I also see it everywhere now, as before I didn't see much at all.

Last edited by Foreverfooled1 (September 9, 2017 11:36 am)

Hi Ynadin,

I have not been up to writing much these last couple of days but have enjoyed reading your posts.  That was an interesting idea that gays tend to be younger family members to limit the competition and I can sorta get into it but when facial recognition programs can determine gay or straight to such a high degree of accuracy it seems to me we edge ever closer to having to accept that same sex attraction is an inherited characteristic.  Just like the shape of your nose.

I have been very unwitting as to how many closet lesbians there are.  as you say it makes sense of a lot of stuff when you realise oh she was lesbian.  I don't like all the mockery they seem to like so much. It is much better now I have learnt how to stand up to it but I can relate much more easily to the emotionality of people who are open and honest about themselves and consequently honest about everyone else - gay or straight.

Last edited by lily (September 10, 2017 12:33 pm)

Hi Daryl,

I think they used straight and gay dating profiles - still not going to be entirely accurate - there would be closet gays on straight dating sites.  But still a reasonable idea of where to get pictures of people self-identified as straight or gay.

I take your points tho and no I don't want to be classified or misclassified for anything - I'm scared to heck of AI and exactly right, a composite picture is a picture of every man but it is also a picture of nobody at all.  

My point was that the fact they have some sort of margin of success from comparing facial photographs indicates that being gay is an inherited characteristic like the shape of your nose is.  well doesn't that make sense, what do you think?

You know how I would like to be treated?  with honesty, a bit of natural respect and a bit of kindness never goes astray either.  Do you think I strayed from that?  If so it was not intentional.

The other point in my post is born out of the experience of spending so long married to a closeted gay man - 15 years before I knew he was gay I reached a point where I could no longer endure his mockery and realised I needed to look after myself - stop looking to him for emotional support but look for it from other people.

It is much better now I have learnt to deal with it.  The other day I was getting some of it from my opposition playing bridge.  Instead of the nervous smiles and dodges I had done in the past I went straight for it and said no that's wrong and I'm not that kind of person - worked a treat.  And it strikes me that if a person is going to hide their identity then they are essentially mocking themselves so they can't help it coming out one way or another.

Is this wrong, Daryl?

peace maintained I hope.





 

Ynadin wrote:

Daryl.

Show me with a quote option who said it/where it was said here in this thread that someone here is *planning* to label a stranger as gay simply because s/he has become aware of that stranger's birth order and with no. other. evidence. what. so. ever.

Please also show with quote option who said/where said it, that someone on here is preaching for us all to take as gospel/new protocol to avail ourselves of AI to judge others' orientation.

Why are you being so defensive about this?
Anyone reading this thread knows full well that I never accused anyone of labeling or preaching anything.
I was expressing my thoughts that these ideas can be badly misinterpreted. (I guess I have to say here that I'm not pointing fingers at anyone in particular.)
Also I don't think it's the point of this board - my opinion, other people may differ.

Ynadin wrote:

I wonder are you the youngest in your own family of origin? I cannot imagine why else you would "read in" something not in evidence here.

I'm not reading in anything here although maybe you seem to be, and you can wonder all you like about my family. I choose what personal details I will reveal here about myself and when.

Ynadin wrote:

My first thought was to delete my comment and urge others to do likewise to address your comfort level and also to deflect from your scolding.

But I think I will not do so.  Because what I wrote was not a "drifting." I took and take extreme pains to write clearly even though my English is not perfect. I take extreme pains, editing many times for utmost clarity. I can guarantee you that my comment did not "drift," nor did the comments after it "drift" toward the dark implications you describe.

Again, I didn't say we were there yet but when discussions seem to be trending towards more talking about groups than individuals, warning bells start to go off in my head.

Ynadin wrote:

Members of my family now retired worked in military intelligence and later at NSA. I grew up hearing all about the potential, and also the limitations, of AI. It is not voodoo to me nor is the bible.

