Gay Marriage In Hong Kong

1.  2017.....Was The Tide Shifting in Asia..?
2.  2017.....Gay Marriage In Taiwan
3.  2018.....Hong Kong Government vs Same-Sex Benefits
4.  What FuelMix Thinks


1.  2017...Was The Tide Shifting In Asia..?

1.  In 2017, we wondered whether the conservative tide in Asia was shifting.  At the time, there was a landmark decision in the High Court allowing same-sex benefits to the partner of a gay Hong Kong civil servant who had legally married his white partner in New Zealand.

2.  Considering that the Hong Kong Government was the city's largest employer, the decision had implications for the private sector as well - although the reality is that several large companies like Cathay Pacific Airways, HSBC and international investment banks, were already providing same-sex benefits to those who were legally married or in a civil union.


2.  2017.....Gay Marriage In Taiwan

1.  Shortly afterwards (in fact, just days afterwards) the Constitutional Court in Taiwan declared that same-sex marriages should be legal.  See the post in May 2017 entitled, Same-Sex Marriage In Taiwan..? 1  (Part 2 of the post that we uploaded the next day confirming the court's decision, with our additional comments, disappeared on 8 August 2018 as we were attempting to republish it. We pressed the wrong button).

2.  There was widespread gay jubilation in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Many Hong Kong pundits declared that gay marriage was also about to come to Hong Kong.


3.  2018.....Hong Kong Government vs Same Sex Benefits

1.  Then, the Hong Kong Government decided to take the case allowing same-sex benefits in the civil service, to the Court Of Appeal.  It was heard at the end of May 2018 and the decision was massively conservative.  The Court reversed the decision of the High Court on 2 main grounds:

(1).  By declaring that the Hong Kong Government, as not just a private employer but as a "custodian of Hong Kong's socio-moral values" had a legitimate aim to protect the institution of traditional marriage.  By granting same-sex benefits, which were unique to "marriage" (i.e. between a man and a woman), the status of "marriage" would significantly diminish in the eyes of the public.  Moreover, the extension of granting same-sex benefits would inevitably spread to public housing, social welfare, public medical benefits, employment benefits and protection, pensions and life insurance;

(2).  The Court also looked at Article 37 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong's constitution, which states:

“the freedom of marriage of Hong Kong residents and their right to raise a family freely shall be protected by law”.

The Court decided that the word "marriage" meant the union between a man and a woman.  Therefore, there was fundamental constitutional backing for the government's legitimate aim.  To give same-sex benefits:

" is to offend, challenge, question, confuse or subtly change [Hong Kong] society's established understanding of the concept of marriage, which....is rooted in its traditional historical, social, moral or religious background and values, as embedded in Articled 37 of the Basic Law".

4.  What FuelMix Thinks

1.  Several times in this blog, we said that while we support same-sex relationships, we do not support it by way of "marriage".  This is because "Marriage" is infused with religious and social baggage and there is no shortage of those screeching in favour of traditional "family values".

2.  We stated that Civil Union was the way to go.  In other words, separate but equal, with full rights of inheritance, next-of-kin status, employment and pensions benefits, employment protection against discrimination, raising a family, divorce proceedings etc.  The effect would be to remove same-sex relationships from the baggage-laden concept of  "marriage", thereby depriving conservatives of any ammunition.

3.  The decision of the Hong Kong Court Of Appeal is a prime example of such social and judicial conservatism.

4.  At some level, however, they're right.  The Government does take the lead in socio-moral values.  This is because Law is a reflection of prevailing morality at a given point in time.  But, society's views change over time.  That's why Laws are amended or repealed and new ones brought in.  It's an evolving organic process as societies become more discerning.

5.  The Court's reliance on Article 37 of the Basic Law is more problematic. They have equated marriage with having children.  In the context of same-sex relationship, that doesn't necessarily follow.

6.  We think that the phrase, “the freedom of marriage of Hong Kong residents and their right to raise a family freely shall be protected by law” is disjunctive.  In other words, the freedom of marriage of Hong Kong residents should apply to their right to marry legally overseas.

7.  The Court alluded to the possibility of same-sex marriage being allowed IF the Basic Law was amended.  Here lies a wider problem.  China has repeatedly stated that it will NOT amend the Basic Law........not because they're against same-sex marriage, but because local pro-democracy activists (who may, or may not, be foreign instigated) have been repeatedly calling for an amendment to the Basic Law regarding the voting for the city's Chief Executive.  From China's point of view, that's understandable. They do NOT want to create a precedent for future amendments.

8.  This matter will now go to the Court Of Final Appeal.  It remains to be seen whether they will be just as conservative as the Court Of Appeal, or more liberal.

9.  Note that in July 2018, the Court Of Final Appeal ordered the Immigration Department to grant a lifelong same-sex couples visa to a lesbian's partner.  Therefore, for the purposes of a Dependent Visa, Gay Marriage and Civil Union that took place overseas, are recognized in Hong Kong.


Copyright © 2006 – 2018 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG

Adultery

To:

Those gay men who claim to be married or have a boyfriend, or claim to be, or think they are, in a relationship, but are sleeping around:

• with consent of the other partner;
• with the assumed consent of the other partner;  
• without the consent of their partner;
• without disclosing or discussing what they're up to;
• on the basis of "don't ask, don't tell";
• assuming their partner is also sleeping around;
• or just flat out lying about what they're up to;

we present the comments of Sadhguru.  Speaking in perfect English, with the option of English subtitles.  Running time: 6 minutes.



To ensure the correct video loads, refresh the page
Copyright in the video vests in the lawful copyright holders

See also the posts:  

1. Yeah I'm Straight
2. Open Season
3. The Vow
4. The Pact
5. And The Band Stayed On
6. Bi-furcation
7. For Better, For Worse Or Whatever
8. An Ideal.....Compromised 
9. Shot Through The Heart 

Copyright © 2006 – 2018 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG

Orbit In Love...?

