'Gay' vs 'really gay'?

[glamorilla]

I find ugly straght men offensve.

Start walking around with a bag over your face and I'll get someone to stop lisping.

 

[PoliteSuccubus]

Glam!

You are so bad!

*high five*

 

[rosco rathbone]

I find ugly straght men offensve.

Start walking around with a bag over your face and I'll get someone to stop lisping.

Oh quit flappin your mangina lips, sit down and have a big cup of "you ain't no oscar wilde, baby" with a "Ha!" chaser.

Ha!

 

[Netzach]

Oy vey. Listen to you.

Personally as a semi-out SM practising freak in addition to being a rather in-your-face androgyne slut, I have no interest in appeasing the mainstream. Why should I? Why oh why should anyone?

If you or Mayberry (as a self-professed liberal?) would relax your sphincters for a second, you might feel more alligned with the people who are getting on your nerves, I don't sense that either of you are very fanatical about blending seamlessly with a reactionary-heterosexist stoopid mainstream, but I could be wrong. They may piss you off, but flaming gay men also piss off the people *you* piss off.

Maybe you both laugh during episodes of Will and Grace and that scares me more than who you think is annoying.

I like really really flaming queer guys. Because they piss guys like you off. Because they are oppositional to whatever norm a butch straight guy's psyche needs to cling to, like that last bit of wreckage from the gender armageddon of the last few years.

Netzach means ascendance you know, rathbone. I adore you, but I think "I'm" winning, and I think we'd both agree.

As for genetics, I dunno. It's possible. Would many people *choose* to adopt mannerisms that'd likely get them killed in Laramie? "Oh, I think I'll affect a lisp this week, the football team will surely appreciate this endearing trait."

I think if it's adopted it's assimilated pretty early on in the personality-formation years, and then it may as well be genetic, kind of a "who cares" for me because nobody *should have to change it*

 

[rosco rathbone]

If you or Mayberry (as a self-professed liberal?) would relax your sphincters for a second, you might feel more alligned with the people who are getting on your nerves, I don't sense that either of you are very fanatical about blending seamlessly with a reactionary-heterosexist stoopid mainstream, but I could be wrong. They may piss you off, but flaming gay men also piss off the people *you* piss off.

Oy, the heavy hitters are here. All lightweights to the bench. Hit the showers, Glamorilla.

I think Mayberry was just advertising his general butchness, in usual charming caveman fashion. Can't speak for him. I will say that I find the Mayberry style of dombination and sumbitchen to be far, far closer to the heterosexual norm than to any kind of queerness. I believe Mayberry to be a blind romantic who seeks to recapture a lost manly past that perhaps never was.

I am queerish; but I get irrational rage when I watch Will and Grace. Trying to figure this out but about to get booted by "NT/SYSTEM AUTHORITY/RPC RECALL" whatever the fuck that is.

 

[rosco rathbone]

As for genetics, I dunno. It's possible. Would many people *choose* to adopt mannerisms that'd likely get them killed in Laramie? "Oh, I think I'll affect a lisp this week, the football team will surely appreciate this endearing trait."

This seems utterly dubious to me. Mannerisms as heritable? Did the Bizzarro Edition of Feminism and Queerness replace the Standard Edition whilst I was in my Rip Van Winkle Slumber?

I am quite willing to entertain notions of {some root of} gayness as genetic and likely to be brought to the surface in the right conditions; but I will have to know exactly what aspects of "effeminacy" you are thinking of as genetically determinable before I can even begin to take this seriously.

It's culture, baby. You said it yourself in another thread: what is effeminate here is something else in another time and place.

 

[glamorilla]

and please make sure you poke a few holes in it.

we wouldn't want you losing any more oxygen.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Jeez, folks, I wasn't expecting this one to last an hour!!

What can I say? Personal taste? I have to admit, I don't much like women who are complete sissies either. And, I don't mean the obviously, 'naturally' gay men, either. I mean the guys who are putting on this huge frigging show all the time.

I don't like Jim Carrey either, for the same damned reason.


*labels this thread 'Johnny's insomnia thread'*

 

[Netzach]

Dude, you posted it in our midst, it's like leaving us a turd in a paper bag, some speculation is going to ensue, no?

Like if I go to the SM forum and post something about dominant males really striking me as the ultimate pussies who just haven't found the right spanking yet, I don't think I'm going to make many fast friends, and I don't think you yourself would refrain from weighing in six or seven times. C'mon.

But it's my personal late night musing, that the whole world would be better if every guy who acted smug or out of line just had his ass beaten red we'd all be happier. Really!

And they all want it, they just can't cope with it, the poor socially repressed dears.

(for the record, I don't think this. Just don't swing that dick near me, I'd be far too tempted.)

RR, granted and granted.

I *like* to think of SM as inherently somehow oppositional....imagine if people picked their relationship to power purely on how *they* felt, not on gender or race or money and what other people thought of what they "should" be.

I think you may be right, it's not always, much as I intensely dislike that idea. Gor is not oppositional, it's just Neitzche rising to the surface (scary), neo-romantic buy you flowers and pick your outfits is not oppositional. At least not oppositional to that which I am interested in opposing. It's not even all that kinky.

Ditto on genetics and behavior. I don't like that idea and you know I don't. I'm also not a scientist and I'm not going to dismiss it completely.

I don't especially like the "gay as gene" debate. I think rather than insisting it's purely biology at work I think we need to focus on defending the sanctity of our choices, and the right to our choices. "Biological errors" to borrow a phrase from that whining bitch Dr. Laura can be attempted to be corrected.

