There are two ways to unite people together

1- Fear: By creating a real or imagined problem, the population can be scared into obedience and conformity.

2- Love: By accepting people, a population can be live happily with each other

johmue:I got your point and I think I prezented it concisely in the new thread. Just one point:

Polaris:even if these things [Extramarital sex, homosexuality, dirty songs/jokes, condoms at youth events] were acceptable in Europe, it's still immorality, still distasteful.

You can't say that generally. It is distasteful and immoral to you, yes. But not to me. To me extramartial sex and homosexuality is just as normal as bread and butter and daylight.

Yes, I certainly CAN say that. You can't tell people what they have to accept or what they can or can't look down upon. Your decision to call these things "normal" doesn't make them right--but more to the original point, it doesn't make them any more acceptable or palatable to the rest of society, either. Showcasing these things and highlighting them for the public subjects the movement to scorn and disrespect.

My point was never to deliberate with you about what is or isn't wrong--you don't need my permission to say what you think; nor do I need yours--but it's the perception of the public that is at issue, here. It's funny how while you're so busy "not judging", you feel the need to harshly condemn people who don't accept your views.

Polaris:And by the way, I'm glad you have a Science Review magazine waiting for articles---I may just have to send you one on Repudiation of Darwinian Evolution: Intelligent Design Models Explaining Irreducible Complexities. Interested?

No. That would make it look as if ISAE as part of Esperanto movement is supporting pseudoscience like creationism and intelligent design.

That's the answer you wanted to provoke in order to make your point clear, isn't it?

It was actually an attempt at humor, Johmue--perhaps I should have known better than to try.

Polaris:

johmue:I got your point and I think I prezented it concisely in the new thread. Just one point:

Polaris:even if these things [Extramarital sex, homosexuality, dirty songs/jokes, condoms at youth events] were acceptable in Europe, it's still immorality, still distasteful.

You can't say that generally. It is distasteful and immoral to you, yes. But not to me. To me extramartial sex and homosexuality is just as normal as bread and butter and daylight.

Yes, I certainly CAN say that. You can't tell people what they have to accept or what they can or can't look down upon. Your decision to call these things "normal" doesn't make them right

... nor does your decision to call them immoral make them immoral or wrong.

My point was never to deliberate with you about what is or isn't wrong--you don't need my permission to say what you think; nor do I need yours--but it's the perception of the public that is at issue, here. It's funny how while you're so busy "not judging", you feel the need to harshly condemn people who don't accept your views.

I don't condemn anyone.

Polaris:

Tempodivalse:

vejktoro:I bet there are several left handed Esperantists.

I hope nobody thinks I think that is okay.

If memory serves, there was some Asian country where left-handedness was considered a disorder up until the 70s ... :eyeroll:

I don't think having Esperantists comparing homosexuality to Nazism is good for Esperanto's PR. It was very disappointing to hear that coming from you, Polaris. Do you really believe gay pride parades result in the a comparable amount of harm as Nazi rallies (and their participants)? That appears to be the implication. Please tell me this was just an attempt at hyperbole.

Oh, my goodness ---Tempodivalse, read what I wrote to Noren--it's the post just above this one---I'm not going through it all again.

I read it, and I still think the Nazi comparison (or even the mention!) is inappropriate in this context. I would be very, very hesitant to link the Tea Party, the ACLU, PETA, Rush Limbaugh, the US Communist Party, or any other position considered "controversial" or "fringe" today (be it right- or left-wing) to Nazism, no matter how much I disagreed with any of their views. To so freely make the allusion, is an unfortunate underestimation of the extent of its horrors - or perhaps just an unfortunate hyperbole.

I actually agree with you that Esperantists would do well to increase Esperanto's visibility in academic and intellectual fields. The "Esperanto University" in San Marino (whose precise name I forget) is a model I would love to see replicated elsewhere. I think academics can more readily appreciate the utility of Esperanto, and contribute more to its development, than "Bob and Jane" (though ultimately, Bob and Jane will have to learn the language en masse for it to have widespread practical use outside non-academic settings, e.g. asking for directions in Ulanbatar).

About the gay pride march "incident":

Polaris cxe Libera Folio:Ŝajnas al mi tre pretendema diri “La Esperanto-komunumo de Filipinoj subtenas la GLAT-movadon”. "La komunumo"? Se du activuloj el la Esperanto-movado elektas agi laŭ samseksemula vivstilo, tio estas sia propra, privata afero. Tamen, ili ne rajtas paroli en la nomo de la tuta komunumo. Ci tio donis la misimpreson ke ekzistas ligilo inter la Esperanto-movado kaj samseksemeco, kaj tio nepre estas erara kaj malvera. Se kelke da Mormonoj aŭ Katolikoj aliĝus marŝadon kaj proklamus ke "la Esperanto-komunumo subtenas nian eklesion!", estus ĝuste?

