Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 62672

[About an ordinance to ban discrimination against gays in Anchorage]

Here are just some of the reasons I am against the homosexual ordinance.

It would allow any man to dress like a woman and use any public women's restroom. Ladies, do you want that to happen? If not then you should contact the Anchorage Assembly and show up at the June 9 public hearing.

A man in a highly visible sales job could come to work dressed like a woman.

A person of either sex who indulges a taste for extreme sexual promiscuity and pornography during working hours could not be stopped or fired even though it damages the company's image.

Maybe, worst of all, this ordinance would allow a man who teaches a second grade class or any grade to show up as a woman in the classroom and the School District could do nothing because of this ordinance.

Dr. Jerry Prevo, ADN Letters to the Editor 77 Comments [5/27/2009 5:58:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 45
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2 3 4
Colonel Catastrophe

You know, gay people are not the perverts you seem to think they are. Also, cross-dressers often tend to be heterosexual just as much as homosexual.

Asshole.

5/27/2009 6:01:07 AM

Rix

This guys problem seems to be transvestites not homosexuals.

5/27/2009 6:07:37 AM

C_V


sounds like someone is in denial of his inner woman. poor baby.

5/27/2009 6:08:19 AM

Scooby71

You seem to think about cross-dressing a lot.

How long have you had these thoughts?

5/27/2009 6:10:27 AM

Shann

Wow. Paranoid much, Dr. Pervo?

5/27/2009 6:11:27 AM

Moondog

I can think of three people on my Facebook Friends list who are gay. None are cross-dressers. Granted it's a small sample size, but we have found some who don't conform to your stereotype. Therefore, the hypothesis is null.

5/27/2009 6:15:33 AM



"Ladies, do you want that to happen?"

Why on Earth would I care? It's not like I'm gonna let them into the cubicle with me, regardless of gender and/or sexual orientation...

Oh, and cross-dressing =/= gay. And I really don't think what kind of porn people watch in the workplace is gonna be a problem, more y'know, that they watch any kind of porn whilst working...

5/27/2009 6:15:44 AM

The Jamo

So if women were to wear, say, trousers, it would mean that it would allow them to use the male restroom. Makes perfect sense.

Oh, wait...

5/27/2009 6:20:07 AM

CailinBan

I imagine that this ordinance would not take away employers' rights to enforce a dress code.

As already said, any porn in work wouldn't be acceptable - so firing a gay person for looking at gay porn at work would not be discrimination as long as you'd fire a straight person for looking at straight porn. So this ordinance wouldn't affect this issue.

And, as others have already said, gay is not synonymous with cross-dressing.

5/27/2009 6:25:50 AM

Paschal Wagner

So... you're afraid that you WON'T get to share bathrooms with cross-dressing gays?

5/27/2009 6:27:51 AM

Horsefeathers

"It would allow any man to dress like a woman and use any public women's restroom."

Uh, no. Gender dictates which you use, not dress you moron. You don't go in the one that has the picture on the door that matches what you happen to be wearing.

"Ladies, do you want that to happen?"

Given the choice between having a guy in a dress or you in there I'm sure I know which they'd choose.

"If not then you should contact the Anchorage Assembly and show up at the June 9 public hearing."

Now, now. Don't go roping others into your stupidity.

"A man in a highly visible sales job could come to work dressed like a woman."

*gasp*

Say it ain't so, Jerry! Say it ain't so!

Look, if I'm in the market for widgets and yours cost less, are better made and have a better warranty than your competitor I don't really give a fuck what your salesperson is dressed like. They could be a trained gorilla for all I care.

"A person of either sex who indulges a taste for extreme sexual promiscuity and pornography during working hours could not be stopped or fired even though it damages the company's image."

I fail to see why you think this. I find it particularly strange that you even brought it up since it doesn't have a damned thing to do with what you're talking about.

"Maybe, worst of all, this ordinance would allow a man who teaches a second grade class or any grade to show up as a woman in the classroom and the School District could do nothing because of this ordinance."

Oh, heavens! We can't have children exposed to diversity now can we!? Why, if that were to happen the likelihood of them growing up to be intolerant bigots such as your fine self would just drop through the floor. And where would we be then, right Jerry?

5/27/2009 6:31:16 AM

wackadoodle

Ah the old 'not treating tans people like shit mens men can put on a dress and watch you in the bathroom!' they always ignore that the people who need to use the other genders bathroom are legally required to dress as a woman and have a note from a doctor explaining why. Lying bigot.

5/27/2009 6:50:38 AM

breakerslion

"A man in a highly visible sales job could come to work dressed like a woman."