It was the scientist, R. Buckminster Fuller who said that rather than "falling in love" (only to fall out of it and go hurtling into oblivion, emotional rebounds and abusive relationships), 2 people should "orbit in love".  In other words, create a dynamic cohesive tension held together by the force of gravity, love and honesty.  This would generate momentum, keeping the relationship alive and evolving.

For years, we had difficulty imagining what the concept of orbiting in love would look like.  Then this came along...



To ensure the correct video loads, refresh the page
Copyright in the video vests in the lawful copyright holders.

Bermuda Reverses Gay Marriage

1.  .....and instead, will allow any Bermudian to enter into Domestic Partnership, which the government says will offer equal rights.

2.  It became the first country in the world to reverse a law allowing same-sex marriage.

3.  This is very interesting.

4.  In 2017, the Supreme Court of Bermuda authorized same-sex marriage.  It was a highly controversial decision in the wealthy, but socially conservative island, (whose status is that of a British Overseas Territory) with a population of about 60,000 and in which the christian church wields considerable political influence. It is estimated that 2 out of 3 people in Bermuda are active christians.  Thousands protested outside the Bermudian Parliament after the Supreme Court's decision.

5.  We wondered at that time, how long the Supreme Court's decision would last.  We knew from our professional dealings that Bermudians are no pushovers - and neither are they politically correct.

6.  According to Reuters, in the 9 months since it became legal, about a dozen same-sex marriages took place in Bermuda and on cruise ships registered in the territory.

7.  And then....in February 2018, the Governor of Bermuda reversed the Supreme Court ruling and gave his assent to the Domestic Partnership Act.  We'll quote Mr Walton Brown, Bermuda's Minister of Home Affairs whose ruling PLP Party proposed the Act:

"The British Government recognizes that this is a local government decision [Bermuda Government]. [The Act struck a compromise by] "restating that marriage must be between a male and a female, while at the same time recognizing and protecting the rights of same sex couples." 

-----"Bermuda governor approves bill reversing same-sex marriage rights", Reuters, February 8, 2018

8.  Needless to say, politically correct, conventional faggotry is screeching in disbelief, shock and horror. 

9.  They shouldn't be.  We've said several times in this blog that whilst we support same-sex (preferably monogamous) relationships, entering into "Marriage" is not the answer because it is so tainted with moral and religious overtones.  Entering into "Marriage" means that same sex couples will always be in a state of civil war with the Morality Militia.

10. We've said several times that Civil Union (or Domestic Partnerships) is the way to go.  In other words, a separate but equal system of comprehensive rights over which the Morality Militia has no jurisdiction.

11. Back in 2012 we said this in our post, That 'M' Word:

And ya know that for the longest time, FuelMix has been saying that Civil Union not marriage is the way to go.....? Because separate but equal is the only way to avoid the trap of the religious Morality Militia?

Heh Heh Heh.......well fags, the highly acclaimed British (gay) actor, Sir Derek Jacobi (probably best known for his title role in the BBC TV drama series, I, Claudius) agrees.  To wit:

"He agreed with interviewer Nigel Farndale’s suggestion that because civil partnerships and marriages afford almost identical legal rights, he might view the debate as a “fuss about nothing”.

He replied: “Exactly, it’s just this word. [marriage] The Church is the problem.”" (emphasis added)

--------Sir Derek Jacobi: Equal marriage debate a "squabble over nothing", Pink News 3 July 2012

It seems the Government of Bermuda also agrees with FuelMix.  We applaud their pragmatic decision.

We should point out that some lawyers in Bermuda are thinking of bringing a constitutional challenge to the new law. We'll see how this plays out.


Copyright © 2006 – 2018 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG 

No Cake For You..!!

1.  Facts
2.  Faggotry Got It Wrong (As Usual)
3.  Every Business Discriminates
4.  Gay Business Discriminate Against Gay Customers
5.  Real Issue:  Freedom Of Association
6.  Faggotry Just Makes Things Worse


1.  Facts

1.  A heterosexual baker in God's Own Country was the the subject of lengthy proceedings when, citing his religious beliefs, he refused to bake a cake for a gay couple.

2.  The gay couple whined.

3.  Up and down the legal system it went, before ending up at the Supreme Court in Washington DC who recently gave a final ruling that the baker was entitled to refuse to bake a cake and that his personal beliefs had to be respected.


2.  Faggotry Got It Wrong (As Usual)

1.  Faggotry screeched it was a backward step, disrespected gay marriage and was discriminatory.

2.  FuelMix says Faggotry is wrong.


3.  Every Business Discriminates

1.  It's not about Faggotry's assertions of bigotry.  It was about the ability of a business owner to conduct their business as they see fit.  

2.  Despite the laws, guidelines and Politically Correct Sensitivity Training about non-discrimination, guess what...?  All businesses whether walk-in retail or professional service ones like lawyers, accountants, advertising agencies discriminate every day.  Every business has an official or unofficial ranking of:

• its favourite clients;
• its VIP clients;
• its long-standing clients especially those who supported it from Day 1;
• clients referred by existing clients;
• argumentative clients or clients with "issues";
• clients who don't pay on time, or don't pay at all;
• clients they wish would simply go away;
• clients they don't want or need;

3.  The gay couple fell into the last category.

4.  Even prestigious universities, who pride themselves on high-achiever levels of admission and snob value, will happily let really dim-witted Johnny into their ranks and virtually guarantee his graduation, if Johnny's wealthy and socially connected parents offer them a handsome bribe  make a generous donation to the university's endowment fund a year or so before Johnny is due to show up, thereby leapfrogging the entire admission process and merit scrutiny.  It's done all the time, especially in Asia where the right "degree" from the "right university" is awfully important.

5. You don't think the university is discriminating as a business decision in accepting this bribe  this generous and timely donation...??

6.  What about clubs where the bouncers/doormen decide who gets in based on looks, trendiness and hotness...? Or whether you get a VIP entry...?  You don't think they're discriminating..?  Has the club been taken to court...?

7.  What about that women-run cafe in Australia that hires only women and once a week, charges men more because of gender pay gaps..?


