Sorry if I sounded too lecturing. I, too, make art with Poser. As an illustration, I am enclosing a recent piece called "Window". It is a 3D sculpture, a combination of plexiglass, inkjet print and James produced with STL (Shade and rapid prototyping equipment).

Laslo

It's not necessarily tht, laslov: but the 'what is art? and is Poser art?' debate seems to crop puponce a month or so... and often, contentious issues such as this, where Poser is looked down on by others in the 3D/art/computer community inevitably turn towards the same drift... Joel was just making a joke about that, is all... :)

jonthecelt

lol oh no not that again!!!

The thing is...

The term "Pervert" is thrown out very quickly.

And it is not the medium that creates the "perversion" - that is entirely due to the creator.

I can create perverted images with a pencil. Or a paintbrush. Or a crayon. Or chalk. Or a camera. Or... you get the idea.

How about you tell your "friends" (and I use this term in the loosest sense of the word here) to get their mind out of the gutter and leave you be?

I am thinking that e frontier should sponsor a physical gallery here in Santa Cruz (in addition to the online galleries) to show off art created with Poser, Vue, Manga, etc.

I confess that I have a serious art background (and an MFA from UC). Despite this, I think it is revolutionary tthat we now have tools that allow anyone (with or without art education) to express his/herself and create decent art that can be shown in an art gallery.

In short, software is a great equalizer that empowers people to create professional looking art, while before, without the software this would have led to embarassing results.

Laslo

Quote - > Quote - For those that have "tried to stear clear of using any nude vicky's"

 

Do one, seriously do a nekkid vicky standing in a temple with a sword. And watch the hits on your image go through the roof.

 

I did a NVIATWAS 1 week, 11 hours and 56 minutes ago, and it has only been viewed 278 times.

So it seems that there is an art to getting views for a NVIATWAS and that not all NVIATWAS are created equal, because it didn't work for me,  LMAO

 

Tsk, She must not have been nekkid enough. LOL

On a serious note though. I have Huntingtons disease and without Poser and other related computer programs I'd probably not be able too do any art at all.

So I take offense at being called a prevert simply because I use poser.

Quote -  

Tsk, She must not have been nekkid enough. LOL

LOL, either that or too old and not thin enough,  hehe

I really did mine as a jest.  I titled it "Everyone Has One", and went against the grain by using an older V3  with gray hair and while she's naked, most of her naughty bits are strategically covered,  hehe

Sounds like your humor is as bad as mine. I did one in a similar vein called "I'll Never Die".

I did one of a naked house mouse in a temple with a sword, titled "Not Exactly NVIATWS But Close Enough"

Quote - ...I think it is revolutionary tthat we now have tools that allow anyone (with or without art education) to express his/herself and create decent art that can be shown in an art gallery.

In short, software is a great equalizer that empowers people to create professional looking art, while before, without the software this would have led to embarassing results.

Laslo

 

Not sure I agree with you there, my friend. Any medium is capable of giving professional looking results, in the hands of talented people, which can then be given a prideful place in an exhibition. Equally, all the training in the world can still lead you to trot out soulless crap that has no merit whatsoever, if you lack the spark. Training is a useful tool in itself, and often allows you to network in the circles where you can get your foot in the door at the more prestigious galleries and venues, but I'm not sure it's possible to take someone who barely knows how to hold a pencil, and give them enough training that they're turning out masterpieces.

I'm kinda coming at this from a different angle, though related. I'm an actor/director, who completed his Theatre degree 18 months back and is now struggling to set up his own horror theatre company (but this isn't the space to talk about that in any detail!!) During my degree, I also did some work with local amateur companies, with people who had never stepped inside a drama class or arts college in their lives. On both sides, I saw hopeless ineptitude, shockingly overinflated egos, and genuine talent shining through. The key difference for me is that, having completed the degree, I have a network of other artists I can work with, some idea of how to approach venues to get my work shown and seen by an audience, and the balls to believe that people might be interested in what I have to offer! The ability, the talent, and the dedication to my craft were there before I went into college: they may have been honed through the practice I got there, and occasionally guided by advice from tutors, but they didn't come from nowhere.

