Independent Gay Forum

[Boston Guy]

I came across the Independent Gay Forum today for the first time. It seems to be an interesting site, with an interesting organization behind it. Their mission statement reads:

THE INDEPENDENT GAY FORUM has been created by a group of gay writers, academics, attorneys, and activists who feel dissatisfied with the current level of discussion of gay-related issues.

[ul]

[li]

We support the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in civil society with legal equality and equal social respect. We argue that gays and lesbians, in turn, contribute to the creativity, robustness, and decency of our national life. [/li][li]

We share a belief in the fundamental virtues of the American system and its traditions of individual liberty, personal moral autonomy and responsibility, and equality before the law. We believe those traditions depend on the institutions of a market economy, free discussion, and limited government. [/li][li]

We deny "conservative" claims that gays and lesbians pose any threat to social morality or the political order. [/li][li]

We equally oppose "progressive" claims that gays should support radical social change or restructuring of society. [/li][li]

We share an approach, but we disagree on many particulars. We include libertarians, moderates, and classical liberals. We hold differing views on the role of government, personal morality, religious faith, and personal relationships. We share these disagreements openly: we hope that readers will find them interesting and thought-provoking. [/li]

[/ul]

The Editors

 

The site can be reached at http://www.indegayforum.org

 

I was wondering if anyone else here was aware of the IGF or followed or participated in it? If so, what do you think of it?

 

Thanks,

BG

[HooBoy]

Well no need for me to spend all the time and money on this, then.

 

I'll just let them do it for me.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

BTW: I'm going to the Peninsula Hotel and start telling people what a great rate I got at the YMCA next door.:*

__

 

The above written as a regular guy, not the owner of a website and has no official meaning, just unofficial BS.)

__

 

--garbo the hoo

[Boston Guy]

HB:

 

Actually, I see no almost no overlap at all between the IGF and M4M.

 

As gay men, we need different kinds of forums for different purposes, just as we read different newspapers and magazines, watch different news shows on TV and turn to different on-line sources for news.

 

IGF seems to me, so far, to be a group of bright gay men and women who are trying to counter anti-gay messages on a variety of levels, primarily journalistic. We all benefit from these kinds of efforts.

 

M4M has stood the test of time, at least in Internet terms, much to your credit. I've been here through what I recall as three separate incarnations of the M4M software (from only a month or two after M4M started, if I recall correctly) and support M4M and its mission. But it's possible to be supportive of multiple efforts and there are times that we, as gay men and women, need to come together and be supportive of each other.

 

I've been impressed by the little I've seen so far of IGF. The writing seems good, the mission is reasonable and the goals laudable. I would not go to IGF for any of the kinds of things I would seek at M4M -- or vice versa. We're a large enough community to be able to support multiple successful venues.

 

I'd urge you to look at IGF again. They are not competing with M4M in the slightest; on the contrary, they represent a completely different kind of message, in a journalistic vein. It would seem to me that, if they are successful, all of us, as gay men and women, would gain.

 

BG

[HooBoy]

Dear BG:

 

I like big parties. Sometimes I just get snippy and if I appeared that way, please understand, I've been under some stress lately and rather than take it out on my housekeeper, I shot the messenger.

 

Carry on. You've been a great supporter and contributor of the site and I appreciate you more than you know.

 

<where is that feral crow I have to eat? Ooops, I have am late for some delicious sidewalk cooking.)

__

 

The above written as a regular guy, not the owner of a website and has no official meaning, just unofficial BS.)

__

 

--garbo the hoo

[raife]

Hey BG,

 

Sorry for the late response, I was just searching for another topic and came across your post. I spend a lot of time on the [a href=http://www.indegayforum.org/culturewatch/2003_06_22_archive.shtml]IGF[/a] site, it's not so much a discussion "forum" (despite the name) as it is a collection of very relevant essays and articles on topics of general gay interest from a conservative/libertarian angle. There is a very high signal-noise ratio and many insights to be gleaned from the various authors.

 

There are some rather shrill Dem party-liners that are still touting the monolithic "gay voting block" myth, and it's very refreshing to me to see a multiplicity of supportive viewpoints from all areas of the ideological spectrum in well-reasoned conversation. Libertarians in particular are vilified for deviating from party-line views, but as a representative of that small group, I would have to say we're one of the few political party alternatives proposing to flush all the moralistic anti-consenting adults laws still on record in most US states. Of course prostitution should be legalized, as usual it seems that much of Europe is the bellwether for where we'll eventually wind up. Traditionalists will just have to be dragged kicking and screaming, into the 21st century I guess. Dems are almost as responsible as 'Pubs for foisting all this privacy violating crap on the rather apathetic US public.

 

Anyway, good site, I highly recommend it & hope to see you there.

 

-R

[Rick Munroe]

>it's not so much a discussion "forum" (despite the name)

>as it is a collection of very relevant essays and articles

 

Actually, guys, it's a BLOG! And just like George Bush's blog (but unlike Howard Dean's), it does not allow anyone to reply to a post. So it's VERY different from this message center in a very big way: it's a "read-only" site.

[+ deej]

>it's a "read-only" site.

 

Some days I think that would be nice around here. :9

 

For the humor-impaired, I'm KIDDING.

[raife]

Hey Rick,

 

[a href=http://www.indegayforum.org/index.shtml]IGF[/a] is read only (except for "letters to the editor") but how do you get blog? I thought a blog was an online diary, like [a href=http://www.andrewsullivan.com/]Andrew Sullivan[/a]'s site. This is more of an e-zine [a href=http://www.hookonline.org/]like...[/a]

 

Take care,

-R

[Rick Munroe]

>>it's a "read-only" site.

>

>Some days I think that would be nice around here. :9

 

How about a lick-only site? :9

[Rick Munroe]

>how do you get blog? I thought a blog was an online

>diary,

 

>This is more of an e-zine

 

Actually, there are two components, which I realized when I just checked the site. To the left side of the page is Steve Miller's Culture Watch, which is a blog, and to the right is the e-zine section. So we're both right.