anotherlongshot (anotherlongshot) wrote,
anotherlongshot
anotherlongshot

on slow download speeds and homophobia.

Does anyone know how to make my BitComet go faster? It's so damn ridiculous that my Veronica Mars is downloading at an average rate of bloody 4 kb/s. It's killing me, it really is; I even made my brother stop all his downloads to make mine go faster, but to absolutely no avail. It's really pissing me off; at this rate I'd only get to watch the brand-new episode for which I've been waiting for a thousand bloody years next Wednesday or something.

Ugh.

Anyway, I was supposed to do my memorial re-write this afternoon but I ended up spending about two hours writing posts on the Legal Theory forum, one of which was a pro-abolition of s. 377 Penal Code which was really a rant against homophobia and the narrow-mindedness of homophobics. I think I might have offended people, but heck, they offended me first! I've never understood why some people feel the seemingly-irrepressible urge to discriminate others on grounds of their sexual orientation, and I will never, ever understand it. You can throw all sorts of arguments at me and I will continue to call bullshit on every single one of them until the day that I die. Let's be more tolerant, okay? I'm not even asking you to accept them; surely tolerance can't be that difficult?

Well, on second thought, I'm not very tolerant of intolerant people so maybe I shouldn't talk.

But what really prodded me to write that anti-homophobia rant was this strange thing someone wrote about how his friend views homosexuality as a "disease" contracted by a person who has been hurt in a past relationship. I tried very hard in my post not to sound too rude and I really toned down on my incredulity; I stopped short of calling that opinion utterly stupid. But can you see where I'm coming from? I truly don't understand how anyone can think something like that if that person isn't of below-average IQ. I mean, I don't agree with religious arguments against homosexuality, but at least those arguments have some logical basis; but the disease one? Like, what the fuck? Talk about mind-boggling.

And there are also some people (not students in my Legal Theory class, thankfully) who seem to think that legalising homosexuality, so to speak, would expose innocent young boys to paedophiles who suddenly have the freedom to molest them. Once again, where the hell is the logic in that retarded assertion? Are we saying that innocent young girls are not the subject of paedophiliac (sp) tendencies? Even more atrocious: Are we in fact saying that all homosexuals are paedophiles who like young boys and that repealing s. 377 is giving paedophiles the green light to molest young boys? Does the pseudo-argument make any sort of sense at all? The last I checked, paedophile is a crime, no matter what sexual orientation you're of; and s. 377 actually deals with private homosexual acts between consenting adults. Where the hell would the exploitation of innocent young boys come in then? (I know! Way left field!)

Section 377 continues to amaze me with its irrelevant, bigoted, illogical and disgustingly discriminatory existence. And 377A? Probably the most laughable provision in the Penal Code, trumping even the funny illustrations of things like culpable homicide and whatever else (that illustration about someone firing a loaded cannon into a crowd? Hahaha).

Would love to rant further but it's dinner time. Any tips on increasing my slow-as-a-turtle BitComet will be greatly appreciated.

Tags: current affairs, law school, rant
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments