The recent controversial statement issued by Miss Universe first runner-up Miriam Quiambao subjected her to an endless tirade from the outraged LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered) community. Quiambao, now the target of hatred from the said community, issued an apology afterwards.
Miriam proceeded to reply, explain, and apologize. She frequently cited Bible teachings. She replied with she “will think about it†to @eco_fierce who challenged her to “advocate†the Ladlad Partylist in the next elections if she really “love us, and sincerely believe LGBT deserves equal rights.â€
About 16 hours after her first LGBT tweet, Miriam posted “I’m sorry LGBT. Perhaps I was too harsh with the words I used. Will do my best to be more sensitive,†with the hashtags “respect,†“nobodysperfect,†and “grace.â€
(Source: Link)
Religious zealots, meanwhile, praised her for her Godly conviction, while some condemned her for being too soft against the “immorals.†Needless to say, this turn of events inevitably, once again, put the issue of LGBT rights and social standing into the spotlight. Here we go again; the age-long struggle of the oppressed to assert their rights and whatnot. Personally, I find this issue quite tiring already. Once again, refer to my introductory statement.
| SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SOCIAL COMMENTARY! Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us. Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider! Learn more |
Yes, I am fully aware of the fact that homosexuals are still being persecuted in several parts of the world. For instance, a persistent hatred for homosexuals still plagues Philippine society. The Philippines, largely a Roman Catholic nation, still maintains their view that homosexuality is a sin and that gays are immoral and must be punished and stuff like that. As a consequence, it is a no-brainer to understand that homosexuals feel obliged to fight back at attempts to demean their very personalities. In a way, the struggle of the gays from social oppression mirrors that of the workers and the feminist movement. And luckily for the proponents of these movements, they are gaining substantial support from the secular community.
Yet, as I have said a while ago, I am tired of such issues. However, let me be specific in saying that I am in no way against the people’s exercise of their rights to be heard. I absolutely have no problems with that. However, I am quite exhausted of witnessing the increasing radicalism in some proponents of the movements. One moment they were fighting for equal social standing, but they seem to be going past the mark they aimed for in the beginning.
I am careful with using the word “some†to impart my thoughts effectively, so that I may not incur unnecessary wrath from concerned parties. However, I must assert the findings of my observations—some proponents of the movements are starting to gain an inflated sense of self-importance. Some of them are not really fighting for equality anymore. Some of them are alluding to notions of social supremacy.
The notion of homosexuality as “sexually progressive,†hypersensitivity to comments aimed at homosexuals, feminists demanding equal rights with exceptions, workers who demean the image of their employers… such things make things hard for me to support their advocacy.
Yes, I am aware that the Church can be despicable for its cold persecution of the homosexual community, while preaching the gospel of love and peace at the same time. Yes, I am aware of prejudiced people who view gays as sub-human, and I am aware that homosexuals do have the right to defend themselves.
I also know that cases of women degradation still persist and that it is rational to condemn them. I also know that poor working conditions and dismal wages make it alright for workers to have their voices heard. However, I cannot say for sure that the aforementioned parties are still fighting for equality.
Why, the notion of LGBT rights, women’s rights and workers’ rights already attest to their subtle (perhaps unconscious) agenda for society to enforce a special set of rights only gays, women and workers have access to. First of all, the law gives us rights. Just rights. No prefixes attached. This is as close to equality as we can get. No special treatment; whether you’re a man, woman, gay, lesbian, transgendered, hermaphrodite… as long as you’re human, you’re governed by the same set of laws and rights.
In my own way, I try to give these sectors the equality they claim to want. I pay no attention to gays. I see them as ordinary human beings. They possess absolutely nothing special. Amongst my peers, gender is no excuse for fun games, teases and pretty much any kind of conversation or activity.
However, I can see discrepancies between how some members of the said sectors claim they want, and how they react when what they want is given to them. Some women demand equality yet complain when they don’t get offered a seat. Some gays complain about people who are squeamish with homosexual intercourse.
For women, plain old equality entails the notion that everyone gets the same treatment, regardless of gender or social standing. Equality with exceptions is not equality. Is equality what women really want?
