 2008, 7:06pm

Simon L6 wrote:
Kirst wrote:I don't think it's up to straight people to tell LGBT people they don't need a separate section, any more than it's up to men to tell women or white people to tell black people they don't need separate sections. If the individuals/groups in question feel it would be helpful or useful or valuable, that's up to them. .


exactly. The rest is neither here nor there.


So where does the idea of a community come into this? For I'm assuming we are one...

Can I unilaterally decide which sections I'd like?

Personally I don't care whether a new section is created or not, but in my experience segregation is a bad thing and since sexuality has no impact on our hobby/sport/way of life then why create it.

You can't be accepted as normal if you insist on special provision.

Jimmy The Hand
Posts: 116
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 11:26am

Postby Jimmy The Hand » 17 Oct 2008, 7:31pm

kwackers wrote:Can I unilaterally decide which sections I'd like?

No, and neither can we. See Si's answer to my question on who decides what Forus are addedm

kwackers wrote:......and since sexuality has no impact on our hobby/sport/way of life then why create it.

It may have no impact in your area but it certainly has in other areas.

kwackers wrote:You can't be accepted as normal if you insist on special provision.

How can we be accepted as normal when the leaders of most of the worlds religions castigate us every chance they get, and lets not even think about the world leaders!

kwackers
Posts: 15461
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Postby kwackers » 17 Oct 2008, 7:57pm

Jimmy The Hand wrote:
kwackers wrote:......and since sexuality has no impact on our hobby/sport/way of life then why create it.

It may have no impact in your area but it certainly has in other areas.


I am speaking about this cycling forum though... I may have a very different opinion for somewhere else.


kwackers wrote:You can't be accepted as normal if you insist on special provision.

How can we be accepted as normal when the leaders of most of the worlds religions castigate us every chance they get, and lets not even think about the world leaders!


If I was religious I'd apologise for the way they behave, but I'm not and think they're a load of t******. All I can do is vote with my feet and make my voice heard when I think people are wrong.

But ultimately to be normal you have to behave in a normal way - by that I mean not segregating yourselves. If you take this forum as a small community and create the 'gay' section, then apply that to all activities and ways of life it's easy to see that what you end up with is a world with straight and gay sections, in such a world gay people would never be regarded as normal since they would have distanced themselves from the majority.

I'm sure the vast majority of gay people just want to get on with their lives as normal human beings, and to further this simply want to do things without their sexuality being an issue.

It's this normality that I think is chipped away by any form of segregation. Even something as simple as a separate forum.

workhard

Postby workhard » 17 Oct 2008, 8:30pm

thirdcrank wrote:Finally workhard:

You said

I know how you feel but the majority of the population of the country have never been better off, by almost any indicator that you care to mention, than they are now, surely, or did I miss something?

Yes- The recent thud of the credit card statement on the doormat.


Thirdcrank I'm not clear what point, other than a rhetorical one, you are trying to make with your retort. As a sound bite like response it sort of works but it won't stand up to much analysis. Please tell me who is worse off today than they were five, 10, 20 or 30 years ago? and on what basis or by what criteria do they claim to be worse off? and if they exist are they the majority population?

Take house prices. My house, which incidentally is pretty much my pension scheme, is worth less that it was last year, I'm told. But it is still worth significantly more than I paid for it five years ago What's more on one level it is worth exactly the same today as always; in that it is worth precisely the amount that someone else is prepared to pay for it. NB not what I or some slick salesman says it is worth but what a potential buyer will actually pay. But so what I don't want to sell it so it is irrelevant to me. If I have a friend who "can't sell" his house I tell him to reduce the price and assure him it will then sell. But then he complains he isn't making enough profit at that price. I ask who told him such a scale of profit was guaranteed in the short term. He has no reply. So it isn't that it wont sell but that it wont sell at the price he is demanding. Well no, it won't. So should I have compassion for my friend and his predicament? and should my compassion be greater because he is recently unemployed? even though his last job was as a investment banker?

workhard

Postby workhard » 17 Oct 2008, 8:54pm

Jimmy The Hand wrote:How can we be accepted as normal when the leaders of most of the worlds religions castigate us every chance they get, and lets not even think about the world leaders!


Jimmy, being a religious leader, or person for that matter. does not give you a monopoly on being right. Just accept they are wrong and many of the believers know it.

Kwackers nor does it mean because you are religious you are always wrong (or indeed a t******, though it is my understanding that most men, in fact, probably are. :wink:) I wonder did a so-called religious person hurt you at some point in your life that you have such an antipathy to us all?

Anyway for every leader there are thousands of believers who don't agree with the specifics of their leader's pronouncements on the subject of homosexuality. In my own local faith community there are many happy openly gay and lesbian people in stable loving relationships getting on with their lives as part of that faith community - despite the culturally conditioned twaddle that it's leader, in a far away place, may spout on the subject from time to time, and which offends nearly everyone who hears it. (apart from the rap artists, fundamentalists etc. etc..)

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50977
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Postby Mick F » 17 Oct 2008, 9:17pm

In reply to TC:

We are all better off than our parents were. Certainly our grand-parents and our great-grand-parents.

Think how many day's wages were required to buy shoes for the kids.
I remember kids at school in hand-me-downs and worn-out clothes.
Television? Not many could even aspire to own one.
Transport? Even bikes were beyond the budget of some folk, let alone a car!
(We were lucky, we had two at one time - some dads couldn't even drive)
Some men had to labour 12 hours a day down a mine or in a field to earn just enough to keep the family alive.
Central heating? When I was a kid, we had frost on the inside of the windows in the winter. If the house was cold, we put on an extra jumper.

The list is endless.



We are all better off, credit card or not.
Mick F. Cornwall

kwackers
Posts: 15461
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Postby kwackers » 17 Oct 2008, 9:20pm

workhard wrote:Kwackers nor does it mean because you are religious you are always wrong (or indeed a t******, though it is my understanding that most men, in fact, probably are. :wink:) I wonder did a so-called religious person hurt you at some point in your life that you have such an antipathy to us all?



Actually my response was really aimed at the right wing zealots that spout the dross Jimmy The Hand was obviously objecting to.

It wasn't actually meant to be read as a general put down since I have no problem with religious people in general, more of an issue with the whole idea. :wink:

workhard

Postby workhard » 17 Oct 2008, 10:53pm

kwackers wrote:
workhard wrote:Kwackers nor does it mean because you are religious you are always wrong (or indeed a t******, though it is my understanding that most men, in fact, probably are. :wink:) I wonder did a so-called religious person hurt you at some point in your life that you have such an antipathy to us all?



Actually my response was really aimed at the right wing zealots that spout the dross Jimmy The Hand was obviously objecting to.

It wasn't actually meant to be read as a general put down since I have no problem with religious people in general, more of an issue with the whole idea. :wink:


Then we are in harmony - although a person of faith I have many many problems with organised religion.