|
Post by kasuku on May 20, 2011 12:03:09 GMT 3
Kamale In the Basis of moral and cultural experiences? Is that not what i precisely wrote there in my posting?
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 20, 2011 12:34:49 GMT 3
Kasuku
Was that a response on Kathure's idea of sexuality or your idea of updating the kamasutra? Interesting though your experience but a tart bit lurid! I would think Kasuku was not going to be offended by this if Merlin and KK did not darken it as they did. This is quite a fitting reaction to what Kasuku posted, and it ought to be part of the dialogue. Its strange that people want discussion but they still strongly feel to cut back the views of others. What you guys are asking for is a chorus among like minded, not a discussion of divergent views.
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on May 20, 2011 12:47:20 GMT 3
Mank, you re absolutely right. Kamales views of the subject is a part of the discussion
|
|
|
Post by merlin on May 20, 2011 15:07:46 GMT 3
Kasuku
Was that a response on Kathure's idea of sexuality or your idea of updating the kamasutra? Interesting though your experience but a tart bit lurid! I would think Kasuku was not going to be offended by this if Merlin and KK did not darken it as they did. This is quite a fitting reaction to what Kasuku posted, and it ought to be part of the dialogue. Its strange that people want discussion but they still strongly feel to cut back the views of others. What you guys are asking for is a chorus among like minded, not a discussion of divergent views. Mank,Discussing the subject African Sexualities in its nature will be difficult as not many are mature enough to deal with their own feelings. However we could make an attempt to make the best of it and learn how to communicate about this subject without abusing each other. Kamale did not contribute anything about the subject but made a comment on someone else contribution. I only pleaded for his consideration not to limit his contributions to these comments - as this will frighten people and scare them away from the discussion - and asked him to leave some room for others. However he has not done so and we have to live with it. I agree with you that I darken the discussion with my plea and should not have used the expression “sneering” – my apology for this - though I also have my objectives and like to move the discussion to a deeper level as superfluous comments. Like mindedWhat you guys are asking for is a chorus among like minded, not a discussion of divergent views.I perceive a difference between "a chorus of like minded" and people with a genuine interest in the subject. However this is a public discussion board and have to accept comments from people with all sorts of motivations.
|
|
|
Post by merlin on May 20, 2011 17:20:31 GMT 3
Kamale, am not a sexual scholar or Therapist. So I will leave the theory to those. My telling about the 4 different experiences was actually to pinpoint that first two experiences that have remained tucked in my mind and actually have driven me to be who I am today. I need to discuss this openly because I have a call to protect young people from being sexually exploited and molested. I have a call to point out to parents that they are helping their children ran into the hands of these Monsters when they make sexual dialog a Taboo. You know that when you refuse a kid anything without explaingnig why, they will do it just for the fun of doing it. It is adventourouse to do the forbidden. Many Kenyan men just need to see a young girl boobs poking the blouse; My daughter, who was then 12 years old was one late afternoon walking to a kiosk behind our house when a man tried to pick her up by inviting her for soda. Another episode; I went to toilet in a nyama choma sport. While washing hands i had to bend (had a long dress on) a guy came out of the Gents and told me if he sees me bend like that am inviting him to just…you know? This is ridiculous, why is a woman in Kenya often a walking Vagina? This surely is a topic that needs an open dialog between all involved. Kasuku,You bring up some very essential issues. Not only do have we to learn how to deal with our own sexuality though teach youngsters how to deal with it. But what can we teach them if we feel embarrassment to express ourselves? The natural consequence of feeling embarrassed and unable to express ourselves is rage and violence. To prevent rage and violence we avoid discussions about sexuality and do not instruct our youngsters. They in turn struggle with their awakening sexuality and no-one to ask or to coach them. The result is that sexuality is paired with feelings of aggression and violence. Although man are hormonal stimulated for sexual relations, they are scared about their inability to deal with their aggression and violence urge and often blame woman for their aggression. The key to change into real love making is opening up communication. Man could learn to recognise, acknowledge and accept their own sexual feelings and separate the aggression and violence component. Sexual feelings could then be paired with compassion and love feeling. The second phase is to lose embarrassment to communicate with others about sexuality. I perceive a similar process happens to women though the aggression and violence is probably replaced by feelings of guilt and suppression. Anyway this thread offers an opportunity to discuss about it from a relative safe position of anonimyty.
