And as to this. How about everyone learn proper history (and stop stopping after WWII!!) and stop giving this and that grief group a disjointed over focus? If students learned proper American History, they'd know about Ponce De Leon, Benajmin Banneker, Paul Revere, George Washington, Phillis Wheatley, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, Antietam, Appamatox, Jim Thorpe, The Alamo, Wilma Mankiller, Rosa Parks, Ceasar Chavez(yes, he's a commie to a degree, but still important, dammit), Stonewall, Bayard Rustin without losing anything.
Last edited by CueSi; 07-16-2011 at 10:06 PM.
Unlike the zoot suit riots of the 1940's which actually got a SONG written about it. I'm surprised California hasn't taught about THAT.
Last edited by CueSi; 07-16-2011 at 10:17 PM.
The highlights of gay history can probably be covered in less than an hour, thanks to us being largely written out of it by later generations. However there is considerable reference in literature, which apparently Christianized Europe wasn't quite as eager to vandalize.
Just as you said about Afrocentrism, it's possible it could happen with gay history in parts of the country as well. Case in point: The rumor mongering about Abraham Lincoln. I dropped a class because the professor believed that theory wholeheartedly. So just like black Americans claiming Cleopatra, I will come to your grave and tell you I told you so if 50 years from now, he's on a poster like this one-------------> I mean, Mrs. FDR is on there already and no one's got solid proof of that shit that I know of. I want inclusion, but fugg a GSA network and this shit right HERE.
Last edited by CueSi; 07-17-2011 at 03:36 AM.
There have been entire organizations and cultural pressure though in certain countries and groups to deny the evidence though for figures like King James, Alexander, and various other significant figures. they really jump through hoops to do this. The gay history of the early Christian priesthood has been deliberately all but erased, yet no one seems to tire of going on and on about the relative handful of priests who have engaged in homosexual sexual abuse and trying to paint the gay community with that while never making similar accusations about heterosexual abuse other than to condemn abuse but not heterosexuality.
I don't get it. If a person did something worth note in history, why does it matter who he/she slept with?
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|