As a heterosexual male, it is only natural for me to disapprove of gay intercourse. I cannot pretend to promote and support such thing because I honestly find the idea repulsive. However, this is nothing more than a personal preference; like how I dislike Justin Bieber. This does not mean I’m against what gays want to do. I give them the next best thing; apathy. I am not against you, because I do not care. As long as you do not transgress the law, live your life as you see fit. Equality.
As to the workers, I only have this article as my response. We must consider the consequences of our actions, if such actions transgress the rights of others; if, by supporting such a cause, we hurt others in the process. Equality.
Perhaps the best thing these movements can promote is equality before the law, rather than making a fuss over who beats who. Everyone should be governed by the same set of rules and rights; no distinctions, no special treatment. Everyone has no right to immunity from criticism, but should retain the right to defend themselves. But then, perhaps this is the original intention of the movements in question; however, whether this is true or not, the fact remains that some proponents are going astray from the notion of equality and are pursuing something else entirely.
I am not telling the communities to keep mum as homosexuals, women and workers are continuously being exploited and persecuted. Keep asserting your rights—everyone’s rights. What I only want to say is that people should make sure that they are genuinely fighting for what they claim they are fighting for. Otherwise, it might be wise to announce their change of ways, or to abandon the cause altogether.
Drop the hype; as far as civility, equality, and rationality are concerned, we’re all human beings. No one is above the other.
(Note: The contents of this article are taken solely from my own perspective. My views are not necessarily in line with the views of the rest of the GRP community.)
Can you cite those “proponents going astray from the notion of equality and are pursuing something else entirely?”
http://narth.com/2012/04/urgent-action-needed/
@Tonybac:
Why not answer the above article directly?
@tonybac;
The link you provided is about California’s SB 1172, which “prohibits psychotherapists from performing sexual orientation change efforts in the absence of informed consent of the patient.” That’s hardly a proponent or initiative going astray from equality.
And the fact you referenced NARTH makes it very dubious. NARTH conducts conversion therapies, and they believe that any sexual orientation other than heterosexuality is a mental disorder and disease.
Hello. ^^
Okay, perhaps I have been blunt in that specific part of my article. I should have said it this way:
“But then, perhaps this is the original intention of the movements in question; however, whether this is true or not, the fact remains that some proponents MIGHT BE going astray from the notion of equality and are pursuing something else entirely.”
As you can see, I am speaking from my crude observations alone, and that makes me unqualified to specifically accuse people of derailing the LGBT agenda, no?
However, given the noticeable shift in the behavior of the social activists in question, you can’t help but consider the possibility that there has been a subtle change in the mindset of some people who promote the cause. Of course, this rests on the assumption that the movement is impervious to external influences. I have utilized this assumption as a way of being generous.
It is not my intention, nor is it my business, to point fingers; I am merely noting what I observe. After all, knowing so much about the LGBT campaign system will contradict my claim that I’m apathetic to the concept of homosexuals living in our society, wouldn’t you say? ^^
Arche, You said it better than I ever could!!!
Heh heh, thank you! 🙂
Homosexuals, Gays, Transexuals, Transgenders, etc…they are people, like you and me…no matter what your religion teaches; or what your religious text states. These people are born on this Planet Earth…what would you do? Create another Holocaust, like Nazi’s Adolf Hitler. And have the Final Solution. No matter who you are: we all deserve to live with dignity as individual. We are all Earthlings…dwellers of this Planet Earth…think Universal, not Global…this is where our civilization is going…
Anyway, I tell you a good story, about the probable cause of these homosexuality. I have an Indian co-worker, who believes in reincarnation. He believes; we are not truly born, and not truly die. We live forever…We live several lives; being in one culture; another in one country. Being a woman; then; another as a man. The experiences in your Subconscious mind is still there…after you had died, he claimed. If your previous life is a woman…then you reincarnated as a man…then, you become Gay. Woman in a Man’s body…Sounds, logical…
Well, I guess you could read on this story about a 7-yr study about homosexuality… http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2797929/posts …
From that same article, published btw, in a conservative website (but who cares, right?):
“Some critics say the study was deficient because it did not record the physical responses of subjects to sexual stimulus. In some mainstream circles, that is done by placing pornography in front of the subjects and either monitoring the physical response or monitoring the brain for a response. But such a test, Jones said, would have gone against what Exodus strives to obtain — sexual purity in both thought and practice.”