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 21, 2011 4:56:26 GMT 3
I would think Kasuku was not going to be offended by this if Merlin and KK did not darken it as they did. This is quite a fitting reaction to what Kasuku posted, and it ought to be part of the dialogue. Its strange that people want discussion but they still strongly feel to cut back the views of others. What you guys are asking for is a chorus among like minded, not a discussion of divergent views. Mank,
Discussing the subject African Sexualities in its nature will be difficult as not many are mature enough to deal with their own feelings. However we could make an attempt to make the best of it and learn how to communicate about this subject without abusing each other.
Kamale did not contribute anything about the subject but made a comment on someone else contribution. I only pleaded for his consideration not to limit his contributions to these comments - as this will frighten people and scare them away from the discussion - and asked him to leave some room for others. However he has not done so and we have to live with it.
I agree with you that I darken the discussion with my plea and should not have used the expression “sneering” – my apology for this - though I also have my objectives and like to move the discussion to a deeper level as superfluous comments. Like minded What you guys are asking for is a chorus among like minded, not a discussion of divergent views. I perceive a difference between "a chorus of like minded" and people with a genuine interest in the subject. However this is a public discussion board and have to accept comments from people with all sorts of motivations.Merlin: I hear you ... let's all agree to approach discussions such as this with light hearts. I think some humour was intended in Kamale's reaction which seems to be missed. Anyways!
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on May 21, 2011 10:58:22 GMT 3
www.nation.co.ke/Features/saturday/Amazing+sexperience++/-/1216/1166300/-/item/0/-/1u07jn/-/index.html"While it would be ridiculous to adopt some of Kay’s love secrets in our African setting, perhaps it would help to have a look at the book and pick what works for you as a couple". Those are the closing words of the Journalists piece on “Amazing Sexperience in the Nation online today The reporter took lots of pain to interview only men of same opinion on the topic, as if to make a point that sex is a man thing and the woman is there only to see that he gets it –whenever he needs it. Ati, if she refuses there are many other women out there waiting in line to give it to him…I wonder if he ever stops to think that his woman might just be thinking the same if she doesn’t get her satisfaction from him….
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 21, 2011 21:07:44 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by merlin on May 21, 2011 23:37:58 GMT 3
Mank,We men just love sex! We can't care less what part of the brain makes us love sex so much. You probably right although you will always find some men who disagree with you, making your task to express the view of men (plural) a bit limping. I like many things, sex, drugs and rock-n-roll though I also like quality and my neighbour. I know indulging in drugs, alcohol, even smoking or eating too much stimulates my pleasure centre in my brain. However the morning after brings a hangover and consequences such as a breakdown in social skills which get me kicked-out of society ending-up in the gutter I rather not experience. Not only my medulla oblongata though my – evolutionary more recent developed - front lobe helps me to manage between all my urges and needs to make me a person that my environment and I can appreciate and love. Yes I love sex though raping my neighbour, indecent exposure, sexual intimidation, paid sex or even sex with my woman when she is not in the mood, stimulates my pleasure centre though it also makes my world a lonely place. To balance between all my needs and urges, I us my front lobe to bring quality, appreciation, self-esteem, compassion and love, into my world. It is a process very much related to the new constitution, rules to deal with each other to improve the quality of our world. If I want something I can steal, rape, cheat, mislead, intimidate or kill for it though even when I can lay my hands on the loot, I end-up in a lonely world. I like a new Kenya a world from and for you, me my neighbour and everyone else; a world of quality without poverty exploitation or hang-overs. So what about your sexuality?