So I don't think we 'now' have tools that will give anyone from any background the opportunity to produce outstanding work - those tools were always there. What we have now, in a similar way to what we had just over a century ago with the birth of photography, is a new medium of art, allowing people who didn't feel comfortable with other media the chance to try and express themselves from a different direction.

But that's just me - and I've been wrong before! :)

jonthecelt

Me y me gran boca..;) I don't know..the whole place seems an intersection of parallel universes. Everything that's true in Israel is by nature false in Palestine, and vice versa. Truth is, unless you live there, you'll never understand..heck, I don't even understand Canadians..;)

I did 2 NVITWAS's, one with an angry V3 demanding clothes, and another with a German Missle..;)
so there..;)

Hi Jon,

That's quite insightful what you said there. Although I never thought of CG as another medium, I think that likening it to photography is right on target. It is a new technology that offers a chance for people to express themselves and their vision. I can go along with that.

Long ago I used to teach art history. One thing that is striking about art history is that originally there was no distinction between artists and non-artists (cavemen all painted, even medieval church frescoes were painted by all monks together, etc.).  The Renaissance, with its technical sophistication created the true division between artists and non-artists.

What I fancy with CG (and especially Poser) is that it may well erase this technical gap and allow those who are artistically inclined to express themselves at a level that is on par with schooled artists. Thus, your analogy with the camera is correct – photography indeed can enable someone to create artistic value without a formal training.

(In a way of disclosure: I am the Marketing Director of e frontier and as such responsible for charting future directions of its software development). You see, it helps me to get up in the morning and think that my work is important because it may help people to regain something that was lost - their capacity for artistic expressions. If this sounds too self-important, please have my apologies.

Laslo

Clothes were invented to protect the eyes from agressive photons, as nobody paints hazardous NVIATWSs, they can continue to be nude..

Quote - Hi Jon,

That's quite insightful what you said there. Although I never thought of CG as another medium, I think that likening it to photography is right on target. It is a new technology that offers a chance for people to express themselves and their vision. I can go along with that.

Long ago I used to teach art history. One thing that is striking about art history is that originally there was no distinction between artists and non-artists (cavemen all painted, even medieval church frescoes were painted by all monks together, etc.).  The Renaissance, with its technical sophistication created the true division between artists and non-artists.

What I fancy with CG (and especially Poser) is that it may well erase this technical gap and allow those who are artistically inclined to express themselves at a level that is on par with schooled artists. Thus, your analogy with the camera is correct – photography indeed can enable someone to create artistic value without a formal training.

(In a way of disclosure: I am the Marketing Director of e frontier and as such responsible for charting future directions of its software development). You see, it helps me to get up in the morning and think that my work is important because it may help people to regain something that was lost - their capacity for artistic expressions. If this sounds too self-important, please have my apologies.

Laslo

And let's not forget about the thin line between 'artiste' and 'artisan'.  For millenia, artisans have been 'specially trained' workers in making simplistic objects (weapons, armor, clothes, furnitiure, architecture, etc.) and applying centuries of discovery, years of apprentiship, and long periods of innovation to make functional things into 'works of art'.  Banging out crude functionality is very rare - there is almost always a level of pride and skill involved in going beyond this and cultivating beauty in the simplest objects.

The Renaissance certainly divided the artisans from the artistes - but not completely.  Michaelanagelo created world-renowned frescos and sculptures, but he also engineered beautifiul architecture.  Asians have always mixed functional skill and craftsmanship with results 'pleasing to the eye'.  The Japanese sword, for all of its technological innovations that make it unique and superior in function, has always been decorated and constructed with symbolism, spirituality, and beauty in mind.  Not only is it a deady weapon that serves its master well, it is something to be displayed and revered on its craftsmanship and beauty!

