Graeme

I would like to think you're right, but my gut feeling is that you're wrong. For the general population, where a lot of attitude and opinions are based on ignorance, I think you're right. However, I was thinking of the situation where people think that homosexuality is morally wrong (and those that take that belief to extremes). In this case, teaching them that effeminate doesn't necessarily mean homosexual will help keep the straight effeminate guys from mental and emotional abuse -- but it is almost impossible for many of these people to get them to change their attitude to homosexuality. For some, they will change their minds, or at least moderate their attitudes, once they get to know some homosexuals, but it is very, very difficult to get them to shift from the view that homosexuality is morally wrong.

I hope those scales are in pounds and not kilograms... though I think he's in trouble anyway. Okay, my post for the day... always a struggle, since I'm such a shy and unassuming person (sorry -- I couldn't resist). It's Friday morning here in Melbourne. The sky is overcast and dull, but it's not raining. We still need the rain -- we had a good start to Winter, but then the rains stopped. Our water supply is lower than the same time last year, and we had serious water restrictions put in place during our last Summer as a consequence. I can see it being even worse this year, since Summer is just over a month away Oh, and I know he probably won't be reading this thread, but it is Rain's 17th birthday tomorrow. Rain is the editor for my short stories and anthology entries. Like Aaron, who edits my novels, Rain is a member of the Mail Crew. Happy Birthday, Rain!

I agree, and if there wasn't a homophobic element in society I wouldn't be as upset. My main problem is that it is quite possible that this THREE YEAR OLD BOY wasn't gay. Was he killed because his dad couldn't stand the idea of an effeminate son, or was he killed because his dad couldn't stand the idea of a gay son? If it is the later, and even if it wasn't in this particular case, then we need to correct the perception that effeminate equals gay. Too often I hear of people equating the two -- and then homophobically putting down the effeminate guys. I dislike homophobic attitudes as much as anyone else here -- but I think it is even worse when the target of that abuse isn't homosexual in the first place! There are effeminate straight guys out that need help -- are we going to not help them just because they're "collateral damage" in the abuse/violence thrown at the gays? "Sorry, now you know what we go through," doesn't help -- at least not by much. If it saves even one boy from being abused/bullied/killed, I think it's worthwhile doing. I believe it is easier to educate people that effeminate does not necessarily mean gay than to educate them that being gay is okay. If you like, it's one step along the way. It's not a perfect step, but it's a useful step.

But seeing something in a theatre is a different atmosphere and feel to seeing it on TV, or even in a home theatre (if you have access to one of those). Oh, and $9 for a ticket in Australia is cheap....

According to the wikipedia page for Ronnie Paris, his father was sentenced to 30 years for second-degree murder and his mother to 5 years for culpable negligence. You can see why I hate it when people try to equate effeminancy and homosexuality -- it can have some very, very nasty consequences. Certainly, a lot of effeminate men turn out to be gay or bi, but to make it out to be 99%, as the article did, gives a very wrong impression.

There's smallpox and cowpox (the original source for the smallpox vaccine), so I suppose there's probably goatpox as well -- or at least a close variation.

If you're going to post a candle a day, then I hope you have a LOT of candle pictures.... Nice, though. I really like them

2004? But that's back in the dark ages!!! Before the dark ages, even!

I agree that may be, and probably was, the intention, but my first reading of it was that he's telling the person who wrote that letter that the boy is almost certainly gay, RATHER than saying that it's the father's reaction that's the problem, not any future sexuality of the child. I can also see some people who don't know better using that initial statement as "proof" that a boy who is effeminate will grow up to be gay. It may be that I'm biased -- I can still remember the case in Florida not that long ago where the father KILLED the toddler because he thought he was gay... I don't want any other parents out there mixing up effeminate as a child with homosexual as an adult. EDIT: The link to the incident I mentioned above from two years ago: Thought Toddler Gay, Dad Kills Son

It's more that different people have a different sense of humour. I don't like being hit over the head with a movie that keeps trying to tell me "laugh, this is supposed to be funny". There's a fine line between being funny and being stupid, and that line is in a different place for different people. I can see that, for me, this movie could end up too often on the "stupid" side of that line.