4.  Gay Business Discriminate Against Gay Customers

1. Take a walk down Fagland lane in the West.  Or drop into a trendy gay clothing shop in Asia.  There's a good chance the goods they're selling, are overpriced compared to what the same items could be purchased for in other shops not specifically catering to a gay clientele.

2.  It's no accident in Hong Kong that over-priced gay retail that makes repeat customers think twice, coupled with sky-high rent, results in the failure of the gay business sooner rather than later.

3.  And yet, especially in the West, there's a rainbow flag sticker in the shop window and a cutesy sign underneath proclaiming, "Proudly Serving Our Community".   On one occasion in the West, when FuelMix pointed out that the sign should read, "Unashamedly Price-Gouging Gay Men", he was asked to leave the shop.

4.  We've written about gay business practices in our series, Pink Dollar Mafia.


5.  Real Issue:  Freedom of Association

1.  If a business publicly decides to state its customer preference or its bias, or its religious beliefs, it takes several risks:

• it risks a public backlash and adverse publicity. Remember Double Sauna here in Hong Kong...? Which became Hutong..? That was the gay sauna in Mong Kok allegedly notorious for its entry criteria based on ageism, racism, lookism and body type in their quest to attract only hot muscular guys...? Were they taken to court..?  They got a lot of flak online and didn't give a damn;
• it risks alienating existing customers;
• it risks some form of legal or administrative sanction;
• it risks a boycott.  When the owner of Chick-Fil-A in the US stated he did not support gay marriage, fags screamed for a boycott of that business - which backfired when a christian group brought crowds of patrons to the chain;
• it risks bankruptcy;

2. More importantly, it also risks removing potentially unwanted clientele and actually attracting their ideal customers.  For a time, Double Sauna (Hutong less so, apparently, now that it's being overrun with Mainland Chinese and fat ones at that) was doing exactly that.  It's a fine line to walk.  Some businesses choose to walk it.  We say that's OK.

3.  For the pragmatic [gay] customer, being put on actual notice that a business [gay or str8] is wearing its preference or bias or religious beliefs on its sleeve, is actually a good thing.  Better to know up front before stepping into the shop (or that gay sauna), wasting your money or worse, having a nasty or embarrassing encounter.  You don't agree with what they've done or their preferences / bias / religious beliefs...?  Great. Go elsewhere.  You have that choice.  You've always had it.  You don't have to force them to take your money when they don't want it.

4.  Put it this way....you're in a gay sauna and you're cruising some hottie and he's constantly rejecting you.  He's wearing his preference, or his bias, on his sleeve.  Do you go running to the sauna management and demand that the hottie be made to fuck you...?  No.  You shrug it off and continue cruising.  In other words, both you and the hottie are exercising their right of freedom of association.

5.  It's the same in business.  They have the right to decide who'll they'll serve.  You have the right to decide who you'll patronize.  No amount of laws, regulations, Sensitivity Training, Affirmative Action, Political Correctness is going to change that.


6.  Faggotry Just Makes Things Worse  

1.  In fact, Political Correctness, Faggotry-style, will just make it worse.....IF the US Supreme Court had ruled that the hetero baker had to make cakes for gay customers and could not refuse, then logically, Faggotry would still be fucked if the freedom of association was removed.

2.  Want proof....?  Suppose the baker was actually a fag.  He would have to accept business from violently homophobic Neo-Nazi skinheads or, ultra-conservative hate-spewing christians coming in
each day demanding cakes with the icing, "Kill me, I'm a useless faggot".  And the gay baker would have no choice but to comply - even if he didn't want their business.

3.  And right there, Faggotry would squeal again.....

4.  You want a happier, hassle-free life...?  Dump Faggotry and start thinking for yourselves.  A shop doesn't want your business...?  Fine, move on.  Faggotry has no legitimacy to impose the views of a minority on the majority.  Not only is it wrecking the freedom of association, it is distorting the free-market economy.

Copyright © 2006 – 2018 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG 

The Pact

The fat, ugly, 50–something, white fag was holding court at the University of Fag Bar (pending accreditation). His audience were three 20-something fag tourists: one was a hunky white dude, another a pathetically skinny, chain smoking white fag and the third, a slant eyed fag with a West Coast accent. 

It would be correct to say the Fat Ugly White Fag had a captive audience – he was buying all their beers and the three fag tourists, realizing that no one else in the bar would talk to him, were smart enough to let him spiel and dip into his wallet. 

FuelMix was quietly eavesdropping as the Fat Ugly White fag proclaimed his personal history.

Turned out that he was married with a wife (the type with a pussy) and some teenage kids. And he had a pact with the wife. She would turn a blind eye to his craving for cock. In return, he would fund her and the kids, while turning a blind eye to her craving for cock. 

FuelMix assumes that part of the agreement would be that neither would fuck the same man, but hey, who knows. 

According to Fat Ugly Fag, the pact worked well and had been in place for many years. He travelled extensively and frequently, diligently paying pussy and the kids every month. He bragged about the houses he’d bought for her, the clothes and cars for the kids, the medical treatment and the fees for psychological counseling. 

FuelMix pricked up his ears at the last item. Fat Ugly Fag continued: his kids had not quite turned out the way he had assumed, according to the pact. Two of them were in therapy for personality disorders and social alienation. Their school grades weren’t stellar either. Fat Ugly Fag shook his head sagely, took a slurp of his beer and grabbed the crotch of the nearest tourist fag whom he was plying with drinks. Tourist Fag smiled at him, then turned towards FuelMix and rolled his eyes. 

Fat Ugly Fag claimed he couldn’t understand what the kids’ problems were, but felt it best to leave it to "experts."

FuelMix smirked. Seemed the problem was pretty obvious.  Kids who were simply an expense item growing up with a distant (emotionally and physically) father who spent his evenings at fag bars around the world, grabbing cock. Apparently, compared to cock, quality family time might be hard for him to swallow. 

One of the Tourist Fags asked if Fat Ugly Fag felt alone in the world. “No”, claimed Fat Ugly Fag, “I have friends all over the world.....”. 