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 22, 2011 8:05:30 GMT 3
Mank,We men just love sex! We can't care less what part of the brain makes us love sex so much. You probably right although you will always find some men who disagree with you, making your task to express the view of men (plural) a bit limping. I like many things, sex, drugs and rock-n-roll though I also like quality and my neighbour. I know indulging in drugs, alcohol, even smoking or eating too much stimulates my pleasure centre in my brain. However the morning after brings a hangover and consequences such as a breakdown in social skills which get me kicked-out of society ending-up in the gutter I rather not experience. Not only my medulla oblongata though my – evolutionary more recent developed - front lobe helps me to manage between all my urges and needs to make me a person that my environment and I can appreciate and love. Yes I love sex though raping my neighbour, indecent exposure, sexual intimidation, paid sex or even sex with my woman when she is not in the mood, stimulates my pleasure centre though it also makes my world a lonely place. To balance between all my needs and urges, I us my front lobe to bring quality, appreciation, self-esteem, compassion and love, into my world. It is a process very much related to the new constitution, rules to deal with each other to improve the quality of our world. If I want something I can steal, rape, cheat, mislead, intimidate or kill for it though even when I can lay my hands on the loot, I end-up in a lonely world. I like a new Kenya a world from and for you, me my neighbour and everyone else; a world of quality without poverty exploitation or hang-overs. So what about your sexuality? [/size][/quote] Merlin, No disrespect, but it would seem a little homosexual for you and I to argue over this ... wait till a sister says something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2011 8:28:55 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 22, 2011 8:39:41 GMT 3
What gay bill now? you don't expect us to read all that nonsense to figure it out, do you? This topic is about african sexuality, not about no gay bills. What F*ing gay bills?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2011 21:06:41 GMT 3
What gay bill now? you don't expect us to read all that nonsense to figure it out, do you? This topic is about african sexuality, not about no gay bills. What F*ing gay bills? MankI started this thread with the aim of addressing the full range and diversity of african sexualities and gender identities. I did not intend it to be a conversation about hetrosexual sexuality only. Heterosexual sexuality is the hegemonic sexuality and by dominant I don't only mean the sexuality of the majority but that of the dominating group whose members generally negate other forms of human sexual expression. You are literate and as such are fully capable of looking up the information about the grave situation in Uganda; where a full blown witch hunt and targeting of LGBTI communities has been on local and international headlines for a long time now. Please. You seem so irate by this thread and my intentions in initiating it. What is really bothering you? Here is a bit more information to help you in your explorations Tamale’s take on the Anti-Homosexuality Bill clauses
Posted Sunday, May 22 2011 at 00:00
The more inflammatory parts of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill have been publicly debated - such as the potential death penalty, and charge of “aggravated homosexuality” - if the accused is HIV positive for instance. But five key clauses have far-reaching legal implications. As identified by Makerere law Professor Sylvia Tamale.
•Clause 1 attempts to define homosexuality and its related activities. How this will be enforced is unclear, and poses considerable risk to freedom of privacy among others.
•Clause 13 which attempts to outlaw the “Promotion of Homosexuality” poses risks to fundamental freedoms such as the rights to free speech, expression, association and assembly. By criminalising the “funding and sponsoring of homosexuality and related activities,” the bill also threatens Uganda’s public health policies and efforts.
Tamale gives the example of the Most At Risk Populations’ Initiative (MARPI) introduced by the Ministry of Health in 2008, which targets specific populations in a comprehensive manner to curb HIV/AIDS rates. If bill as it stands becomes law, health practitioners and fundraisers of the initiative would be liable to imprisonment for seven years.
•Clause 14 introduces the crime of “Failure to Disclose the Offence” of homosexuality. Under this provision, any person in authority is obliged to report a homosexual to the relevant authorities within 24 hours of acquiring such knowledge. As well as this being extremely difficult to enforce, Tamale suggests it would foster violence, blackmail and “witch hunting.”
•Clause 16 relates to extra-territorial jurisdiction, and would allow Ugandan law enforcers to arrest and charge a Ugandan citizen or permanent resident who engages in homosexual activities outside the borders of Uganda. This law enforcement model is normally used in international crimes such as money laundering and terrorism.
•Clause 18 requires Uganda to opt out of any international treaty that we have previously ratified that goes against the spirit of the bill. Article 287 of the Constitution obliges Uganda to fully subscribe to all its international treaties obligations ratified prior to the passing of the 2005 constitution.