The methodology of that “scientific study” was they followed a bunch of gay people for a few years, then after a certain time period, asked them if they were still gay. Some of the gay folks said they weren’t. Are we supposed to take them at their word? Holy cow, there are numerous cases of gays saying they’ve been converted. That “scientific study” doesn’t prove anything new. Unless you can come up with an objective scientific study that gays can reduce their sexual stimulus to gay porn, and increase their sexual stimulus to heterosexual porn, you’re grasping at straws.
Excellent article. I have nothing personal against gays either but soemtimes, they kinda moved to the extreme (and I’m not comfortable with extreme). the same can be said for other minority groups. Yes, by legal means we are all equal and we should be given equal respect. But sometimes, it also depends on the person you are talking to. some people have difficulty understanding gays or had a bad experience with them. You certainly can’t blame them but they also can’t hurt or generalize all people as such.
The law is one thing, personal perception is another. So much more is the perception of society. But I think we all need time to adjust and make changes if need be. Perceptions change over time and maybe all of these issues will be solved soon.
“Religious zealots, meanwhile, praised her for her Godly conviction, while “some” (the not zealots?) condemned her for being too soft against the “immorals.—
And may I know who are these religious zealots who praised her? And who are those “some” (not zealots?) who condemned her?
Why is it there’s the adjective for those who agree with her? Can’t we label those “some” as “misguided” as you have labeled religious “zealots” those who agreed with her?
Do these “some” also favor pedophilia as being practiced by gays (NAMBLA)?
Are you telling us that LGBT are oppressed in our country? In what way?
One has to read the history of LGBT in Wiki or for that matter the LGBTQ (Q for queer – those with “queer” sexual practice preference). Maybe you can cite examples on how they are being oppressed. Or maybe how they enjoy being in the limelight.
How are they persecuted/oppressed in the Philippines?
“Yes, I am aware of prejudiced people who view gays as sub-human,…”
How about this example –
(WARNING: Full frontal nudity to follow. Do not continue reading the page if you don’t want to see naked people.)
http://www.zombietime.com/world_naked_bike_ride_2007/
They are gays. Are these their pc-ness? Moral relativism?
I would agree that they’re persecuted in Muslim counties. They’re being executed, most of the time by being stoned into death, and their execution by that method is legal in those countries.
“However, I must assert the findings of my observations—some proponents of the movements are starting to gain an inflated sense of self-importance. SOME of them are not really fighting for equality anymore. SOME of them are alluding to notions of social supremacy.”
(My caps.)
On that one, 100% I agree because it is evident even though you’re referring it to “some” of them. My choice would be “most”.
There’s no such thing as gay being persecuted in our country or in US of America IMO.
Hm… let’s see…
“And may I know who are these religious zealots who praised her? And who are those “some†(not zealots?) who condemned her?
Why is it there’s the adjective for those who agree with her? Can’t we label those “some†as “misguided†as you have labeled religious “zealots†those who agreed with her?”
Oh, I’m impressed by your observation. But that is purely coincidental. There is no subliminal message embedded in that statement whatsoever.
I cannot associate any collective name to Miriam’s detractors; they could be atheists, pro-gay activists, feminists, concerned citizens… the possibilities are too diverse. Meanwhile, as to the “religious zealot” part:
http://ph.omg.yahoo.com/news/miriam-apologizes-to-lgbt-community-.html
Perhaps, I should have appended “many” to the “religious zealots.” Yes, I told you I’m speaking from a crude observation.
“Do these “some†also favor pedophilia as being practiced by gays (NAMBLA)?”
This is not covered by my article.
“Are you telling us that LGBT are oppressed in our country? In what way?”
To address the rest of your statements:
I now see where you’re coming from. Well, I guess we have a slightly different definition of “persecution.” You see it in a physical sense, which is understandable. I see it in a physical AND psychological sense.
