Surely it could make me mad, if said in a derogatory way. Anything said in a derogatory manner would offend me. But, if it was just a joke by a gay friend, I wouldn't take offense. By the way, if you're gay, you should realize you're in the minority and that many straight people would take offense at that, so your friends should be careful and not be inflammatory.
2006-08-01 09:30:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
Here's the deal: I think it's stupid (read: counterproductive) for any oppressed group to just turn around and retaliate. I completely understand the desire to, I just don't think it's a very effective method of gaining any kind of respect. That having been said, while I don't like the term "breeder" or the implications thereof, I also recognize that calling a straight person a breeder is far, FAR different from calling a gay / bi person any of the myriad of names that exist for them. The GLBT community has a longstanding history of random acts of violence against them; each incident probably at least starts out with someone shouting "fag" or something similar. As such, when a straight person gets called "breeder", they're gonna be angry, maybe a little bit hurt or sad. The one thing that's different is that they are incredibly unlikely to feel real, physical FEAR. There is no terror aspect involved. As such, I think it's disrespectful as all get out, and counterproductive, and generally just catty, but it's NOT the same as when a straight person does something similar.
2006-08-01 13:15:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Atropis 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
That is one of the dumbest term I have ever heard. Medically, and by nature, we are all "breeders". Men and women were created to reproduce. If a man decides to sleep with other men, or a woman sleeps with other women they are still breeders. That term is right up there with the stupidity of calling white people "cracker". Never heard the term until I moved to the south. I think crackers are quite delicious. In the words of Rodney King, "can't we all just get along?"
2006-08-02 07:49:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by 0219 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
It bothers me if you classify me by any word that makes it seem like you know me when you don't. You could call me Bob. Anything else is an assumption and yes assumptions are malicious. I'm a man and I'm only sexually attracted to women. Not all women, but some. I don't refer to myself as a "straight person". Is that okay with you?
Some of my ancestors were from Europe. I have light skin, brown hair and green eyes. I don't refer to myself as a "white person." I'm still just Bob. Why would you want to classify me? There is no acceptable reason. Do you want to suppose that you can make my decisions for me because "all straight people" or "all white people" are supposed to think a certain way? Don't go down that road. Treat people like people and may peace return to the earth.
Sorry for being tough, but I really hate exclusionism.
2006-08-01 09:41:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by anyone 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Eh, not really. I mean, it is true that heterosexuals are a little better at making babies than gay people. I guess they think it's offensive to imply that all we're interested in is having babies, but hey, it's a pretty rewarding experience and most of us wind up having kids at some point. A lot of people think that being a parent is the best thing they ever did in their life. I guess it's a little dismissive to say that that's all we're good for...but we don't find the term as offensive as the terms that gay people get called by some gay-hating straight people. It's not that big a deal.
2006-08-01 09:34:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by SlowClap 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
specific, regrettably that's frequently partly genuine. They do would desire to conquer canines however. these days have considered greater (Line breeding) working example Grandfather/granddaughter, a million/2 brother/a million/2 sister, difficulty is it may carry out the extremes, solid and undesirable. There are solid breeders and undesirable breeders everywhere. If this female gained suitable of instruct, she could have had to conquer, the winners of the different communities, ie, working, carrying, non carrying, toy. She would have gained suitable of Breed, yet no longer gotten any factors if no different BC had shown. the information superhighway could be an exceedingly undesirable ingredient while it incorporates advertising canines. human beings will have self assurance something that's on a internet site, pay solid money with out checking issues out, have the pup shipped to them and then stay with the outcomes. I truly have talked with a lot of human beings, who think of they are getting high quality canines and finally end up with tragic memories. that may not customary yet regrettably is happens way too frequently. desire I helped.
2016-10-01 08:50:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Erika 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well as a bisexual I find the term amusing. I am a breeder and it doesn't bother me at all.
Edit:
By the way you 100% straight and you 100% gay people need to realize something we bisexuals outnumber both of you by 2 to your 1. So we need just a little more respect from you guys.
Just a thought.
2006-08-01 09:31:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by ♂ Randy W. ♂ 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Doesn't really bother me. I do think it odd that they call straight people breeders, however, as without breeders they and their lifestyle may no longer exist. If homosexuality is genetic then it could only be passed on through "breeding" since they cannot pass on this genetic code through male-male or female-female copulation.
2006-08-01 09:32:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Rance D 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
It doesn't bother me at all when my gay friends call me a breeder--I know they are just playing around and that they love me.
When people that I don't know call me a breeder, it kind of bugs me (granted, it's only happened once or twice). I respect people and don't judge, and I want everyone to extend the same courtesy to me.
2006-08-01 09:33:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I've never heard the term. But it doesn't bother me one bit because although I have decided not to have children, technically I am a breeder.
2006-08-01 09:32:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by tina m 6
·
1⤊
0⤋