Even the most mundane, functional object can be embued with beauty and artistic expression by a skilled craftsman - and this is someone who isn't considered 'an artist'.  The phrase 'that is not art' is for people who don't understand the difference between 'art' (in the most banal, snobbish definition) and 'expression'.  They define art as some esoteric and idealistic set of limitations - such as'depicting ideal beauty' or 'must have philosophical meaning'.

Art is what evokes you emotionally - pleasing, soothing, grandiosity, depressing, repulsing, whatever.  The argument about 'what is art' reminds me of the creationist/ID notion of the evidence for design in nature.  They propose that design by a 'higher power' is evident in life.  But they forget that this same 'higher power' must also be attributed to the design of other things - stars, planets, rocks, water, clouds, light, dirt, you name it (or did some other power create everything else?)  Since the 'higher power' created both the rock and the sentient human, how can one so entangled in the system being examined make a determination about what was 'designed' and what was not?  Similarly, art exists in our sensory apparatus - anything can be art - a sunset, a photo of a sunset, a painting of a sunset, a sculpture of a sunset, a structure dedicated to a sunset (think Stonehedge), an abstract representation of a sunset, a 3D rendering of a sunset.  What does it matter - except to those who have preconceived notions of what the 'beaulty of a sunset' is?

Anon

i haven't read every message in this thread, so apologies if someone has already covered this, but in the early days when i'd just bought poser, i came across a site where men were making not very nice pictures of children. I dont think i need to elaborate here. It was a site like this, in terms of layout/format and i went into the forums and it made me feel sick. I stopped using poser because of this. A few years later, through neccessity i started to use poser again and have never seen anything like it since. I'm now a poser addict and can easily admit that I have relived a few of my 'adventures' with this tool. I guess what i'm trying to say is that some pervs do use poser, but it's not a neccessity to be a perv. There is also the question "Is it better that paedos play with poser than kiddies, or does it encourage them?" - I wouldn't like to even think about it

As has been mentioned countless times in this thread:

It is not the tool that reveals the pervert, it is the pervert who usurps the tool.  Does any person think that it is beyond possibility for someone to use Photoshop or clay or words to reveal their perversion?

So we might as well universalize the title of this thread to "/insert something here/ is for Perverts" and be done with it.  Just because horrible people use cameras or camcorders to record instances of perversion, does that make cameras and camcorders for perverts?  The logic in the primary statement relayed by the original poster is missing - and we have seen the rational discourse offered by the original poster's detractors - not a single word...

i think the reason poser is getting picked on here is simply because it is so good its probably the best tool for getting realistic stills or animations

You know what they say about the fiercest opponents to homosexuality - they tend to be latent homosexuals fearsome of the truth of their situation.  Self-loathing has been the cause of many a dispicable event. ;D

yes i'll go with that my daughter was abused by my ex partner so, yes it's too close to home for me

With all due respect to past events that affect you, here is a paraphrase of a famous quote (from the bible):

A flaw for a flaw.

People tend to ravage against what they deem to be examples of the 'flaws'  of society (family, times, or whatnot) when it really reflects their retaliation against their own flaws exemplified in others.  When one finally accepts their flaws and can also attain empathy for others' flaws, there is a greater peaceful coexistence and acceptance than ever.  Noone is perfect.  Let he who is without flaw cast the first stone.  (And I'm not religious, just partial to the Golden Rule and acceptance of mutual existentialism).

Such a glorious thread, pity it had to die.  Surely much more could have been added to it!

Quote - You know what they say about the fiercest opponents to homosexuality - they tend to be latent homosexuals fearsome of the truth of their situation.  Self-loathing has been the cause of many a dispicable event. ;D

by this logic those who are the fiercest opponents of rape or  pediaphilia are latent rapists and pedos. how absurd. in fact the above statement is so absurd i'm still giggling. i've heard this staement made many times and you know who expresses it the most.  homosexuals. and before i 'm accused of being a latent homosexual my thoughts on the subject are to each their own.

billy

Quote -
by this logic those who are the fiercest opponents of rape or  pediaphilia are latent rapists and pedos. how absurd.