Another Tourist Fag asked if he might like to spend more time with his emotionally troubled kids. “No” said Fat Ugly Fag, “I’ve left them to the experts. I’ll pay whatever’s necessary and keep my end of the pact”. 

FuelMix finished his drink and swiveled off the bar stool. The pact seemed entirely stupid and chronically crippling to the kids. No doubt some outraged reader will accuse FuelMix of jumping to conclusions. Probably. But any parent with a minimum of sense would at least look at the family context before writing cheques to the therapist – and before bragging about it to strangers. 

Presumably the beer was a business expense too.  

Originally published 11 July 2007
Amended and Republished 24 October 2011  |  22 December 2013 |  
2 April 2018

Copyright © 2006 – 2018 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG

Two Views On Gay Marriage

From 2 guys FuelMix finds interesting:

1.   Pope Francis

Interviewed in 2014 by an Italian daily, the Pope appeared to suggest that civil unions for gays might be acceptable - whilst matrimony i.e. "marriage" remains between a man and a woman.

It's important to note that in the reported English translation, the Pope doesn't explicitly refer to civil unions, but mentions moves to regulate diverse situations of cohabitation, which in turn, are driven by need to regulate economic aspects between persons.

HAHAHAHAHA.....!!!  FuelMix has been screeching for the longest time that fags need to stay away from "marriage" and demand Civil Union and further, that the actual agenda behind western gay activists whining for "marriage" was economic.  See what FuelMix has written under the label, Gay Marriage.

Seems Pope Frankie agrees............


2.   The Dalai Lama

He appears to have gay marriage as an option, saying firstly, that it was up to each government and secondly, that it was ultimately "individual business" - subject to an overriding proviso that each individual should follow the teachings of his religion on sexuality - if he had a religion.

In cases where that individual had no religion, then so long as the sex was safe and consensual, then it was "OK".


FuelMix says:

1.  And there it is in a nutshell from 2 cool guys, interviewed separately in 2014 over a 48 hour period. One says "marriage" should be reserved for str8s, with other vehicles for gays. The other says that ultimately, it's an individual decision.  Reading between the lines of what the Dalai Lama said, we suspect, he's actually inclined towards Civil Union.  That phrase about it being "individual business" seems to give it away and jives with what Pope Francis says about regulating economic aspects between persons.

2.  And just think, fags:

• neither of them screeched in outrage;
• neither of them acted up;
• neither of them demanded "positive portrayal" in the media;
• neither of them called for a boycott of anything or anyone;
• neither of them fulminated about inequality or how gays were the new blacks**

**Memo to fuckin' gay activists:  Blacks aren't done being black yet.

Originally published 18 April 2014
Amended and Republished 15 February 2018

Copyright © 2006 – 2018 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG 

It's Who You Know

Underlining, highlighting and bold print by FuelMix:

ZHEN AI used a conventional method to uncover the truth about her husband’s “business trips”. She logged on to his computer. But what Ms Zhen, who was three months pregnant at the time, found was beyond her imaginings. She saw photos of her husband in some of China’s most exotic settings—Tibet, Hangzhou and Yunnan province—with another man. The pictures of them together in bed were particularly devastating.

Ms Zhen, who is now 30 years old and prefers to use a pseudonym, is one of an estimated 16m straight women who are married to gay men in China. Zhang Beichuan, a scholar, estimates that more than 70% of gay men marry straight women. Using census data from 2011, Mr Zhang estimates that somewhere between 2-5% of Chinese men over the age of 15 are gay, or between 11m and 29m. The women who marry them are known as tongqi, which might be translated as “homo-wife”, using “homo-” for same.

Tolerance is on the rise in major cities. Shanghai had its fourth Pride festival in June. Earlier this month the national ministry of health announced that lesbians will be permitted to donate blood.

Yet intolerance still prevails. Homosexuality was only removed from the health ministry’s list of mental illnesses in 2001. In rural regions, the belief that homosexuality is a treatable disease is still widespread.

It did not occur to Ms Zhen that her husband could be gay, though there were signs. She recalls inadvertently resting her hand on his arm during a movie date. “I felt him flinch, but he endured it”, she says. Though confused by his lack of intimacy, she found his considerate nature to be endearing. She hoped the passion would grow after he proposed. What followed instead was an icy marriage, frequent business trips and a perfunctory sex life.

After finding the photos, Ms Zhen found temporary solace in an online tongqi support group. Luck again abandoned her. This month, her signature joins 50 others on an open letter accusing the website tongqijiayuan.com of scamming its members out of 90,000 yuan ($14,000) in total. Ms Zhen lost 2,000 yuan. “We’ve realised [the site’s] owners were taking advantage of our fragile emotions and low social status,” the joint letter reads.

It is especially difficult for Chinese men to come out to their families. Traditional beliefs about the importance of maintaining bloodlines permeate society, which regards homosexuality as unfilial. Yang Shaogang, a Shanghai-based lawyer who specialises in tongqi cases, counselled five women last year after they contracted HIV from their husbands. The only way to prevent this sort of tragedy from befalling such women, he says, is calling for more tolerance so gay men won’t feel forced to enter marriage in the first place.

In recent years some have found a solution, of sorts. Chinagayles.com, a website with some 153,000 members, helps gay men meet lesbian women for matrimonial purposes. Individuals upload personal details, such as monthly income, hobbies and Zodiac signs. Some seek cohabitation without sexual contact. Others want children.

Zhuang Xiang, a 30-year-old accountant from Shanghai, came to understand why he was drawn to boys when he was 17. On flicking through a gay comic book in a shop, he had his great “a-ha!” moment. He met his boyfriend in 2004. And then he married his lesbian wife in 2009. He and his wife don’t live together, but they visit each other’s parents once a week. Mr Zhuang even keeps some of her clothes on display at home, in case of unannounced visitors.

