Houston just elected a gay mayor...does it now eclipse Austin as most progressive Texas metro?

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by OneJackson

and Jay Brown two things:

1. you're wrong about JJ. if she didn't have those pipes, she would've been a nobody. her VOICE was the first impression, her color, sex etc...followed.

2. and no gay hate here. Just questions no gay has been able to answer or dare to. it's too touchy of a subject and may cause fireworks. so my comment on the term was a topic discussed with other heteros but all that other stuff you said heteros do and say , I've never heard in my circles. that's all I'm saying.

1) I never said she wasn't known for her voice. Only that people discussed the other aspects of her as well. You said her voice was the only thing that mattered. It's not really something I need to argue, Look up the biographies on Janis Joplin. YOU Might not have said it, but it was part of the conversation.

2) What questions are us "gays" not able to answer? I answered all your questions. As far as your "comment on the term was a topic discussed among other heteros" I am confused? What topic? Only amongst heteros? Us "gays" cannot answer it? What did I say heteros do and say? I have NEVER made a blanket statement saying all heteros act or say one thing? Prove me wrong, show me what I said. Are you purposely baiting me by saying "no gay has been able to answer or dare to."? What don't we DARE to answer?

Your specific question of "what does ones' sexual orientation have to do with her ability to do the job" was answered in full by me and others.

I guess I have to quote myself here.

"You really need to read the posting before you respond."

[OneJackson]

by Jay Brown

How we want to redefine things...

That's exactly what gays want when it comes to the laws of marriage or else it would not be such a hot button issue.

[phoenix_talons]

Houston just elected a gay mayor...does it now eclipse Austin as most progressive Texas metro?

Create more jobs, then I'll be inclined to agree.

[Paulmmm]

>>by Jay Brown

How we want to redefine things...

Originally Posted by OneJackson

That's exactly what gays want when it comes to the laws of marriage or else it would not be such a hot button issue.

Are you saying that you honestly believe that the reason that gay marriage is a hot-button issue is because some people (and not just gays - I'm straight and I want it changed, too) want the laws of marraige redefined to include gays? You honestly think that it's the redefining that makes it controversial? It's not because some people have fear, disgust, prejudice, etc. of gays? It's because some want a law redefined/changed? If that's what you think, I totally disagree with you as to why it's a hot-button issue.

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by OneJackson

That's exactly what gays want when it comes to the laws of marriage or else it would not be such a hot button issue.

It's sort of interesting when the topic is about a gay mayor, and OneJackson immediately jumps to gay marriage. It's sort of like when someone asks "What is the job market like in Austin?" and someone jumps in with "too many illegal aliens!"

Basically, what is happening is, someone has an axe to grind about a particular issue, and they try to shoehorn it in whenever they get a chance. Whether it has anything to do with the conversation or not. OneJackson himself admits that this is another topic for another post, yet he keeps jumping to it.


Notice how onejackson does not answer my questions. When I ask him to clarify his statement that he has asked "questions no gay has been able to answer or dare to", he ignores that. When I ask him to defend his accusation that I have generalized heterosexuals saying "all that other stuff you said heteros do and say" he ignores that too. He has a confusing sentence that I don't understand, about how he was only speaking to heteros, when I ask him to explain he ignores that too.

If he is talking about gay marriage, I don't see how that is "too touchy a subject". It only has about 300 million posts on City-data alone.

But just for clarification, this is the history of the post.

1. Gay Mayor in Houston
2. Good job Gay Mayor in Houston
3. Why does being Gay matter
4. Because it's good for gays to have role models and 10 years ago it never would have happened.
5. YOU GAYS JUST WANT TO REDEFINE MARRIAGE!!!! (Jumping much?)

My suggestion to OneJackson is to start a new thread about gay marriage if that is his particular axe to grind.

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by Paulmmm

>>by Jay Brown

How we want to redefine things...



Are you saying that you honestly believe that the reason that gay marriage is a hot-button issue is because some people (and not just gays - I'm straight and I want it changed, too) want the laws of marraige redefined to include gays? You honestly think that it's the redefining that makes it controversial? It's not because some people have fear, disgust, prejudice, etc. of gays? It's because some want a law redefined/changed? If that's what you think, I totally disagree with you as to why it's a hot-button issue.

It's interesting that you mention this too, and I think it deserves a little bit of focus. I find it a little bit irritating when people against gay marriage claim, almost as if their feelings are hurt, "NO, we aren't homophobic! We just prefer the TRADITIONAL defenition of marriage."