The sign said "Eo-komunumo de Filipinoj". The FEJA has four members, out of which two attended the event, so yes: at least 50% of the FEJA supports GLAT rights. Apparently the FEJA is the only Eo community or association in the Philippines (http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landaj_asocioj_de_UEA...). So I cannot see anything wrong with this sign...

He didn't say that the Oklahoma-Eo-Community supported GLAT. He only spoke on behalf of himself and the other three organized Philippines esperantists.

His local Eo-group shares also the basic principles of the world wide TEJO:

TEJO kontraŭas diskriminacion rilate al nacieco, raso, sekso, seksa orientiĝo, handikapeco, religio, politiko, socia deveno kaj lingvo.

Kiam oni kontraŭas diskriminacion, estas devige subteni la rajtojn de diskriminaciatoj.

So if anyone is to blame for the participation in a gay rights event, it is the members of TEJO who adopted these principles against discrimination.

So, yesterday, while I was gone all day, I thought of things I could say on this topic (regardless of whether it's the original topic or not) of Esperanto's public image. But on my return, I find that Polaris has already said it all . So, I will just recapitulate what seems to be the basic thrust of his point: Esperanto is supposed to be a neutral language for all people. And as long as people are people, they will have different strongly-held positions, and think that others are objectively wrong. It isn't the job of Esperanto to take sides in these controversies. If a vegan speaks Esperanto, and is publicly characterised by both Esperantism and veganism, that is not the same as saying "Esperanto is the language of vegans. That is what it's all about." Can't anyone figure this out? It's not about whether or not homosexuality, the Tea Party, and Naziism are similar in any way! It's about the fact that people should not claim that the Esperanto community as a whole supports this or that lifestyle or ideology, or say things that give that impression, because it isn't true! The Esperanto community is made up of all kinds of people, although the ratio may be different than that of the overall world population, and we all need to realise that one group's views do not necessarily represent those of all Esperantujo.

Christa627:If a vegan speaks Esperanto, and is publicly characterised by both Esperantism and veganism, that is not the same as saying "Esperanto is the language of vegans.

And that's correct. You know that that's true. I know that that's true. Anyone who speaks Esperanto knows that that's true.

The general public does not know that that's true.

Esperanto is mostly an unknown to the general public today. But if it were to become known in particular by first being linked in any way at all to any particular group or individual, it could very well become associated in the public's mind with that group or individual. That can be a positive or a negative, of course.

For example, let's say that 60 Minutes (a long-running US "news magazine" on the CBS television network) does another interview with Charles Manson, and uncovers very publicly that for many years he's been an avid fan and supporter of the Esperanto movement[1]. Turns out the entire "Manson Family" was learning Esperanto right before that whole "Tate/La Bianca" thing. It just never came up.

That would be bad for Esperanto, right then and there. Has nothing to do with Esperanto itself, but Esperanto would instantly become "that weird Manson thing" in the public's eye. But you can pick your (in)famous celebrity, political group, religious sect, it doesn't matter - if THEY (whoever they are) become known for their link with Esperanto, then Esperanto will be linked with them. So if Veronica Lettucehead, the award winning vegan author and frequent daytime talk-show guest suddenly reveals that she thinks that Esperanto is just what the world needs to live in peaceful harmony with itself and nature and blah blah blah[2], then Esperanto becomes "that nutty vegan thing from Oprah".

You know it's not. I know it's not. Todd down at the hardware store knows no such thing, and he's the guy a lot of people would like to get interested in Esperanto - the so-called "normal" types. Without the Todd's, Esperanto remains fringe, but with the Veronica Lettucehead's, Esperanto also remains fringe. The question is, how do you market Esperanto to Todd? Because Todd doesn't like any of that weird stuff.

I think that's the main point in this thread that's getting buried in questionable particulars where generalities would really work a whole lot better.

-----------------------------
[1] There is no evidence that Charles Manson or anyone in the "Manson Family" had or has any knowledge whatsoever of Esperanto. It's just a made up example about someone I can probably pretty much count on there not being a lot of support for.
[2] Veronica also thinks that doctors aren't using enough "crystal energy" in surgeries. She is famous for not running from controversy.

In your experience, does Todd down at the hardware store consider "being against discrimination" (kontrauxi diskriminacion) being main-stream or fringe?

Some user here has an Esperanto blog about woodworking, does this turn Esperanto into the language of weirdo woodpeckers?
Some user here has an Esperanto blog about oils, does this turn Esperanto into the language of alternative massagists?

About what can we talk publicly in Esperanto without scaring Todd?
Which stance can TEJO or any Eo community take without scaring Todd?
Especially when what is main-stream for Todd might be fringe for Ansgar, Muhammad or Juan and vice versa.

nornen:About what can we talk publicly in Esperanto without scaring Todd?

That is the question, isn't it?

RiotNrrd:

nornen:About what can we talk publicly in Esperanto without scaring Todd?

That is the question, isn't it?

So kontrauxi diskriminacion is definitely not on the list of items that won't scare Todd?