Let's remove the word "Attention" and substitution the word "scream".
If someone stands in the middle of the street and screams: "I DON'T SCREAM" - clearly they are contradicting themselves.
If I say, "The problem with guys in plaid shirts is that they tend to scream", I'm over generalizing.
But then, if a plaid shirt wearing guy starts screaming "I DON'T SCREAM" over and over and over again, you really don't expect me to say "Wow, you're right. You don't scream."
You would be wrong to say it about ALL plaid shirt wearing guys.
[gs]This thread boils down to three things in my opinion:
#1) Who is gay?
- My point is and has been that "gay" is an umbrella term which included "bi", "lesbian", etc. The BIs on the thread have admitted that they are covered under "gay marriage" and "gay rights". So, they admit that "gay" applies to them.\[/qs\]
Others seem to have brought up honest attempts to explain how they see being gay and gay marrage as different things with different implications on people who may or may not fall under one or both of those terms. I tend to agree, gay marrage is a union between two men, so the nomer gay marrage works in regards to the act of the marrage itself. However, I don't see why ONLY gays, as defined by the concensus as those who are only interested in members of the same gender as they, are the only ones who would want a "gay marrage". It doesn't seem to be about attention seeking about attention seeking, but about making sure correct terminology is used.
Yet, in response to me, they object to being referred to as "gay".
So, it's a "nigger" situation. They get to call one another gay but no one else gets to.
Drastic oversimplification. The term Nigger is deemed offencive to some due the historical connertations it brings up for them (so some have told me, I see no rason not to believe them). I don't know why some have a problem with you're use of the term gay other than being deemed wrong by concensus, but that's for them to deside.