Source: A Human Rights Impact Assessment of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. Sylvia Tamale. Nov. 18, 2009.www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/-/688334/1166746/-/c1gmgiz/-/index.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2011 21:34:50 GMT 3
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2011 22:20:07 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 22, 2011 23:44:31 GMT 3
What gay bill now? you don't expect us to read all that nonsense to figure it out, do you? This topic is about african sexuality, not about no gay bills. What F*ing gay bills? Mank I started this thread with the aim of addressing the full range and diversity of african sexualities and gender identities. I did not intend it to be a conversation about hetrosexual sexuality only. Heterosexual sexuality is the hegemonic sexuality and by dominant I don't only mean the sexuality of the majority but that of the dominating group whose members generally negate other forms of human sexual expression. KK, My apologies for the "F*ing" word. It sounded like a good joke at the time of writing, but reading in a fresh session I find none of the humour I thought it had. Still I am not convinced by your claim that you are addressing "... the full range and diversity of african sexualities and gender identities." Your material would better be titled "Homosexuality in (for) Africa". You are literate and as such are fully capable of looking up the information about the grave situation in Uganda; where a full blown witch hunt and targeting of LGBTI communities has been on local and international headlines for a long time now. Please. You seem so irate by this thread and my intentions in initiating it. What is really bothering you? I empathize with the gay community in Uganda. I really do. What's "really bothering" me about your "intentions in initiating" this thread is that you seem to be using a mischievously titled thread to address something else all together. Your intolerance for RR's view that "sexualities" is the wrong term was the first indication that your intention is not really to discuss sexualities in general but to push something. If you were in the mood for discussion of sexualities you would have attempted to show RR why he was wrong, and why you were right. Instead you hit back at the guy as if he were a transgressor. Within no time the poor fellow had become a punching bag of Jukwaa brethren that felt called defend a sister ... men are very generous that way! Then he coiled out of the thread. Is that how you really want to discuss topics? Here is a bit more information to help you in your explorations ... I love the use of the rolling eyes. It tells me that you know I am not buying what you are selling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 6:46:20 GMT 3
Mank I started this thread with the aim of addressing the full range and diversity of african sexualities and gender identities. I did not intend it to be a conversation about hetrosexual sexuality only. Heterosexual sexuality is the hegemonic sexuality and by dominant I don't only mean the sexuality of the majority but that of the dominating group whose members generally negate other forms of human sexual expression. KK, My apologies for the "F*ing" word. It sounded like a good joke at the time of writing, but reading in a fresh session I find none of the humour I thought it had. Still I am not convinced by your claim that you are addressing "... the full range and diversity of african sexualities and gender identities." Your material would better be titled "Homosexuality in (for) Africa". I empathize with the gay community in Uganda. I really do. What's "really bothering" me about your "intentions in initiating" this thread is that you seem to be using a mischievously titled thread to address something else all together. Your intolerance for RR's view that "sexualities" is the wrong term was the first indication that your intention is not really to discuss sexualities in general but to push something. If you were in the mood for discussion of sexualities you would have attempted to show RR why he was wrong, and why you were right. Instead you hit back at the guy as if he were a transgressor. Within no time the poor fellow had become a punching bag of Jukwaa brethren that felt called defend a sister ... men are very generous that way! Then he coiled out of the thread. Is that how you really want to discuss topics? Here is a bit more information to help you in your explorations ... I love the use of the rolling eyes. It tells me that you know I am not buying what you are selling. Mank,I’ll respond within the body of your claims. KK, My apologies for the "F*ing" word. It sounded like a good joke at the time of writing, but reading in a fresh session I find none of the humour I thought it had. Well, you did said it. And surely it came from somewhere; I mean all that rage. Why? I asked you and you still haven’t answered that to yourself leave alone to me or anybody else. Hope you had a good laugh at the time you thought it funny. Still I am not convinced by your claim that you are addressing "... the full range and diversity of african sexualities and gender identities." Your material would better be titled "Homosexuality in (for) Africa". I started the thread and anybody is free to comment on matters “African sexualities & gender identities”. I choose to highlight the experiences of LGBTI communities and I am at liberty to do so. And, I’m not sorry that clearly, you find that offensive. Mank, to spell it out to you and others who hold your sort of position on these issues; a full range of African sexualities and gender expressions does not amount to HETEROSEXUAL EXPERIENCE ONLY. There have been posts made on this thread that speak to heterosexual experience. Are you not satisfied with that? You feel that this thread is slanted towards homosexual experience. This is a lie as you and everyone else knows as evidenced by the postings here. In as far as my choice of title is concerned and like I told RR start your own thread. Call it African heterosexuality or whatever you wish. No amount of protest from you or anyone else will change the fact that the title invites us to engage the issues of the diverse forms of sexual orientations and gender expression. I am not here to “convert” you or anyone else to “gayness” whatever the hell that is as per your “Homosexuality in (for) Africa:”. Can you please bring more intelligent arguments even as you disagree with me?
