Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Eddie Izzard has the right idea.
Personally I think its dicrimination that men have to wear shirts and ties to work.
If I didnt have something more important to protest against I would be fighting for the right to wear less restrictive clothing.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Is that all I get for an answer?

Anyway I'm sure that somewhere in the archives you will find a fairly long thread about the wearing of ties by men being unfair and someone taking such a case to the sex discrimination board.

Yes Found it!!

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/sh...discrimination

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

I fear we're talking at cross purposes(sp?) and my grammar is not up to the job of explaining the misunderstanding but I appreciate the links to the other thread, nice to see other people find ties oppressive too.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

I don't understand the first bit, but yes - I am biased against people who continually whinge and moan about anyone who disagrees with thier view of the world - and as you have just shown, the gay community are particularly prone to label anyone who disagrees with them as "homophobic".

In my view you are over reacting - pure and simple. You can call me what you like, you won't change my mind.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Oh it wasn't just me being thick then? :confused:

Incog.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Your the one who said you were 'being thick' i said you were being biased, just like Pem.
It may be a hard sentance to comprehend (grammer wise) but i'm sure someone who agreed with the point it made, woulld find it easier to understand than someone who is biased against the argument.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

So people who don't agree with you are just being biased?

Anyone fancy a pint...?

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Of course you would think it was over reacting, those 'screaming queens' always over react don't they. Its part of being a poof, queer etc.
Forget the years of abuse gay men have had to suffer, forget getting your head kicked in for walking down the street with a mincing style, being called poof, queer just for speaking softer or having blond hair and blue eyes.
They're making a fuss about nothing, after all its only an earring isn't it?
Yet one earring in the ear means your either a poof or a yob, doesnt matter if your a decent person whatever you look like or wear.
It's always seen as an over reaction when someone who your predudiced against fights for their rights, no matter how big or small an issue.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

I just didn't understand the first sentence of your original posting to Russ.I asked you about it and you got on YOUR high horse and accused me of being biased because I didn't understand.You then accused me of bias because I disagreed about all police being allowed to wear whatever jewellery they want in duty.Then you changed the subject after I pointed out that I have to conform to a dress code for my job,to a tirade against the wearing of ties by men and not women.I thought we were having a discussion by the way.
THEN Pem said he didn't understand that sentence either so I spoke up because I was still confused about what your meaning was.

So to sum up I am biased because one of your sentences was gramatically confusing and I'm supposed to telepathically understand what you meant.

I'm just biased against non communication really.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

AHA! Now I see where we are.You are looking to pick a fight about something I'm not really bothered arguing about as I'm not even slightly homophobic as I have a gay member in my family.As someone who championed for homosexual rights since before it became legal I think you need to cool it.Gays actually have rights not to be discriminated against but I really think they need to pick better fights than the right for policemen to wear jewellery whilst on duty.

Incog.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

What's my 'high horse' gotta do with anything? Again thats your perception of my post. No horses getting high here.

No your not biased because my sentance was 'gramatically confusing'. Your biased because your on the opposite side of the argument, just as im biased the other way.
Definition of the word 'biased'
'Favoring one attribute or characteristic more than another'

Its not a judgement just a statement of fact.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

You have done this many times to other people too, I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A FIGHT. nor HAVE I SAID YOU ARE AGAINST GAYS, that reply was for Pem not you.
I have only said your biased against wearing earings in general my last post explained my reasons for using the word biased.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Sorry, you seem to be going completely off the rails now and I am not going to be dragged into an argument with you - so I shall retire from this topic now.

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Now I'm biased against wearing earrings????? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

And you gave me a red rep for making a cr@p posting at the weekend.

So I've got it in for all right minded earring wearers? Well I'll be sure to give myself a good telling off as I wear earrings myself. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Re: Gays overreacting/looking for trouble?
 

Sorry my fault for using the words 'in general' I meant 'in the police force' . Nice to see you pick up on a false point rather than question my grammar even tho ive already suggested I have trouble with it.

P.s. The above is a good example of how bias can affect how people can miss understand a sentance. Of course, taken on merit that sentance would mean that i thought you were biased against earings no matter where worn, but in the context of my previous posts and given more credence for trying to be constructive, someone else might have been able to comprehend that I meant in relation to the police only

Or to put it another way, someone who agreed with me, or who wasnt trying to be argumentative, would have given me the benefit of the doubt, that I meant 'in the police force'.