 
It is absurd because that isn't a logical progression/ equivalent.

Quote -   in fact the above statement is so absurd i'm still giggling. i've heard this staement made many times and you know who expresses it the most.  homosexuals.

A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy because a person's interests and circumstances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. While a person's interests will provide them with motives to support certain claims, the claims stand or fall on their own. It is also the case that a person's circumstances (religion, political affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim. 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

The statement about anti-homosexuals being latent homosexuals is based on a study that showed that self proclaimed anti-homosexuals became sexualy aroused when shown gay porn. they were less aroused than when shown heterosexual porn.

My perspective on whether Poser is "for" perverts is colored by one odd observation. Count the number of polys devoted to Sydney's labia and anus. Then if that seemed pointless, count the ones devoted to her ear.

M

Guys,

The point is that Poser is a "tool". It is an enabling tool that let you do many things. If you are an artist, you do art. If you are a sex addict (if there's such a thing) than you do sexual phantasies.
But the cool thing is, that without this tool you wouldn't be able to express yourself and with this tool at hand you can create professional results, be it art or sexual phantasy.
This goes back to my earlier comments of the democratizing effect of tools, which takes complex tasks like art out of the hands of "professionals" and puts it within reach of "Joe Six-pack".
Laslo

Poser for Perverts?  No, hardly so.

I can't help reading all of this, without putting in my pretty copper pennies.  I've gotten nailed before as referring to my images as "paintings", and have been told that they are not.  Even though I still work in oil paint, and airbrushing on paper and cloth off the computer, I see no difference if paint is physicial, or digital with a wacom.

The fact is, blatantly, some people are fools, and make a judgement on something they know nothing about.  Its a fact of life we can debate to the hereafter.

It is also a fact, that when you slander someone or generalize them according to that foolishness, you will get an uprisen response, as we see here in these posts.

For the record, my faith if you can call it that is a "naturalist". Unlike an athiest who believes in nothing, I do believe in order to the universe and a spiritual power that goes along with it.  But it runs along science, and evolution and nature.   That said, as you can realize, I do have some innate troubles understanding the "religious aspect" of nudity, even in discussions here in these posts.   They are not right or wrong, as what a person believes is right to them.  However, it does make my commentary here, perhaps, slightly different.

Poser has recieved its incideous lable, not due to rubenesque type nudes, beautiful human anatomy study, or graceful romantic images of couples tastefully done with swaths of white flowing curtains.  No, indeed Poser recieves so much unwanted press, due to certain facts that we cannot get away from.  Just like any other medium that could be "slammed", it is very sad, but the "handful" that get out a LOT, tend to define what it is.  A sterotype that will not go away, unless, "craftsmen" of great detail make enough of a plethora of contribution to be seen to the mass public, that sways opinion.

Here are the facts that give Poser its unique reputation:

1.  It is affordable to the masses.  Someone without a shred of artistic ability, artistic eye, or vision can buy it.    It is highly unlikely that a 15 year old, male or female will just "pick up" a copy of 3DSMax.  If someone spends that kind of money, it certainly is not to "play" and make a fifteen minute render.

2.  Everyone's first renders look like hades.   Because of inexperience, and a plethora of freebies, or the inability to buy clothes for figures, hundreds of new users flood galleries of all kinds with naked, koz haired V3's.   With that kind of influx, of that type of rendition, the "same old same old" as it were, it causes a stigmata and the idea of the ever dread "make art" button fallacy.  This is not to knock the freebies, at ALL.  Koz hair is phenominal, as are the thousands of other freebies.   However, in default mode, no moprhs, no changes, the general public has seen it all before.

3.  Young boys (and  I have to admit some young girls) absolutely adore the v3 breast injections.  You have to admit you've seen your fair share of images containing a head and chest with breasts that would have saved her from the sinking of the titanic.  Though not all renders are like this, there is SO MANY of them, it spawns the sterotype.