I empathize with the gay community in Uganda. I really do. What's "really bothering" me about your "intentions in initiating" this thread is that you seem to be using a mischievously titled thread to address something else all together. My understanding is that you claim that I want to push the “homosexual issue” and “convert” Africans to homosexuality as referenced in your assertion that I should name the thread “Homosexuality in (for) Africa”.
That just doesn’t add up. On the one hand you “empathize with the gay community in Uganda”. On the other hand you are very disturbed by my intentions in initiating this thread. You are not in my head and I’ve spelt it out. My intentions are to bring to the fore conversations about sexual orientation & gender identity; two very different aspects of the human condition. I must be missing something you are saying. Want to explain further?
Your intolerance for RR's view that "sexualities" is the wrong term was the first indication that your intention is not really to discuss sexualities in general but to push something. If you were in the mood for discussion of sexualities you would have attempted to show RR why he was wrong, and why you were right. Instead you hit back at the guy as if he were a transgressor. Within no time the poor fellow had become a punching bag of Jukwaa brethren that felt called defend a sister ... men are very generous that way! Then he coiled out of the thread. Is that how you really want to discuss topics? And again I ask exactly what you think my intentions were in starting up this thread? Spell it out. Maybe I’m too thick to get what you are saying. As far as I can see, RR was pushing the same notion you are namely that I want to ram “gayness” down your delicate Kenyan throats. Well you know what? You all aren’t delicate at all. And like it or not LGBTI communities will have our day because the train already left the station, so please join us in this new century, we still have the grace to welcome you. Backward exclusion, marginalization of whole groups of people and hetero-normative terror cannot hold forever. Poor RR, I’m sure he cannot hold his own when it comes to me and he needs you to articulate how wronged he was. Job took him to task for his blatant sexist epithets. (Thank you Job!) If RR had engaged me with his opinions without epithets that would have been swell and I would have had a different conversation with him. It is not the responsibility of only the targeted people to hold accountable those who choose to violate other people’s space with the sorts of comments RR directed at me. It is all of our responsibility to stand up and do the right thing ama?
I love the use of the rolling eyes. It tells me that you know I am not buying what you are selling. I love that you "love the The rolling eyes" the rolling eyes was a visceral reaction to how pedestrian but vexing your assertions are. That is what I was thinking when I put them there!!