Mr Zhuang says he is lucky to live in a big city like Shanghai, where such a solution is possible. But he wants to live in a country where gay men are accepted. His parents have started to talk about a grandchild. Mr Zhuang and his lesbian wife will likely get a forged certificate of infertility. Keeping up the appearance of their marriage feels like a never-ending battle, he says. But sometimes lies are more sensible than the truth.

-----"Gay marriage gone wrong", The Economist, 12 July 2012

Copyright © 2006 – 2018 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG 

For Better, For Worse Or Whatever

Fag:  Hey FuelMix, how come a hot, cute guy like you doesn't have a boyfriend and why aren't you in an official relationship..?

FuelMix:  'Coz I don't know what the new paradigm of marriage is gonna look like

Fag:  Huh..?

FM:  Think about this....what are the options...?

• Marriage;
• Civil Union;
• Domestic Partnership;
• Cohabitation;

Fag:  Okay...

FM:  Then add:

• Heterosexual Normative Marriage i.e. Cis gender;
• Homosexual Normative Marriage i.e. Cis gender;
• Transsexual Heterosexual Marriage;
• Transexual Homosexual Marriage;
• Intersex with Hetero / Homo / Trans Hetero / Trans Homo;

Fag:  Ahh...

FM:  Now add Gender Fluidity, Queer and Questioning to the mix.  What do you get..?

Fag:  Dunno

FM:  Now add Robotics and Artificial Intelligence...

Fag:  Why...?

FM:  The trend of Robotics and AI are unstoppable.  Have you noticed how manufacturers are falling over themselves to make their Robots not just realistic but hyper-realistic...? They are bragging about empathy, moods, temperament, interaction, tactile sensation, facial features, body shape, height, weight.....and sexual willingness.

Fag:  Manufacturing something that goes beyond Human...?

FM:  Yeah.....in Japan and other countries, there's talk of Robot "Humanoid" Rights and protection against abuse.  People are talking freely about bonding with their Robots and having an emotional and physical relationship with them.  Have you noticed that in the Lamestream Media, nearly every day, there's some item about robotic advancement, AI technology, the dangers of AI, the ethical issues of AI...?

Fag:  Yeah....I guess...

FM: So my question is, "exactly who or what are you having, or will you be having, a relationship with..?"

Fag:  Ssshhhiittt.....

FM:  And where does that leave Monogamy..?

• Are you being unfaithful if you're cruising Craigslist, Facebook or Grindr, posting ads, leaving messages or having an erotic chat...?
• Are you being unfaithful if you're keeping a hyper-realistic, highly interactive robot on the side, with programmable feelings or a default setting..?
• If 2 Humans and a hyper-realistic Humanoid are having sex, is that a 3-some..?
• Are you being unfaithful if you're interacting in Virtual Reality, Real Time porn..?
• In a merged world of Human, Humanoid, Virtual Reality, and Gender Fluidity, what does "monogamy" and "being emotionally faithful" now mean...?
• What are the negotiated parameters of a relationship in the context of Human, Humanoid, Virtual Reality and Gender Fluidity..?

Fag [grins]:  I hate you FuelMix

Copyright © 2006 – 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG

Same Sex Marriage In Taiwan ? 1

.....Self-ruled Taiwan's constitutional court will rule on Wednesday [24 May 2017] whether same-sex couples can tie the knot under existing law, in a decision the island's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender groups widely expect to be favorable. Such an outcome would be a first in Asia,........

But even a favorable decision by the court, or Judicial Yuan, as it is known, could take a year or two to translate into laws allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, experts say.

This is because the court is expected to give lawmakers time to frame relevant measures, said one lawyer who frequently appears before it.

Democratic Taiwan is famed for an annual gay pride parade that showcases the vibrancy of its lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

The community has high expectations its years-long effort to legalize same-sex marriage will win the court's backing, because of support for gay rights by the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that swept national elections last year......

If the court decides current law does not permit same-sex marriage, it is expected to rule whether such denial violates Taiwan citizens' freedom to marry and constitutional rights.....

The court held a public hearing in March, after years of refusal to take up the issue, prompted by petitions from a gay rights activist and a city government facing growing requests for same-sex marriages......

Legal experts say the 15 judges on the court form the most liberal such group ever, with seven appointed by Tsai after becoming president......

-----"Taiwan activists hope same-sex marriage ruling will be trailblazer in Asia", Reuters.com, 22 May 2017

FuelMix says:

1.  Depending on your definition of Asia, Taiwan may, or may not, be the first in Asia.  Apparently back in 2007, the Supreme Court of Nepal asked the government to end sexual discrimination of minorities (not fully implemented); legally recognize a third gender (which they've done); AND explore the legalization of same-sex marriage (which they're sorta doing).

2.  And once again, Asia's World City (that would be us here in Very Rich Megacity) and Singapore - both affluent and with a growing gay population (we hate the word, "community" - it makes us vomit) plus Thailand (which does NOT recognize same sex marriage, contrary to public perception), are gonna be left behind.  Even more ironic considering the local hoopla in anticipation of Very Rich Megacity being awarded the Gay Games in 2022.

3.  Meanwhile in Jakarta, Indonesia, where homosexuality is apparently legal nationwide but severely (and recently violently) restricted by Sharia law and attitudes, (particularly in the province of Aceh),  the police arrested 141 gay guys in a gay gym / sauna on charges of prostitution and widely disseminated their pictures.

4.  Perhaps someone should politely inform them that if they're looking for Indonesian male prostitutes, they'll find them on Hong Kong's Craigslist M2M pages.  New (ugly) faces every week.

Copyright © 2006 – 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG

Open Season

“In the gay world there are always going to be open (relationships)…….There is no curbing the gay”.

-----Patti Stanger, “Watch What Happens Live” Bravo Channel, reported on CNN 28 September 2011, ‘Millionaire Matchmaker ’ apologizes for comments on gay men

1.  The Politically Correct gay front was outraged.  Their target was a female matchmaker on a television show in God’s Own Country.  Chatting to an admitted homosexual who called into the show enquiring about long distance open relationships, she made the above remark as her way of describing the failure of gay men to be monogamous.  Watch the video here.