And if showing a little cleavage helps get the sale, I bet his employer won't give a shit.

5/27/2009 7:05:14 AM

Pyena

I like how his only concern is gay guys and not lesbians.

And why do people like this always go for the whole restroom argument? First off, gay men wouldn't be interested in anything the women are doing in there. Second, most restrooms have stalls with doors on them. It's not like they're gonna bring a stepladder and peek over the door!

5/27/2009 7:08:43 AM

BobsOldSocks

A publicly accessible news site is *not* the place to play out your sexual fantasies, Jerry. Please show a little restraint.

5/27/2009 7:10:10 AM

LC

None of my cross-dressing acquaintances ever go to work dressed as women. None of them use the ladies' loos. None of them look at porn at work.

And none of them are gay.

5/27/2009 7:17:43 AM

Thinking Allowed

I believe Dr. Jerrry Prevo is confusing transgendered with homosexuality.

5/27/2009 7:19:44 AM



On the site he links to on that page, he says that the 3 largest religions, Christianity Islam and Judaism(lol) find something wrong with gays, therefore its wrong. Maybe because they are descended from Judaism?

5/27/2009 7:19:47 AM

D Laurier.

"It would allow any man to dress like a woman and use any public women's restroom."
No, It wouldn't.
It would only make it illegal to persecute homosexuals for being homosexuals.

"A man in a highly visible sales job could come to work dressed like a woman."
And??? This is already common to the point of being boring. There was a gentleman who ran a hardware store.... always dressed in his wife's floral dresses when he was working.
Beehive hairdo wig too.

"A person of either sex who indulges a taste for extreme sexual promiscuity and pornography during working hours could not be stopped or fired even though it damages the company's image."
Ummmmm. Yes they could.
Being homosexual does not mean having the right to abuse company time.


5/27/2009 7:25:29 AM

Jezebel's Evil Sister

What they really need is an ordinance against lying about proposed ordinances in public forums.

5/27/2009 7:36:53 AM



you've never met a gay guy, have you

5/27/2009 7:42:19 AM

shykid

I'm a gay dude, and I have no inclination to cross-dress (not that there's anything wrong with it--just not my thing) or engage in promiscuous sex in any public place, much less my place of work. Also, anyone--straight, gay, or anything in between--would be fired for looking at porno on company time, the end.

Furthermore, being a gay guy, I obviously have no desire to perv out in the ladies' room. If I was inclined to that sort of thing, there'd be a greater danger of it happening in a men's room. Does that really need spelling out for you? Plus, if some creepy straight guy tried what you said, he'd be promptly apprehended for it. As for the rest of your inane babbling, the only response I can muster is "So what?"

I know it pains you to think I'm a "normal" person just like you, but I'm pretty much a regular guy. No uncontrollable sexual urges. No public orgies. No STDs. No lisp. No limp wrist. No swish. No fabulousness. And no "oh, girlfriend, let me tell you something" unless I'm being silly. The only thing that sets me apart from your average straight guy is my knack for other guys (and perhaps my nice clothes and groomed eyebrows if you insist on being stereotypical).

You have displayed a breathtaking level of ignorance about both LGBT people and the ordinance in question. You leave no doubt in any intelligent person's mind that you're speaking out of bigotry rather than a genuine concern for society.

5/27/2009 7:57:11 AM

Philbert McAdamia

worst of all, this ordinance would allow a man who teaches a second grade class or any grade to show up as a woman in the classroom

Why...why...why, Mrs. fr**kin' Doubtfire might show up at your 7 year old's school!!!!!!1!!!!

The HORROR!

What next? A guy in a fuzzy sweater making sci fi monster movies? Milton Berle in a gown? It's the end times!

5/27/2009 8:03:41 AM

aaa

I think you are confusing some terms. If you dress up as a woman, you are a transvestite or a japanese video game character. If you are into people of the same gender, it's called being a homo.

5/27/2009 8:15:46 AM

JSS

Okay Mr. Jerry Prevo. (I refuse to call you doctor after this display of sheer ignorance) Here's the reasons why your theories are bull:

There is a DIFFERENCE, yes a DIFFERENCE between being gay and being a transsexual. Gay rights are not the same as transsexual rights. Knowing this, you can take out all the theories about how men would come to work dressed as ladies and use ladies' restrooms.

Just because someone is gay does not mean he/she is extremely promiscuous. Why else do you think they're all wanting gay marriage? I don't know how someone who follows mere stereotypes "earns" your title. Maybe from one of those Christian theology biased "colleges"?

5/27/2009 8:25:55 AM
1 2 3 4