4.  The recent upswing of CGI art.   Lets be realistic, an oil painter, who pays tons for supplies, has to clean up and spends months creating an image, might get a little "testy" about the kid next door (or in another country) making art in less than a day.  Thats bound to cause friction considering, once again, that theory of the "make art" button we all so dread.

Poser is not alone in some of its stigmatas.  Take for example "furry" art.  Thats one that takes a big hit.  I know many serious "furry" artists, yet, its the few that use it for outright beastiality images and other porn, that give the entire genre its horrible reputation.

As for "perversion", I've seen many an oil painting that would make a poser user blush.  However, oil paintings are in a more limited supply, and therefore dont "flood the market".

So there you have my shiney penny, IMHO.

It is only a matter to see if time will tell, if these sterotypes go away, or get worse.

Tiari,

Very eloquently said. Our challenge at e frontier is to make more people (read: potential artists) aware of the power of Poser and the beautyful things you can create with it. The best way to recruit these new artists is via art work - shiny examples of the possible. We need more ideas as to how to reach more people with art and make them Poser users.
Laslo

I guess it would be impious to ask how that poly count is going?
M

Madam, surely neither you nor your husband cannot expect me to paint an adequate portrait without first carefully examining your clitoris, labia minora -- every little fold -- and anal sphincter.

We should be grateful. If the rest of the model were as closely "examined" the polycount would melt your PC.

M

Didn't we do this one over at Daz? I have to say that if using Poser makes someone a pervert then I'm proud to call myself a pervert.

LONG LIVE THE PERVERTS!

If someone calls you a pervert say "yes and thank you".  It's not even worth arguing about and approaches swing-a-dead-horse-dom.

My new perverted image. I'm so twisted.

 It is also the case that a person's circumstances (religion, political affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim. 

whose truth, yours. mine someone elses. another absurdity. there is often more than one truth.
not only do the above affect and effect the truth. they very often create the truth. change the truth or or hide it at any given time. truth like studies depend on whose running the show.

billy

Quote - > Quote - You know what they say about the fiercest opponents to homosexuality - they tend to be latent homosexuals fearsome of the truth of their situation.  Self-loathing has been the cause of many a dispicable event. ;D

 

by this logic those who are the fiercest opponents of rape or  pediaphilia are latent rapists and pedos. how absurd. in fact the above statement is so absurd i'm still giggling. i've heard this staement made many times and you know who expresses it the most.  homosexuals. and before i 'm accused of being a latent homosexual my thoughts on the subject are to each their own.

Sorry billy, your logic is flawed, since the argument is not "all those opposed to X are secretly in favour of X, for any X". My observation, from my life, is that the most anti-gay people I've met did subsequently come out of the closet. I'm not generalizing here, but examples could also be found from public life. So it's very far from absurd.

The 2 laws of conspiracy

1. any action in proof of the conspiracy proves the existence of a conspiracy
2. any action that contradicts a conspiracy proves the operation of a conspiracy

It's like the laws of thermodynamics (you can't win, you can't break even..;)

on the other hand.

Never attribute to conspiracy that which can be explained by stupidity..;)

of course, after a few decades, you figure what works for you..;)

Poser is a tool. A tool can create art, or destroy. It's how you use it that counts.

quote

Sorry billy, your logic is flawed, since the argument is not "all those opposed to X are secretly in favour of X, for any X". My observation, from my life, is that the most anti-gay people I've met did subsequently come out of the closet. I'm not generalizing here, but examples could also be found from public life. So it's very far from absurd. 

