UK and homophobia and SSM

So, please take this with a big caveat. I can only say what I've observed, and observations on such a short time scale are suspect, and certainly are not objective data.

I've been very surprised by the number of comments I've heard made in my presence both at work and at social events (specifically, gaming; folks at the pagan moot don't seem to have this problem) that are bordering on homophobic.

They're the sort of statements that are borderline, like thinking it's funny and worth pointing out or bringing up that someone looks 'gay.' These are people who probably aren't homophobic -- they may even have a gay friend. But they don't seem to realize that finding it funny that someone might be gay implies that there's something funny about being gay in general -- and that thus, gay people are objects of derision.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that comments like that would be considered highly inappropriate in a Canadian workplace -- it creates a hostile environment for those of us who are queer.

And then, I've heard a few people bring up SSM as though the situation here in the UK is satisfactory, so I looked it up.

They've got one of those "separate but equal" dealies, where they are granted all of the legal rights of marriage, the only difference being the title 'marriage.'

Separate but equal is not equal. Period.

Sure, this is heads and shoulders above most of the countries of the world. But it feels unsatisfying to me.

I'm wondering why it ended up this way -- does it have to do with the Queen being the head of the Anglican church, and thus state and church not being separate? Yes, I'm woefully ignorant about British government, so please bear with me. And, I'm wondering, are local activists still working on getting this last bit of difference removed, or is the local community satisfied with things as they stand?

Friendships and confidance and "talking dirt"

A while ago, I was hanging out with some people I did not know very well, who are also poly. I observed that in cities where my friends are not available to occasionally hang out one-on-one, I have felt lonely or frustrated.

One woman immediately said that she didn't have any friends like that, and several of the other people sitting at the table agreed.

That bothered me at the time, in part because I felt she was speaking in a manner that invalidated and dismissed my experiences.

But more importantly because this is something I think a lot of poly people miss out on. All our one-on-one time gets taken up by dating multiple people, and we have no time to build strong friendships. Which means that when you're having trouble with one SO, the only people you're really close to are your SOs, who are all to some extent biased by the very nature of your relationship with them.

Fast forward to a few days ago, when I was reading some back entries in the polyamory community, and I ran across this entry.

The common thread in peoples' responses to polywolf's post is that it is not appropriate to "talk dirt" in "public." No one defined what it means to be talking dirt, and no one defined what is in public.

This bothers me for a variety of reasons, since this is a question I often struggle with -- I know I tend to be more prone to talk about things than many people. I think there are a lot of good and reasonable reasons to talk in certain circumstances, but I also recognize many of the reasons NOT to talk, and so I'm torn.

This time when I read these words, however, what struck me the most was not the usual arguments for and against public discussion. Rather, what struck me was the juxtaposition of the dismissive woman I spoke with, and what people were saying in the polyamory community.

If we never hang out with friends one-on-one, and we are not allowed to talk about our problems with the people in our lives (also apparently known as talking dirt) in public, then we never get to talk to our friends about it. Combine these two factors and you get a system that doesn't work.

I suppose that someone who falls into both of these categories could arrange a one-one-one conversation with one or two friends when they need advice.

( A segue about personal problems I have with this solution, and using LJ for support )

Anyway, the people espousing these two mores do not, as far as I know, overlap. But I'd be curious to hear how someone with both beliefs functions, and how well it works for them. The answer may lie in their definitions of public and talking dirt.