2.  It’s clear that the woman’s mouth and brain were not engaged.  Yet, at a fundamental level, what she implied was accurate. Gay men are shit scared of monogamy.

3.  What she should have done is to have asked the caller to observe from his experience, whether the average gay man would embrace monogamy.  She could have initiated a discussion as to why gay men are so ambivalent towards commitment.

4.  Instead, she got flak for implying what every fag knows:  Faggotry is in a dilemma.  

5.  For the last 40 years the evolution of Faggotry has been on 3 parallel tracks:  

• drink to drugs 
• dick to disease
• dogma to diatribe 

6.  The Politically Correct fag will go to great lengths to talk about the “sacrifices” in “the fight” for “acceptance and tolerance”.  Then he will proudly declare that Faggotry is a social and political force.  All true, except that Faggotry is also massively incongruent, contradictory, hypocritical and unempowering -  and nobody seems to want to address that.

7.  Monogamy and Faggotry are inherently incompatible.  Anonymous casual sex is ingrained in Faggotry for a number of reasons;

• It’s very profitable for Gay Media;
• It’s very profitable for Gay Businesses;
• Closet fags need anonymous casual sex for their personal, professional and political survival;
• It reinforces the hedonism of Faggotry;
• Hedonism has no limits.  Monogamy means commitment and boundaries;
• NSA sex avoids the need to develop Emotional Intelligence;
• NSA sex justifies the attitudinal social posturing;
• It’s a distraction;
• It accessorizes nicely with drug use;  
• It justifies the anecdotally high failure rates of fag “relationships” which were never properly defined;
• It’s the crutch for the “but I also have needs…” argument that many fags use as an excuse to play around in a “relationship”.

8.  The only way Monogamy works is for both fags to admit that Faggotry doesn’t.  In other words, as FuelMix has previously said in this blog, in order to be a successful gay man, one has to be homophobic by conventional Faggotry's standards and go into the gay unknown on one’s own terms.

9.  That’s where the average fag starts to shit:  

• He has to turn his back on “the community”; 
• He has to acknowledge the uncomfortable truth that while there are tons of attitudinal hotties swimming around, what he’d really like is a hot man he could come home to; and more importantly, a hot man he could trust physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually.

10. That’s a tall order and takes work.  Those hours in the gym count for nothing.  It takes personal and mutual honesty in a sub-culture where deceit and distortion are just greeted with a shrug.  But then...... there’s that After-Party where that blonde guy from the gym is gonna show up and maybe they could swap phone numbers…..and he could introduce him to his dealer…..and the weather’s pretty good for cruising in the park…….

11. And once again, the fag is back where he started.  The institutional and addictive pull of Faggotry and its mindset are stronger than Gravity.  Yet, at his very core, the fag yearns to be accepted, loved and cherished, to trust and to be trusted.  

12. But Faggotry is stacked against him so he’s reduced to a cheap compromise of being “emotionally faithful” to somebody he hopes at the very least, is.  

13. Everybody smiles and nods even though they all know what that means. The collective delusion that the majority of fags are indeed “stable” must be perpetuated at all costs.  It’s the survival of the sub-cultural species.

14. We've said it before: Faggotry is a Ponzi scheme.  It needs a steady stream of fucked up, easily distracted, Politically Correct fags to keep the behavioural scam going and their lifestyle options “open”.  The Politically Correct gay establishment of course obliges and enforces. They need the votes, the sponsorships and the donations.

15. Outrage and Coercive Silence are an expensive business you know.

Originally published 2 October 2011
Amended and Republished 27 September 2013 | 18 April 2017

Copyright © 2006 - 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG

An Ideal....Compromised

“The thing is”, said the Fat Middle Aged English Fag, “virtually all my friends are partnered. They’ve been together and faithful to each other for years. I like that”.

“Why?” asked FuelMix.

“Well,” said the fag, “there’s trust between them. There’s better communication. And more integrity when they deal with people…..you know, they keep their word and stuff. Their communication is more direct – you know whom you’re dealing with”.

“Not bad”, thought FuelMix who had once again, dropped into the University of Fag Bar (pending accreditation). It was rare for a Fat Middle Aged English Fag to spew sense and even more rare for one to posit the social virtues of gay monogamy.

FM: Do you have a partner?

FMAEF: Well…I’m sort of in a relationship.

FM: Huh?

FMAEF: I’m kind of seeing someone…..he’s younger…..not sure where he is right now…..

FM: A lot younger?

FMAEF: About 25 years or so. Not really sure about his age. And I didn’t tell him that I was coming to town this time.

FM: How much communication do you have then?

FMAEF: [voice trailing away] Oh….we talk…now and then.

FM: Are you monogamous?

FMAEF: Oh God No! I travel a lot for work. I have needs.

FM: Did you talk to him about monogamy or an open relationship?

FMAEF: No….he just sort of appears and then disappears. Besides, it’s too much work to talk about something as heavy as that. Why risk a fight...?

FM: So…..you don’t know his age, you don’t know where he is right now, you didn’t tell him that you're in town,  you’re not sure if you’re in a relationship and you sleep around anyway.

FMAEF: That’s pretty much it, yes.

FM: But you admire your friends and their relationship?

FMAEF: Yes very much so. They’re such good people.

FM: So what’s stopping you from emulating them?

FMAEF: Gosh! It seems awfully hard work…..you have to work at the relationship. And I travel a lot for work anyway.

FM: Do your partnered friends travel for work and pleasure?

FMAEF: Oh, all the time…..Oh..! I see what you mean…..I suppose I must be sounding like an arsehole……

FuelMix smiled politely, satisfied that he had trawled sufficient blog material to make a meaningful point.