well i have to say most, in fact all the those i know  who were anti gay and this includes most of those guys i knew are still hetro.  some of these guys were or are so  anti gay if you went with a flat chested woman they branded you gay. don't get me wrong i'm not saying some anti's aren't gay. just that i find it hard to belive the whole anti gay movement is and was mainly made up of latent homosexuals. it's a bit like saying all the anti hetro gays (and there are more than many people think) are secretly straight. as for  the flawed logic phantast isn't that what was said. all those opposed to x (homosexualty) are secretly in favour of  x (homosexuality) if not what was said...does this mean all woman who are opposed to homosexuality are lesbians as well as men are gay? soory but from my experience i can only relate this phrase to a steriotypical generalisation. i had a look at some of the studies done and have yet to see one that shows  it to be true. i read one studie that showed men watching gays making out are more aroused because it gave them a feeling of power as to showing them as homosexual. refering to it as the alpha male syndrome in which the dominant male has a need to show the females how week the other males are.

billy

Quote -  It is also the case that a person's circumstances (religion, political affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim. 

whose truth, yours. mine someone elses. another absurdity. there is often more than one truth.
not only do the above affect and effect the truth. they very often create the truth. change the truth or or hide it at any given time. truth like studies depend on whose running the show.

billy

truth does not change. facts are facts. only interpritation and percption change.

stating or implying that something is not true because of "whose running the show" is illogical. If you wish to dispute the conclusions you should present evadence that contradicts the conclusion and/or offer a theory that explains the evadence/observatons collected.

Attached Link: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/prej_defn.html

take your study which shows anti gays are latent homosexuals.  take weinbergs use and conception of the word homophobia stating that predjudice against gays was all to do with the individual. his self loathing and so on etc. you use these as your truth. in fact studies since have shown predjudice against gays..anti gays. is a social desease the same as colour predjudice. it has less to do with the individual than with the herd mentality. backround, area, class all play there part in whether or not one social class resents another. if your going to read studies read the latest ones

billy

Attached Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth

you can find more about truth by looking up philosiphies on truth. the structure of truth. does truth exist and many more. non give a definable answer.

then we have shrodingers little kitty in a closed box. is it dead, is it alive. what is the truth? only by opening the box and percieving can we know. till then it has two truths. it is both dead (not there) and alive (there)

if you require any more from me to sustantiate what i say please ask. i'm surei could find reams of the stuff.

billy

Quote - well i have to say most, in fact all the those i know  who were anti gay and this includes most of those guys i knew are still hetro. 

Doesn't it strike you as odd that a bunch of guys who are loudly heterosexual whould give two craps about some other peer group that they will **never connect with?

**They'll never compete with you over girls...
Unless your aggressively-hetero buddies hang out in gay bars or glory holes, you'll never get flirted at
You will never see gay men having sex out in the street (or at least, that's pretty improbable)
No one is going to miss out on a job promotion "because you're not gay"
You are in absolutely the lowest risk group for being a rape victim (unless you're in prison maybe)
.....
What is there to be "anti" towards?  **It will never affect you. ** So why the preoccupation?

because something isn't there doesn't mean people don't  air their opinions about it.

you don't get many black people in kkk bars but i doubt that would stop them voicing their predjudice. and funny enough two of the nartenders in our local were gay.  my aggressively hetro buddies gave them honourary membership lmao.  for most of my peers. a good pint was much more important than gay bashing no matter how voiciferous about it they were.

predjudice of all kinds has been shown to reduce when the predjudice people get to mix with the victims of their predjudice. predjudice is more severe whith those who don't mix or have access to their victims. people who have gay family members are less likely to be sexually predjudiced.  usually it isn't the person but the idea that instills predjudice. the thought of etc. thanksfully homosexuality isn't hidden as it once was so sociaty as a whole is less predjudiced now than say the 60's like all peer groups get certain people together and the herd mentality takes over. it's not an individual thought but a collective one. one that isn't always what the person as an individual believes in. the same thing is shown by soccer hooligans.  the human ape. a book by desmond morris explains it better than i could. basically we all have a need to belong. in doing so we often catsigate those that aren't in our group or herd. it's one of the reason why people who are alike tend to flock together. look at any collage you have different subsets of jocks, nerds, etc etc. they don't or seldom mix with each others group but will often villify them. psycologists say it isn't that odd at all. in fact it's classed as normal behaviour

billy

Quote - the truth can only be known by us percieving it. the sea is green, what is green. it's a name given to a colour, what is colour...we make our truths. without us there is no truth.

without us the sea would still reflect the same spectrum of light in complete disreguard for the label we use to describe, quantify, and measure it.

