[url=http://www.gay-serbia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2518606#p2518606]Srklet napisao:[/url]zasto je 'kontroverzni, donekle' dovoljno da se odrice vrijednost nekog djela?
pa, ja sam isprva uradio sve sem odricao vrijednost ovog djela. naprotiv, preporuchih ga.
medjutim, informiravshi se malo podrobnije, Dynes jeste unekoliko kontroverzan. ne bi ga Garland Publishing, Inc. olako uklonili. pa se on vajka na "levicharsko, politichko-korektne, jednoumne...." LGBT-ovce koji su, po njemu, bezvredni, grozni..... a, ne vidi problem u ovom shto pishe, citiram ga:
"LGBTQ vs. Homosexualities
The success of the the so-called 'LGBT movement,' has often served to dumb-down the actual history and character of homosexualities.
Homosexualities aren't an alphabet soup of 'identities'. Neither are they any one, single thing.
The center of gravity of male homosexuality across cultures, even species has been pederastic (adults and adolescents) and transsexual (butch with fems).
Today's ideal-celebrated-in-the-breach ideal of monogamous matrimony, among same-age, same-class "normal" males is a form of homosexuality that has has been rare throughout history.
The LGBTQ movement increasingly defines itself by denying these historical facts and the continuing reality around the world today.
LGBTQ has become worse than an empty signifier. Like other social movements, such as Marxism, that promised freedom and ended in disaster --revolutionaries from the French on and nationalisms of all kinds, including perhaps Zionism -- it's not clear how successful the LGBTQ movement has been been in promoting justice, fairness and happiness
Many of the texts here address this imbalance."
- dakle, on inzistira na isticanju istorijskih ljubavnih i seks. odnosa mushkarac-djechak (ispod 18 godina) ili dominantni (mushkarac) - pasivni (mtf-transrodni). izjavljuje da su samo ti imali centralnu silu gravitacije homoseksualnih odnosa u proshlosti.
sigurno da smeta njegova iskljuchivost u onome i njegovo nametanje hodanja po tankoj liniji s pedofilijom. nije ni chudo shto velika vecina savremenog GLBTIQA pokreta ga smatra za kontroverznog i liability. moze se on vajkati koliko hoce "ljevicharski politichko korektni sterilni...".
nije u tome stvar! stvar je potreba poshtovanja odredjenih univerzalno moralno etichkih normi i u gej svijetu te kako predstaviti gej svijet (proshlosti i sadashnjosti) vecinskom negej svijetu.
ono na chemu on u svom relativno selektivnom pristupu inzistira u opisu predjashnjosti gej svijeta je sigurno da je bilo izrazeno u toj predjashnjosti (nishta vishe od istog toga u hetero svijetu!), ali centrirati svoj nauchni rad na tome je bojim se kontraproduktivno za gej prava, zivote i interese.