Originally published 24 September 2008 
Republished 4 November 2011, 
Amended and Republished 24 May 2013 | 16 April 2017

Copyright © 2006 – 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved 
ON A MOBILE DEVICE, VIEW THE WEB VERSION OF THE BLOG

Shot Through The Heart

1.  How To Make A Gay Guy Squirm
2.  Failure To Set Parameters Of A Relationship
3.  Faggotry's Basis: Hedonism And Easy Availability
4. Gay Hedonism vs LTR
5.  Our Suspicion
6.  The Unanswered Questions
7. The "Gay Nazi" Relationship Paradox


1.  How To Make A Gay Guy Squirm

1.  If there's one thing guaranteed to make the generic urban fag squirm is his reaction to the question:

"So.....you have a BF.....are you monogamous and committed or is there a deal about sleeping around..?"

2.  Their answers:

• "OMG...let's not go there..."
• "We haven't talked about it.."
• "We won't talk about it.."
• "I don't dare bring it up.."
• "If I raise that, we're gonna break up for sure..!"
• "I really don't and won't wanna know.."
• "There's a big age difference between us, so I'm sure he's fuckin' around.."
• "I don't know what he sees in me, so I'm guessing he's fuckin' around.."
• **sheepish grin**  "We're sorta emotionally committed.  If you were to ask me where he was right now, I wouldn't know.."
• "I never trusted him and I don't trust myself.  So that's where we're at"
• "I have needs and I guess he does too"
• "We've been together - in one form or another - off and on - for [  ] years.  Why risk embarrassing questions..?"
• "God, I've been hurt so many times I really don't care anymore. If I have someone in my bed for a while that's cool.  Even when I'm holding him, I don't trust him".

Fascinated readers will already know that FuelMix supports monogamy.  See the stuff he's previously written under the label,  Monogamy .  But that's NOT the point of this post.


2.  Failure To Set Parameters of a Relationship

1.  This post enquires why there is such widespread failure to set the parameters of a "relationship" - if there is one.


3.  Faggotry's Basis : Hedonism And Easy Availability

1.  Start with the basic premise that Faggotry is based on outright hedonism and the easy availability of hot guys.  Nothing wrong with that and we've all done it.  It's fun and it's a rite of passage.  Done in moderation by a fag who's genuinely single and unattached, recreational and anonymous sex can be healthy.  But some fags never outgrow it and it becomes a chronic lifestyle "choice".  Check out what their faces and bodies look like after a few decades of gay saunas, chems, after-parties, gay travel and circuit parties.

2.  (Hint:  ever wondered why these pretty fags in Fagland photographed in Clubs with big grins and their arms around each other, look SO sleep deprived??  And fuck....some are still in their 20s).


 4.  Gay Hedonism vs LTR

1.  Fundamentally Gay Hedonism is incompatible with a Long Term Relationship.  Think about it.  Hot guy comes into club or gay sauna.  He's the object of attention and competition. Fags are turning ruthless, the chase is on, the cruising is hot and heavy, the conversations limited to "what you into?" or thick compliments with the intention of snagging the guy for a couple of hours.  Time is of the essence, it's now or never.  That's why the reality of Fagland is that a fag's definition of a good friend is someone he's known for 2 hours.  Most of the phone numbers on his phone's contact list are one-time 2-hour tricks.  They ain't never gonna call and if they do, it'll be real superficial.  Forget about articulating and sharing values, forget about priorities, hell forget about names - most of the names fags give out are false anyways.

2.  Fagland doesn't prepare a fag for anything other than next weekend.  Just how many Faglands are there that actively teach Relationship Building?  And yet there's no shortage of fags screaming for Gay Marriage  HAHAHAHAHAHA....!!!

3.  The only counselling that exists in Fagland are Telephone Helplines to help the angst-ridden closeted fag come out, or peer-to-peer drug counseling, HIV-counseling, suicide-counseling and grief counseling.  In other words, the counseling is entirely Casualty Based.


5.  Our Suspicion

1.  FuelMix has long suspected that vast swathes of fags screaming for Gay Marriage were political poseurs.  Most fags don't have a clue about relationship-building, they probably fled their dysfunctional birth families, the societal norms of Fagland are implicitly (perhaps even unwittingly) set against it, large chunks of gay media deliberately say nothing about relationship-building (although there's no shortage of ads from fag lawyers offering advice on how to import a same-sex marriage partner).  There's a palpable sense of disconnect which explains why so many fags have so many superficial friends and yet, are desparately lonely.


6.  The Unanswered Questions

1.  It's not surprising that when a fag does find himself in a "relationship", then by default nothing is said about what truly matters.  Namely, the answers to the questions:

• "Why do you want me?"
• "Do you really love me or are you as pathetically lonely as I am?"
• "Do you love me enough to be faithful from here on out?"
• "For as long as we're together, can I trust you on the small things and the big things?"
• "Do you trust me?"
• "What do you mean by an Open Relationship?"
• "Are you going to tell me who you've slept with?"
• "What if I'm not happy about all the guys you're sleeping with?"
• "Why can't we talk about it?"
• "How will we redefine this relationship if I'm not happy with your amount of sleeping around?"
• "Why are we in this relationship to begin with?"
• "What do you mean when you say that you can sleep around and be emotionally faithful?"
• "So if we're out together and run into a hot guy and you wanna fuck him, am I just supposed to agree?"
• "Where do my feelings come into this?"

7.  The "Gay Nazi Relationship" Paradox

1.  If fags claim to be Out to the world at large, then how come they are so repressed and closeted in their own "relationships"? Where is the Pride in that..?

2.  So many ultra-politically correct, screaming fag Nazis are the very ones who are Deaf, Dumb & Blind in their own bedrooms.  They torture themselves and their "significant" other guy in fluffy-pillowed, stuffed toy  Concentration Camps of their own creation.  Complicit in each other's agony and uncertainty, they act as the dubious role models for the next set of chronically lonely fags who assume that is the only choice.  It's futile to resist.  There will only be evasion, silence, betrayal and departure.  A little part of them will die inside.

3.  No wonder they squirm.  Each of these so-called couples is a war criminal.

4.  So.......the title of this post becomes clear.  As the boys from BonJovi wailed:

"Shot through the heart
And you're to blame
You give Luuv a bad name......."