In addition, regarding the accuracy of AI/facial recognition of orientation: I have had multiple surgeries on my face after a dog attack in my childhood, it took massive surgeries to reconstruct especially my mouth. The surgeons did an excellent job over 20 yrs. I look much like what I would likely have looked like if not torn up... however: in my late teens I had a rhinoplasty ("nose job").... so...... is it not likely that such alterations to my face would obscure the program's ability to "read" me accurately?

I share these personal factors only in order to "prove" that I myself have no attachment to the AI program's success/failure rates, as my own "God given" face has been altered artificially.

You do not have to prove anything to me. As for my opinion, things like AI do need to be carefully thought out. Not just "can we do it?" but "do we need to do it?". Once done it can be hard to go back so I think it's safe to have a healthy skepticism and demand the most extraordinary and rigorous testing and analysis weighed against our rights as people.

By the way, I can't imagine going through 20 years of surgeries. That takes strength.

Ynadin wrote:

I will not accept accusations that I promote or even subscribe non-negotiably to things that I only shared on here for sake of discussion with those who might be interested.

If admin wishes to delete "offending" comments, mine especially, that is his prerogative. But I reject the accusations laid out in your comment. I take great pains to be careful in my assessments/musings (speculations). I study vast amounts of information resources, and keep an open mind, too open perhaps. It is important to me to assess and receive individuals as individuals. Having grown up around the world it is natural to me to look first to commonalities in order to connect, not objectify.

Again, I did not accuse you of promoting this but, in my opinion, when you post something you have to take some responsibility for posting it. Even if you were just posting it for the sake of discussion, is it a discussion we need to have? How does it help anyone here at the moment, especially those of us still in the middle of the maelstrom?

None of this is/was intended to be a personal attack on you or anyone else, just my 2 cents worth. Take care folks.


 

Let's not allow ourselves to argue or become defensive.  These are very important conversations about very painful and personal experiences.  It's easy to mistake another viewpoint as a personal criticism.  Let's take a step back and remember we are all here for the same purpose.  We can apprecaite the intentions of the other person and move forward on good terms. 

I will weigh in with my opinion for the sake of transparency and then I will have a conversation with Sam about how to address an important point being raised. 

I should have changed the title of the thread to something more individually focused.  The original post was a comment from nancy about how she suspects her circle of friends is very heavily closeted gay people.  Her request from the group was for advice on how to change her network of friends.  I think we did great in giving advice on how she might be able to meet new people and expand her network and maybe find some new activities that she enjoys. Mission accomplished in my opinion.    
However, WE (notice I'm not singling anyone out) pivoted to a discussion on general groups of people having more or less gay people in their population, and then to a theoretical discussion on what causes people to be gay.  I think we got off topic and that's my fault for letting it go so far down a different track. 

I think Ynadin's posts were brilliant, well-written and very thoughtful.  I completely understand how it feels to make a great effort to help others and then have the information you've shared be questioned on whether or not it's appropriate for the forum.  I greatly appreciate her desire to help people and share the wisdom she has gained through her experiences.  

I think Daryl's posts posed a great question/warning about the topic of discussion.  He has a long history of sage advice and is a trusted voice of reason on this forum.  I didn't read his comments as a direct attack and I didn't see any disrespect or carelessness in what he posted. 


So here's the question:  Is it OK for this forum to have broad and general conversations about homosexuality?  I can see both sides and I could argue both ways.  I think it's always healthy to improve your knowledge on a topic.  I think having a better understanding of the topic helps us process our own life events and also helps us share better advice with other people who need our support.  On the flip side, I think it's dangerous to stereotype groups.  I think we've all be injured by homosexuality and despite our best intents, I think we are prone to negativity, and negativity compounds stereotyping to become hate.  If our forum gives off the appearance of hate we will run contrary to the Straight Spouse Network's stance and objectives and we will turn away new people who greatly need our help.

I'm going to chat with Sam and ask him to weigh in on this topic.