Now, I don’t intend to over-inflate the importance or severity of the encounters where gays are being teased or degraded verbally and stuff like that. I only stated that such instances occur. I do not mean that they always occur, and I do not mean that they are always physically persecuted.
Indeed, compared to other countries, homosexuals are more or less gaining more freedom here, and I agree with that. I just stated that gays still face verbal degradation to a certain extent, while discussing the problems with their movement at the same time. Again, I speak from crude observation.
I have been careful to include this in my article:
“Perhaps the best thing these movements can promote is equality before the law, rather than making a fuss over who beats who. Everyone should be governed by the same set of rules and rights; no distinctions, no special treatment. Everyone has no right to immunity from criticism, but should retain the right to defend themselves. But then, perhaps this is the original intention of the movements in question; however, whether this is true or not, the fact remains that some proponents are going astray from the notion of equality and are pursuing something else entirely.”
So yes, I guess this was a matter of how we define “persecution.” Are we okay? ^^
And I use “some” to mean “there exists at least one” (I use it in a “formal logic” kind of way) to maintain my objectivity. Gotta be careful with what one has to say, after all.
“Here we go again; the age-long struggle of the oppressed to assert their rights and whatnot.
Yes, I am aware that the Church can be despicable for its cold persecution of the homosexual community, while preaching the gospel of love and peace at the same time. Yes, I am aware of prejudiced people who view gays as sub-human, and I am aware that homosexuals do have the right to defend themselves.”
Have you mentioned anything about crude observation?
Maybe, and I’ve missed it.
““Do these “some†also favor pedophilia as being practiced by gays (NAMBLA)?â€
This is not covered by my article.”
How about me saying just my crude observation?
The way I’ll do it, the next time I’ll comment in your post, I’ll ask first if your basing it in your crude observation.
Claro, I would say, isn’t it Mr. Crude Observation.
Cheers!
I thought it would be self-evident, as the article was mainly laid out in first person. Still, I apologize if I have inconvenienced you.
Heh heh, catchy name… Mr. Crude Observation. It has a quite cheesy ring to it though.
See you in my future articles.
Self-evident???
Duh…
“Homosexuality is not a sin but it is a lie from the devil. Do not be deceived. God loves gays and wants them to know the truth.â€
Above is Miriam’s statement.
Anyone has the right to freely express his/her own opinion. Nothing wrong with that.
So what’s so insulting with her statement? I can’t see what’s the hype all about.
@bulutongboy
The same question I would like to ask.
Why they would be zealots.
I think the emotionally-charged reactions is just a result of our backward onion-skin insecure Filipino attitude.
I mean, if a person says that how I define myself “is a lie from the devil” and that “I should not be deceived”. I would rather ask an explanation why, rather than an emotional defensive reaction (coz that’s stupid).
If the explanation is plausible I may consider it. If not, then everyone is free to believe whatever anyone wants to believe. Simple as that.
If you’re mature you would know that “Other people’s opinion of you, IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.” A person may consider it or may not, but, making a fuzz over an opinion of a one lady really defines what kind of insecure society we have. Insecure and immature.
Sorry but it’s not just Filipinos who are going crazy over a statement from a single lady based from her own opinions and beliefs. Are you aware of the Duck-Dynasty fiasco in the US?
“Anyone has the right to freely express his/her own opinion. Nothing wrong with that.”
I don’t understand the logic here. Quiambao exercised her right to freedom of expression. Her critics, in turn, expressed their right to freedom of expression by criticizing her. What’s the problem?
Quiambao has a right to spout her ignorant, fatuous, and pathetic nonsense. Everybody else has the right to call her out on her nonsense. Why is it nonsense? Because the Devil doesn’t exist and people who believe in the Devil should be treated the same way middle aged men who believe in Santa Claus should be treated: with contempt and ridicule.
True, everyone has a right to their opinion. However, all opinions are not equal. A rational statement that is backed up by scientific or statistical evidence is considerably more valid that an opinion that is nothing more than gauge of an individual’s personal comfort level or religious belief.