I always find that interesting, because whether you look at it historically, or use the bible as your dictionary, the TRADITIONAL definition of marriage is

1) Polygamy
2) Women owned by their husbands as property
3) No Divorce

Now, we as Americans have by law, by tradition, and by all logic removed all 3 of these definitions from marriage today. The people who claim up and down that gay marriage will destroy society, and that we should not try these "dangerous social experiments" with marriage, never seem to jump on the bandwagon when we try to illegalize divorce.

It sort of reminds me of Anita Bryant who crusaded against gay people being able to have any rights, going so far as to say that they can't teach in schools and that all gays were evil and trying to "recruit" children. She claimed she didn't hate gays either, she was just going off the bible.

Sort of funny that in her declining years all the fundamentalists that supported her rabid homophobia completely abandoned her because she divorced her abusive husband. Looks like Anita didn't mind redefining marriage when it suited her needs. Guess the bible doesnt need to be consulted when it started affecting HER. As Anita said herself "The church needs to wake up and find some way to cope with divorce and women's problems"

And that's really what it is, isn't it? The bible and religon are just convenient EXCUSES for homophobia. Joe Blow hates gay marriage because he hates gays. But rather than be honest about his hate, he hides behind Jesus. Just like Anita Bryant did. But Joe Blow won't help to illegalize divorce, because that might affect him. Can't limit Joe Blows rights, after all. The institution of marriage is ONLY sacred when it is being denied other people, not when it is being denied to Joe Blow.

So, just be honest about your homophobia. Come right out and say "I don't like gays, the though of gay sex skeeves me out. I don't think that the relationship between 2 men could be as deep and loving and fullfilling as those reality show contestants on the Bachelor." Just admit it people!!!

[hamiltonpl]

I am glad that her election challenges the long-held beliefs of many that Texas is a racist, redneck, homophobic state. Additionally, many people in Austin are, quite ironically, provincial in thinking that their's is the only progressive town in Texas. Austin has a homogenus, white population, one main industry, and one main university. It's an awesome town, don't get me wrong. But it ain't the diverse weird scene that Austin promotes. Dallas and Houston have long elected people from racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities. They just don't brag about being diverse... because they don't have to.

[inthecut]

Originally Posted by Nomadic9460678748

It shouldn't matter if she's gay, straight, crooked, bi, try, or whatever. We have a black president and that doesn't necessarily make the United States the most progressive country in the world. Elected government leaders don't necessarily reflect an overall population's penchant for progressive political leaders. How could it when electoral turnouts are often 20-50% of the eligible voting population? Though I'm not privy to the numbers in Houston. Were they high? State and local elections tend to have dismal turnout percentages. I think it matters most that she appears to have earned the trust of the voting population in Houston and seems ready to work for an objective agenda. And it's true that Austin has never had an openly gay mayor, but it's not had an African American mayor either, and only a handful of Latino mayors. I don't know that it proves anything though.

Either way best of luck to her!

Interesting point, whether this "proves" anything, ala "the proof is in the pudding". Presuming this means you're implying that this proves Houston is explicitly diverse in itself, or more diverse vis-a-vis Austin, or amongst the most diverse large cities, I suppose it COULD be a harbinger of the same.

I don't think many large urban areas have high voting totals for several reasons. One, much of the urban core is composed of hispanics, many of whom are either alienated from the voting populace, or not naturalized in the first place, and second, much of it is composed of the rest of the alienated urban core, largely poor and struggling, who are light years away from anything considered a body politic.....the remaining 15-25%, unfortunately, decide elections in most large urban metros.....

That all being said, the Houston business establishment just got a collective thumbs down from the voters who DID show up in Houston last week-end, and that might be the biggest story of all. Houston looks to be tired of the same old politics, and looking to shake things up, and I really think it just happenstance that the winner happens to be gay. More important, she happens to be a political gadfly, who has got in the "ointment" of Houston politics for quite a while now, and has worked her way to the top of the pyramid per the local power structure. She sounds like she is willing and able to transform the Houston metro into a world class city, and a progressive one at that, with energy/oil money at its core, but with a penchant for risking it all that was there since the wildcat oil strikers of old. I think it more than a coincidence that one of the Texas oil titans, T Boone Pickens, has been one of the leading proponents of alternative energy/wind power/solar power....Would it not make all the sense in the world if the main push for alternative energy came, not from California, but from Houston, Texas, the nexus of the oil/energy industry itself?

I think we have a sleeping progressive giant in the making that just woke up(Houston). ......I greatly look forward to what great things Mayor Parker will do at the helm, and all power, hope, and Godspeed to her.....


And what a great, genuine smile she has, BTW!

[inthecut]

BTW, this is Annise Parker's GF/SIG OTHER, Kathy Hubbard(not sure if they are married, but they have two kids). Kathy is the nondescript, frumpy-looking woman on the right with the bad perm, not the large black woman.