Apparently I'm not the only person in the world who can intelligently rant.
The following is by my wife, posted on her behalf (as she doesn't want to create and maintain her own blog.)
This is in response to this article: http://www.gayguys.com/2013/10/bisexuals-pushed-lgbt-rights-issues/
This
article talks a lot about bisexual men. I understand there is a
difference between bisexual men and bisexual women as far as acceptance
goes.
As for the male side, this article does a pretty good job of summing it up. I know it is very difficult
for bi men to feel accepted by both straight men and gay men. Lots
either go one way or the other and have one night stands on the side to
fill the need for the other gender (hence the bad rapport of they are
all slutty and sleep around too much).
As
for the female side of things...It seems to me we are accepted by
straight men, but it is not usually an acceptance that comes with respect.
The acceptance we get is "OH your bi...So you can make out with other
chicks and I get to watch and maybe play?! Eh?!" This leads to a lot of
women being more straight but being "bi curious." They get boyfriends
lead the "straight" life and when they are drunk or no one is looking
they make out and have sex with girls on the side. It is all hush hush
no one need know type of life. I have seen it time and time again. This
makes it hard for a female to find a committed relationship with another
girl once she has a guy. Few of the "bi curious" type will mever admit
to being fully bi. "I don't want a relationship with another girl," or
"I don't really like girls I just have a few friends I like to play
with," or "I am not bi I just make out with anything while I am drunk,"
are all things I have heard. For the few I have heard that admit they
are bi it is "well my family would not like it if I was bi or gay so I
will just have to keep you a secret."
Lesbians,
not all of them but a good number, do not like men. Not just they don't
want to sleep them, but they have issues with non gay/transgendered
men. Try telling one of them that you are bi and they just don't
understand. They are usually fine with it, but it they just can not
understand it. They would want nothing to do with a bi female who would
also want a male as far as a relationship goes.
I
personally think there are more bisexual people out there then society
realizes. We just hide or lie to ourselves. It is easier to lie to
yourself and play strait until drunk or curtains are closed to let out
who you truly are. Hell, I lied to myself for years. I knew back when I
was in grade school that I liked girls, but I was a girl I was supposed
to like boys. I liked some so that counts. I must be strait. I am not to
like all boys and I don't like all girls so...I am just strait and
admiring these women. I must want to look like them...that is all,
right?
Also
there is another issue with being bi that is not mentioned when
marriage comes up. Polyamory. When a person is bisexual, and to feel
completely satisfied sexually need both sets of genitalia, it is hard to
have a committed three way relationship. First off, even if you find
two people that fit well with you and of opposite genders, you can not
marry both. It is illegal. That leaves one person out if you decide to
marry one before meeting the other. Also the word Polyamorous has lots
of negative connotations. Let just put the whole "I can play too and
watch right?"on the side. There are some men who think it is all about
them and having lots of wives to have more babies, and who cares if the
women actually like each other, harems. Lots of women are scared of
couples looking cause you never know when it might just be the guy
posting looking for his own harem or they live in a more BDSM style home
and you will be his 24/7 slave. Being a single bi female looking at
couples can be dangerous. So find a guy first and then find the right
chick, but then it comes full circle. There is not a girl who will risk
it.
There
are lots of issues with the bisexual community. I hope one day we can
all learn to be who we are and be okay with who we are. I also hope for
understanding of bisexuals. It is not that we want to sleep with
everyone or everything. We just need both genders in our lives sexually
to feel satisfied. We can want and keep committed relationships even if
it has two other people instead of just one.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Wealth Equalization = Economic Health
Okay, most don't sound that extreme, but you get the general idea, but they do get pretty bad. Those who call welfare "the poor stealing from the middle class" and those who tell about shellshocked vets who will never have a chance to reliably hold a job again who need our support, to the ominous sounding "welfare mom" who lives off of welfare making babies because she can to the noble people who were once stuck on food stamps, but having been able to survive due to them and later become millionaires and became gracious philanthropists.
Almost all the arguments on both sides are highly emotional, with people going on about "what's right."
The only remotely unbiased argument that I've heard (and I do mean "remotely") is those that say making the rich have money means money will trickle down and help the poor although that's been disproved over and over (note, they keep trying to push the failed "trickle down" idea over and over despite it never working, and they just change the name each time; it may be trickle down, another time it's "Job Creators," another time its "public investment in industry," etc.).
So the question is... what makes the economy healthy?
One very obvious answer when you stop and think about it. It's called Wealth Equalization.
Most will agree, the economy is built on two things: Buying, and Selling. Which, in reality, is silly. Because if you think about that for a second, you'll realize that's not two things. It's one thing. You can't buy without a seller, and you can't sell without a buy. In the long run, buys minus sells and sells minus buys equals 0. There's one sell for every buy, one buy for every sell.
The economy is built on only one thing: Trades.
The more trading that happens, the better. It doesn't matter if its buying or selling or for how much. One day's seller is the next day's buyer. The value of a coin changes from day to day. The economy is not built on the value of trades or who's buying and selling, it's built, almost completely on the number of trades that happen and the number of people involved in the trades. The former determines the strength of an economy, the latter determines the size of an economy.
Another key point to realize about trades, is they benefit specifically the people who trade. The trades that happen on Wall Street benefit those who are on Wall street. That's why they make the trades. The people who make trades in stores are the ones who benefit from the trades. If a trade doesn't benefit (or at least seem it benefits) both parties, they don't trade, simple as that. The vast majority of the benefit goes only to those people who did the trade.
So, for the best economy, you need the most people doing the most trades.
And that means you have to maximize the number of people trading, and the number of trades. And that means maximizing the number of people who want to buy things and have the money to buy things while making sure there are enough people with the resources to make and sell those things to meet the demand.
So, whatever scary name people call it by, "Wealth Redistribution," "Wealth Equalization," a "Robin Hood Tax," or "Stealing from job creators to give to welfare moms" doesn't change the fact it's a good idea for our economy, and in turn, for everyone. You want to have as many people as possible as close as possible to being middle class. That means people have the resources to make things, and people have the money to buy those things, and in turn, push the economy forward.
Some people may wonder if any kind of precedent for such forced wealth redistribution exists without violent overthrow or Robin-Hood tendencies. And the answer is, yes. During their most prosperous time in ancient history, the Hebrews once had a tradition that happened very 50 years called Jubilee.
During the year of Jubilee, all debts were forgiven, slaves were set free, and bought/taken/seized lands were returned to their original owners (references to it can be found in the Torah/Bible in Leviticus 25:10). Practically, this helped the Hebrew nation significantly by forcing an equalization to an economy that could get unbalanced over time. It wasn't perfect (business people began to plan ahead for jubilee to prevent it from redistributing their wealth), and eventually the practice lost prominence. (Although, interesting to note, some Jews still hold this practice to this day, and interestingly, our previous time of healthiest economy was around the time of the last Jubilee. It could be coincidence, but I believe it's something that should be researched.)
So, in all honesty, what we likely need to end the recession and get the economy back on track is a either sweeping reforms to make constant wealth equalization, some politically intense event to force wealth equalization, or a Jubilee.
And that means systematically giving to the poor.
So, I don't care if you feel giving to the poor, and medicare, and medicaid, and so many other things are the right thing to do (although I feel they are), but they are the smart thing to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)