I disagree with Dan's first comment. The child shows strong effeminate tendencies. That does not make him 99% certain he'll be gay. Yes, there is a high probability, but it is a lot lower than 99%. Otherwise, I thought he gave some good answers.

Good luck, Tony! It sounds like it's starting well and I hope it continues that way

Not my type of film, but it could be amusing. It appears to be poking fun at those who racially stereotype.

I had a thought last night about what's likely to happen in the next chapter with Zeke. I know I'm slow, but I've only just realised that Brandon is unlikely to be a surprise for Zeke. Since they are touring with Instinct and Instinct has just appeared in Rolling Stone, with Brandon on the cover, it is highly likely that someone in The Shadows will have picked up a copy. Zeke will therefore know about the new lead singer. If Zeke remembers Brandon from Phoenix, then he will have at least a suspicion that Brandon is his brother's ex-friend. He may have some lingering doubts that the picture just looks like the person he knows, but he's not likely to be surprised when he meets Brandon. He will have had some time to think about it first. Another thought has also occurred to me. We don't know the circumstances about Brandon's falling out with Zeke's brother. Was it over a short enough time, and Brandon leaving shortly after, that maybe Zeke's brother has had a change of heart? We can all do things in the heat of the moment that we regret later. Okay, I'm looking for a classic happy ending, but maybe Zeke's brother missed Brandon after he left and hence realised he'd made a mistake.

What am I going to post about today? I don't know.... Has anyone else noticed how quiet GA has been since CJ has been offline? I'm usually a reactive poster (responding to other people) -- it's really hard for me to try to initiate things since I don't have posts from CJ to respond to....

SPOILER!!! Though in this case it's a good spoil since it means I don't have to worry about being stressed out for a couple of weeks. Thanks, Joe!

I suspect that chapter 14 ends in a cliffhanger... or, if I can pretend to be CJ for a moment, a slightly tense ending... and as such he doesn't want to leave us waiting too long. He knows he'd be BBQ'd if he left us waiting too long after doing that. Nice picture, Bondwriter, but I don't think that's CJ unless he's decided to die his hair.

There's a report that Australia will be returning the favour from our last bushfire season and will be sending some firefighters to help out. I hope they do -- we've done it in the past and I expect we'll be doing it in the future, too.

In the report they listed each country and the number of people interviewed. For most places it was around 700-800 people, with some of the larger countries going as high as 3000. I'm pretty sure the just didn't interview people in the other countries. That's probably a convenience thing -- they used interviewers where they had them, but didn't fly them to other countries. As for countries smaller than Mauritius... besides Singapore, theirs Lichtenstein and Vatican City. Depending on how you count size (eg. if you use landmass, rather than area covered), there's probably one or two South Pacific nations that also qualify as smaller.

Er... I thought CJ's Chapter Release Schedule didn't have chapter 14 until the 6th November. We've got another two weeks to wait....

Happy Birthday! I hope you have a great day!

Isn't that all we'd all like to think about? I agree -- great Avatar!

I went to the PDF report because I want to find the figures for Australia. All I discovered was that Australian and New Zealand don't appear to count In the report itself, there was more details: I checked the age breakup on homosexuality for Germany for you. The 18-39 age range has an acceptance percentage of 91% while the 40+ age range had 76%. In all of the countries they listed (they didn't list all, but they listed most American and European countries) EVERY country had a more accepting younger generation than older generation. Graeme

I hope not -- he hasn't mentioned Hobart in the story so far.... :wacko:

A new day, so time for another post. I'm going to be a bit short today, I think, because I'm about to get on a plane again... It's only an overnight trip, but I'll be off the air for most of the two days. And I know CJ is counting on my to pass his post count while he's away...