Quote -   the church tells us their is a god. to many that is the truth.

it is not truth, it is faith. using the term truth to describe a belief is a misuse of the word.

Quote -   democracey tells us freedom is everything we believe it as the truth, we quote it as the truth we, us , mankind, homosapien the social animal makes his own truths yet where on this planet is there total freedom apart from death. the world is flat. for centuries this was the truth as we know it how we percieved it to be. truth like time is relative to who is using it. i'm not implying anything.

when faced with the statement that anti-gay people were latent homosexuals, you offered two points to oppose that statement. First the logical fallacy Reductio ad absurdum/straw man, I beleive. You substituded the subject of the statement for inequavlent subjects then declaired the original statement absurd based on your modified statement.

second you implied that the statement is inaccurate because the individuals whom you have heard proclaim such an idea are predominatly gay. This being a fallacy known as Circumstantial Ad Hominem.

I do not promote the idea that the original statement is true, I only know of the origin of the argument from the article i read many years ago when the subject was of interest to me. I am only pointing out that the statements you have made in opposition to the original statement are not logical and offer no real opposition.

Quote -   i'm stating fact. facts are facts..yes they are but not all facts are truthfull. some are only percieved to be so.

In the context of the sentance that was quoted, i do not belive the author intended the word "truth" to be interprited as perception or faith/belief.

Quote - take your study which shows anti gays are latent homosexuals.  take weinbergs use and conception of the word homophobia stating that predjudice against gays was all to do with the individual. his self loathing and so on etc. you use these as your truth. in fact studies since have shown predjudice against gays..anti gays. is a social desease the same as colour predjudice. it has less to do with the individual than with the herd mentality. backround, area, class all play there part in whether or not one social class resents another. if your going to read studies read the latest ones

after following the link and reading the information Weinbergs statements seem consistant with the conclusions of the study from which the original statment was derived. In fact the page "Sexual Prejudice: Motivations" seems to be a similar to the older study's reasoning behind their conclusion.

Quote - you don't get many black people in kkk bars but i doubt that would stop them voicing their predjudice. and funny enough two of the nartenders in our local were gay.  my aggressively hetro buddies gave them honourary membership lmao. 

Who is getting compared to Ku Klux Klansmen, blacks or gays or your friends?

Quote - > Quote - the truth can only be known by us percieving it. the sea is green, what is green. it's a name given to a colour, what is colour...we make our truths. without us there is no truth.

 

without us the sea would still reflect the same spectrum of light in complete disreguard for the label we use to describe, quantify, and measure it.  

would it?  in truth if no one is here who is to say what colour the sea reflects. i see you never went to the  url i placed about time.  can you actaully tell me what truth is?  see yo8 use words to descirbe it yet you don't describe it. you only describe an idea of truth.

Quote -   the church tells us their is a god. to many that is the truth.

 

it is not truth, it is faith. using the term truth to describe a belief is a misuse of the word.

not  according to some philosophers. again for the truth to exist for us we have to have faith in it.

Quote -   democracey tells us freedom is everything we believe it as the truth, we quote it as the truth we, us , mankind, homosapien the social animal makes his own truths yet where on this planet is there total freedom apart from death. the world is flat. for centuries this was the truth as we know it how we percieved it to be. truth like time is relative to who is using it. i'm not implying anything.

 

when faced with the statement that anti-gay people were latent homosexuals, you offered two points to oppose that statement. First the logical fallacy Reductio ad absurdum/straw man, I beleive. You substituded the subject of the statement for inequavlent subjects then declaired the original statement absurd based on your modified statement.

second you implied that the statement is inaccurate because the individuals whom you have heard proclaim such an idea are predominatly gay. This being a fallacy known as Circumstantial Ad Hominem.

and your point is?