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 23, 2011 16:45:32 GMT 3
Kathure, I am in no rage ... I just explained, out of my own volition, how the "F*ing" word came about. It seems you are not willing to accept that explanation. Well, I said the word, and I also regretted using it. What more can I do? You see, the "F*ing" word is about sex, and this topic has sexual connotations. Is it really that hard to see how someone would think the word could be funny? Mank,
.... I started the thread and anybody is free to comment on matters “African sexualities & gender identities”. I choose to highlight the experiences of LGBTI communities and I am at liberty to do so. And, I’m not sorry that clearly, you find that offensive. Mank, to spell it out to you and others who hold your sort of position on these issues; a full range of African sexualities and gender expressions does not amount to HETEROSEXUAL EXPERIENCE ONLY. There have been posts made on this thread that speak to heterosexual experience. Are you not satisfied with that? You feel that this thread is slanted towards homosexual experience. This is a lie as you and everyone else knows as evidenced by the postings here. In as far as my choice of title is concerned and like I told RR start your own thread. Call it African heterosexuality or whatever you wish. No amount of protest from you or anyone else will change the fact that the title invites us to engage the issues of the diverse forms of sexual orientations and gender expression. I am not here to “convert” you or anyone else to “gayness” whatever the hell that is as per your “Homosexuality in (for) Africa:”. Can you please bring more intelligent arguments even as you disagree with me? KK, You do not seem to be getting me. We are not discussing "homosexuality". If you had titled this thread homosexuality, we would probably be discussing the subject. Allow me to explain my point to you using a subject not related to sexuality. Suppose I started a thread here under the title "African Countries", but then kept posting material for Kenya only. Would the person who entered the thread with the wholistic view of Africa feel deceived? Would the person have basis to suggest that I change my title to "Kenya" instead of "African Countries"? Would that person necessarilly be expressing an opinion about Kenya when s/he expresses the discovery of mischief? You see therefore, there is no contradiction whatsoever, in me empathizing with the chastized gay community in Uganda while being skeptical of the packaging of your postings. ... And again I ask exactly what you think my intentions were in starting up this thread? Spell it out. Maybe I’m too thick to get what you are saying. What I think is that you really wanted people to read the homo material, but you knew if you appropriately titled the thread then people would not care to read. As far as I can see, RR was pushing the same notion you are namely that I want to ram “gayness” down your delicate Kenyan throats. Well you know what? You all aren’t delicate at all. And like it or not LGBTI communities will have our day because the train already left the station, so please join us in this new century, we still have the grace to welcome you. Backward exclusion, marginalization of whole groups of people and hetero-normative terror cannot hold forever. What do you want us to do? In other words, what does joining you mean for us? With regard to RR's posting, perhaps I am the naive one ... I did not notice the sexual epithets that you allege.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2011 2:09:32 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 28, 2011 6:55:19 GMT 3
Is this also a case of 2 people expressing their sexuality? What of the poor kid being choked of its own sexuality? On seeing the title I thought the kid was born without genitalia. That would have been cruel enough, but it would have been nature's doing. In this case it is two people conspiring in the queerest case of child abuse. Whatever the message they think they are sending to the world is not apparent. All I see is a case of inhuman treatment of an helpless child.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2011 7:49:28 GMT 3
Is this also a case of 2 people expressing their sexuality? What of the poor kid being choked of its own sexuality? On seeing the title I thought the kid was born without genitalia. That would have been cruel enough, but it would have been nature's doing. In this case it is two people conspiring in the queerest case of child abuse. Whatever the message they think they are sending to the world is not apparent. All I see is a case of inhuman treatment of an helpless child. mank,That is an irrational response. These parents have decided that rigid gender roles for their kids is something they want to minimize even if they are not the sole socializing agents. We live in a social world and not just as individuals although we are entitled to our individualities. You call that inhumane treatment and in which case I'm forced to conclude that you do not know what inhumanity is. The message they are sending to the world may not be apparent to you but thank goodness it is to some of us. Rigid gender roles are what is actually harming children. www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=136087463www.tulsaworld.com/specialprojects/news/becoming_katie/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110507_11_A1_CUTLIN842116
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 28, 2011 8:32:00 GMT 3
Is this also a case of 2 people expressing their sexuality? What of the poor kid being choked of its own sexuality?
On seeing the title I thought the kid was born without genitalia. That would have been cruel enough, but it would have been nature's doing. In this case it is two people conspiring in the queerest case of child abuse. Whatever the message they think they are sending to the world is not apparent. All I see is a case of inhuman treatment of an helpless child. mank,
That is an irrational response. These parents have decided that rigid gender roles for their kids is something they want to minimize even if they are not the sole socializing agents.Irrational, really? I am not sure you know how your arguments sound. So these parents are socializing by denying a child its identity? You KK, one aspect of your socialization here is your pride as a woman. What if your parents had hidden from the world that you were a girl? How would you express that pride? We live in a social world and not just as individuals although we are entitled to our individualities. Exactly that is what this poor child is being denied - individuality. It is having to serve as a weapon in the battles these foolish parents have lost in their own lives. In this I am very serious! This is child abuse you are presenting here in guise of individual expression. You call that inhumane treatment and in which case I'm forced to conclude that you do not know what inhumanity is. The message they are sending to the world may not be apparent to you but thank goodness it is to some of us. Rigid gender roles are what is actually harming children. I hope you are right. I am more hopeful that I am the one who does not get it, than that I am right and this innocent child is going to have to put up with such a tortured lifestyle. I look forward to other people's reaction. To me there is no relation between the message I reacted to, and the one you are now introducing with the 2 links. If you really want us to have a rational conversation let's stick with what I reacted to. It was not about gender roles, or people who were borne with the wrong outward sign of their inward gender. It was a story of 2 people deciding to deform the identity of a child for their own wickedly weird expression.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on May 28, 2011 9:15:28 GMT 3
What will these idle white folks think of next? Thankfully the comments in the article indicate that the the couple are really pushing the envelope, even for Canada. Why didn't they try this inane experiment on their first born? Clearly judging by the type of braids (not rastas but a German milkmaid type) on the older boy the parents have been up to an unconventional way of raising their kids.