Originally published 13 December 2010
Amended and Republished 10 September 2013 | 15 March 2017

Copyright © 2006 - 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved

In Defence Of Monogamy 3

The other day, FuelMix dropped into the University of Fag Bar (pending accreditation). Ordering a drink and finding a comfy perch, FuelMix scanned the joint, looking for blog material.

A tame fag, with whom FuelMix was peripherally acquainted, made eye contact. When beckoned, he came trotting over, wagging his tail. After the usual pleasantries (during which FuelMix's crotch was repeatedly fondled), the fag sat next to FuelMix, looking jittery and agitated.

FM: Something on your mind?

Fag: Yeah, can’t figure out my BF

FM: Didn’t know you had one

Fag: I don’t know if I have one.......he’s forever sleeping around and bragging about it. Makes me uncomfortable

FM: How long you been together?

Fag: A few years

FM: What’s the deal on sleeping around?

Fag: Dunno………..we can’t discuss it. We just end up fighting, he storms out, fucks around, comes home later, starts bragging about it.

FM: You sleep around?

Fag: Kinda – but not as much as him. Thing is, I can’t trust him anymore. When we’re having sex, I can’t trust him. Emotionally, I can’t trust him. Sometimes I’m scared for my health. But we can’t even talk about it without him storming out and fucking somebody else.

FM: You’ve put up with this for a few years?

Fag:Yeah, it’s getting kinda tiring

FM: What’s in it for you?

Fag: Well….I guess I can say I have a BF. Not much else

FM: You scared to confront him?

Fag: Yeah, he’s younger than me and drinks heavily, especially after one of his revenge fucks

FM: So….there’s infidelity, an inability to talk about it……..and the threat of physical abuse?

Fag: I think so……….I wanna end it but don’t know how. I think I would have preferred monogamy but we can’t even discuss it. I don’t think I’m in love anymore. I just don’t know where I stand with him. He’s happy with things as they are, I’m miserable. I’m beginning to hate myself.

FuelMix finished his drink and left.

Originally published 16 June 2009
Republished 16 October 2014 | 14 March 2017

Copyright © 2006 – 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved 

In Defence Of Monogamy 2

One of the depressing things when engaging the generic urban fag in conversation, is the cynical flippancy with which they treat their (apparently) significant relationships. 

This flippancy cuts right across educational, class, financial and professional boundaries. Time and time again, the Significant Other is described in a way that suggests he is an acquisition, liable to depreciate in value and open to disposal or trade-in. 

Worse, the relationship comes across as a lingering series of half-truth milestones, assumed or actual deceit, an awkward convention of mutual censorship of “don’t ask don’t tell” or a one-way street of cheque writing. 

There seems to be no attempt by fags to change the way things are. This kind of crippled “relationship” frequently confers bragging rights and the acceptance of other fags – many of whom are in exactly the same position. For some bizarre reason, the fag in the “relationship” is thought of as “stable” and “responsible”. 

FuelMix finds it insane. A relationship is a sacred contract. The term “sacred” has nothing to do with religious dogma. It has everything to do with how much and how seriously 2 men are prepared to invest of themselves physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually. 

A relationship is a commitment. And FuelMix has said several times in this blog that fags are shit scared of commitment because the fag lifestyle is one of shallow hedonism. The longer the party lasts and the later is gets, the better everyone looks. 

Torn between a lifestyle of (repetitive, unhealthy) carnal and chemical distractions and gnawing chronic loneliness, the fag compromises at every step. The reasoning goes like this: 

“Yeah, I’m horny so I’ll go to the sauna, fuck my brains out, smoke some crack and weed, do some poppers and maybe I might find someone significant there too. It doesn’t have to be monogamous coz we both met in the sauna right...? We could date and he could move in, or maybe not, but it has to be like………totally open……. coz I’m not ready to commit……but it would be nice to have someone to go to Jerry’s place with on Saturday…..and I’m thinking of going to Bangkok or Puerto Vallarta and I don’t know anybody there……..maybe if he has some money he could pay for both of us……..so we’ll just say that we’re good friends, but kinda “committed”…OMG!! What the fuck does that mean?............ 

Exactly. 

What the fuck does it mean? Nothing actually. There’s no contract, there are no parameters, there’s no investment. But when the fag shows up – alone – at the University of Fag Bar (pending accreditation), he’ll bad mouth the other guy for as long as the drinks keep coming. And all the other idiots will nod and consider him “stable” and “responsible”.

Originally published 14 July 2008

Republished 31 December 2013 | 16 October 2014 | 14 March 2017

Copyright © 2006 – 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved 

In Defence Of Monogamy 1

FuelMix was chatting to a well educated, well travelled fag who enquired whether FuelMix had ever had a Significant Other. FuelMix replied (truthfully) that he had had only one, which lasted just over 2 years. Even though FuelMix and his SO were several hundred miles apart (but in the same time zone) and physically saw each other once a month, they kept in contact several times a day. The relationship was monogamous by prior agreement. It broke up for reasons not connected with fidelity, but as a result of each party's professional ambitions -and FuelMix's desire to return to Asia - that would have massively increased the physical distance and time zones between them.

Fag was incredulous and leery. He was visibly disgusted that FuelMix would even mention the obscenity of monogamy. 

“That’s just too restrictive...!!”, fag declared “no man in his right mind would buy into that deal...!! Who wants to be monogamous..? It’s just too much trouble and besides, he probably lied to you the whole time...!!”. 

FuelMix took a long hard look at the fag, realizing that in his short sentence, fag had gone from being mildly attractive to downright repugnant. There’s a lot that FuelMix can say in defence of monogamy which will in due course, unfold in this blog. 

Looking at the fag, trapped in his own paradigm of distrust, FuelMix was reminded of the following:

• There are some fights you get into coz you know you’re gonna win;

• There are some fights you don’t get into coz you know you’re gonna lose;

• There are some fights that are just not worth getting into;

FuelMix shrugged and excused himself.

Originally published 30 November 2007

Amended and Republished 12 December 2013 |  16 October 2014 | 14 March 2017

Copyright © 2006 – 2017 FuelMix All Rights Reserved