I do not promote the idea that the original statement is true, I only know of the origin of the argument from the article i read many years ago when the subject was of interest to me. I am only pointing out that the statements you have made in opposition to the original statement are not logical and offer no real opposition.

why not?

Quote -   i'm stating fact. facts are facts..yes they are but not all facts are truthfull. some are only percieved to be so.

 

In the context of the sentance that was quoted, i do not belive the author intended the word "truth" to be interprited as perception or faith/belief. 

and is the lack of belief your truth the truth or not a truth. the word truth has many meanings what you believe it to be may be right or wrong either way it's just your opinion. one you're entitled too of course

Quote - take your study which shows anti gays are latent homosexuals.  take weinbergs use and conception of the word homophobia stating that predjudice against gays was all to do with the individual. his self loathing and so on etc. you use these as your truth. in fact studies since have shown predjudice against gays..anti gays. is a social desease the same as colour predjudice. it has less to do with the individual than with the herd mentality. backround, area, class all play there part in whether or not one social class resents another. if your going to read studies read the latest ones

 

after following the link and reading the information Weinbergs statements seem consistant with the conclusions of the study from which the original statment was derived. In fact the page "Sexual Prejudice: Motivations" seems to be a similar to the older study's reasoning behind their conclusion.

then you read something different than me. the study went on to say that weinbergs homophobia was the wrong word to describe sexual predjudice. as it had little to do with a phobia.  i 'd love for you to expand. weinberg was of the belief that homophobia was a product of individual taboo, fear, and self. whilst the following study describes it as socialogical. how different can that not be.

Quote - > Quote - you don't get many black people in kkk bars but i doubt that would stop them voicing their predjudice. and funny enough two of the nartenders in our local were gay.  my aggressively hetro buddies gave them honourary membership lmao. 

 

Who is getting compared to Ku Klux Klansmen, blacks or gays or your friends?

sorry i'm rushing round like carzy and my grammar sucks.

the kkk to the anti gays. neither mixes or has little contact with their respective targets except to berate villify or attack either verbally or phyisically
billy

Anybody get those polys counted yet? Try setting Hither to 0.

M

Quote -
well i have to say most, in fact all the those i know  who were anti gay and this includes most of those guys i knew are still hetro.  some of these guys were or are so  anti gay if you went with a flat chested woman they branded you gay. don't get me wrong i'm not saying some anti's aren't gay. just that i find it hard to belive the whole anti gay movement is and was mainly made up of latent homosexuals. it's a bit like saying all the anti hetro gays (and there are more than many people think) are secretly straight. as for  the flawed logic phantast isn't that what was said. all those opposed to x (homosexualty) are secretly in favour of  x (homosexuality) if not what was said...

I'm not saying that all homophobes are latently gay; I'm saying that it is not uncommon for homophobes to turn out in the end to have been gay themselves.

In addition, there is a logic in this case which is not present in your comparisons. In every person there is a mixture of animus and anima, male and female. The balance is different between individuals. It's clear that in some cases, where the balance is rather even, that person incurs anxiety about their true sexual identity, and attempts to repress it by intolerance. The question is, what proportion of intolerant people are so motivated? I don't know the answer to that and neither do you.

You don't know which of your homophobic acquaintances are suppressing their female feelings. They certainly aren't going to tell you. Either they subsequently come out, in which case you know, or they don't come out, and you never know. The fact that they behave in an overtly hetero style means nothing, since you don't know what they may be concealing.

The opposite case you cite, of anti-hetero gays being secretly straight, has no such logic, and no examples that I've ever encountered.

Quote - the kkk to the anti gays. neither mixes or has little contact with their respective targets except to berate villify or attack either verbally or phyisically
billy

I may have lost your point, but that's a pretty faulty analogy - caucasians cannot be "closet blacks" or have "black tendencies" or "black urges".