I think nature will eventually take its course since the parents have abdicated their right to nurture the child according to societal norms. When this kid plays pee pee games with it's (saving myself from having to say he/she) peers it will see the difference. When it hits puberty, the sex hormones will kick in & demand the appropriate attention nature intended. You can legislate (enact affirmative action, have one third MP's to be women) all you like but the male female-divide will always endure. It's just the way it is. Call it the Mars-Venus factor if you will.
Having seen the anguish some half black half white people go through in life by not knowing which group they are part of & in a sense being accepted by none, these parents are playing with their childrens future. I agree with one commentator that maybe couples should start getting licensed to have kids if they are going to resort to such ridiculous means to get their 15 minutes of fame.
KK, you also just derailed your African sexualities thread by posting the link. An example of some African couple would've been more appropriate. I doubt you'll find anything quite as whacky in Africa though.
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on May 28, 2011 12:35:22 GMT 3
KK, you also just derailed your African sexualities thread by posting the link. An example of some African couple would've been more appropriate. I doubt you'll find anything quite as whacky in Africa though. Well you will definitely find something quite as wacky as pink nail polish in Africa. The best Beauticians in Kenya are men. And some wear make up and nail polish. Well, they say it belongs to marketing. Those boys either had to do all duties, together with the women at home and actually got to liking it. Well, is that wacky? A child I a child and should be allowed to explore it’s world
|
|
|
Post by merlin on May 28, 2011 15:52:26 GMT 3
KK,I started to participate in this thread on the wrong footing. I perceived it was about a broad spectrum of African Sexuality though now understanding you like a discussion about Homosexuality. So why didn’t you said so? You surely must have your reasons not to be open and straightforward about it though must realise by now the discussion is not really going anywhere. We discussed homosexuality in another thread “Esther Adhiambo on Homophobia” jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=5450&page=1#ixzz1NCaMwVJx which shows a discussion pattern where the subject is openly addressed and the participants moving from a prejudice stand towards realising the essence of the social problem. Also the aversive positions are slowly shrinking. I found this a very worthwhile discussion a gem on the JUKWAA board. It is impossible to discuss a subject if the instigator is not open about it – or very clear for him/her self. If you like discussions about homosexuality then open a thread that clearly indicates this. It could be of help if you define for yourself what you try to achieve and analyse afterwards how close you achieved your goal. I don’t think you can convert anyone to homosexuality though probably create a better acceptance for homosexuality as part of society. I also perceive that JUKWAA is not the best place for finding homosexual contacts and friendship. Your discussion is ambivalent - Homosexuality or Sexuality. It probably is part of your life feeling different gender urges which is not unusual and we all go through these phases in due time. I think at the end we just make a choice to be male or female however some of us limp with one leg in the male and the other in the female gender. Some later in life make a choice the change from gender – even after raising children.Society – other people – don’t like ambivalence and get annoyed (feel cheated). Though don’t worry about this, just discuss what you like especially in the anonymity of JUKWAA. Regarding raising children and nurture gender position. I perceive it is easier for the child to relate to one or the other gender type otherwise the situation could occur where you find yourself in. I have only (4) girls and no experience in raising boys. I found there is a bit of both gender types in my girls though the female gender dominates. However I buy them all sort of toys from dolls to cars. It is their choice and does little to direct gender issues however it is society - the school - who demands a choice of gender.
|
|