If something is reduced to pure heredity/biology....I'm not so convinced of the benificence of the government and the medical community, climates change, administrations change, even our electoral process seems enormously flexible of late and we were generally OK with that.

I get perfectly rational rage while subjected to Will and Grace. Smart people, respectable people I know and love actually find it funny and it makes me think they have been abducted by aliens and implanted with some chip.

 

[zipman]

This seems utterly dubious to me. Mannerisms as heritable? Did the Bizzarro Edition of Feminism and Queerness replace the Standard Edition whilst I was in my Rip Van Winkle Slumber?

I am quite willing to entertain notions of {some root of} gayness as genetic and likely to be brought to the surface in the right conditions; but I will have to know exactly what aspects of "effeminacy" you are thinking of as genetically determinable before I can even begin to take this seriously.

It's culture, baby. You said it yourself in another thread: what is effeminate here is something else in another time and place.

Denying that some gays demonstrate extremely effeminate behavior as an affectation is as ridiculous as saying some heterosexual men don't affect an overly macho attitude as an affectation.

Let's at least be honest in the discussion!

 

[Queersetti]

Denying that some gays demonstrate extremely effeminate behavior as an affectation is as ridiculous as saying some heterosexual men don't affect an overly macho attitude as an affectation.

Let's at least be honest in the discussion!

So what if they do?

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

So what if they do?

Then I can be offended by it if I want to! Some people have personalities equivalent to the guy with the loud stereo who cranks it up louder when you complain at 3 am...I swear I think it is some sort of passive-aggressive attack on the rest of the world.

 

[Queersetti]

Then I can be offended by it if I want to! Some people have personalities equivalent to the guy with the loud stereo who cranks it up louder when you complain at 3 am...I swear I think it is some sort of passive-aggressive attack on the rest of the world.

So be offended.

I am sure that the last thing some mincing queen is looking for is your approval.

 

[zipman]

So what if they do?

Admitting that both heterosexuals and homosexuals try and fit into certain "stereotypes" establishes a common ground for discussing the issue of the "swishy stereotype."


Isn't this the correct forum for such a discussion to take place?

 

[Angel]

I think we should all be the same. That would fix the problem.

 

[Queersetti]

Admitting that both heterosexuals and homosexuals try and fit into certain "stereotypes" establishes a common ground for discussing the issue of the "swishy stereotype."


Isn't this the correct forum for such a discussion to take place?

Fine. let's discuss it.

So what if they do?

Why is it an issue for you whether or not gay men act swishy? What impact does it have on your life?

 

[zipman]

Fine. let's discuss it.

So what if they do?

Why is it an issue for you whether or not gay men act swishy? What impact does it have on your life?

Well, we could discuss the need for "fitting into a stereotype." I have always been amazed at the false bravado and machismo that many men feel is how they should behave. Even more so, I think some of them feel a societal expectation to act that way.

That seems like a worthwile type of discussion to have, from both the heterosexual as well as homosexual standpoints. Indeed, if the participants really looked for similar reasons why such dynamics exist, some of us might just understand the other guy's point of view a little better.

Or you could just keep up with the snippy remarks. Your choice.

 

[Queersetti]

Well, we could discuss the need for "fitting into a stereotype." I have always been amazed at the false bravado and machismo that many men feel is how they should behave. Even more so, I think some of them feel a societal expectation to act that way.

That seems like a worthwile type of discussion to have, from both the heterosexual as well as homosexual standpoints. Indeed, if the participants really looked for similar reasons why such dynamics exist, some of us might just understand the other guy's point of view a little better.

Or you could just keep up with the snippy remarks. Your choice.

I don't feel straight guys should have to justify the way they are to us, why should we have to justify the way we are to you? Especially in a thread intended to insult us on our own forum?

 

[ReBeLBeLLe]

As for genetics, I dunno. It's possible.

I think it's more than possible. I say this because I have taught four and five year olds in the public school system. I have seen my share of little boys that love to go to the housekeeping center and dress in women's clothes and whose every action is more feminine than masculine. I have no idea what these little boys grow up to be, but I am more than willing to assume that a good majority of them will be gay.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I don't especially like the "gay as gene" debate. I think rather than insisting it's purely biology at work I think we need to focus on defending the sanctity of our choices, and the right to our choices. "Biological errors" to borrow a phrase from that whining bitch Dr. Laura can be attempted to be corrected.

This is how I thought you felt and that's why I was rather suprised at your initial post.

I think that the queer lib movement, in trying to follow in the footsteps of Civil Rights and Feminism (ie All People Are Born<<<<<important word here Equal) is likely to do itself a grave disservice. The issue at hand is not "We can't help ourselves-we was born like this"..... It is "We choose this as rational and fully developed humans; based on our innate desires* and no one is going to stop us".

I think the "Jack from W&G" flamer is a product of repression and I can't wait for everyone to just be all normal and happy and even in their grey jumpsuits and unisex hairstyles.

Actually, I'd miss the poor little irritating flamers. I like hating them. Keep sex evil.



*Yes, troublesome, but I think theres probably something to this, at some level.

 

[Netzach]

three points:

I don't think it's only a choice any more than I think it's only biology at work. I think the mix that makes us us is elegant, complex, and ultimately unknowable, kinda like God, if there is one.

if someone says "I was born this way" I'm not going to be the person to say no, you aren't.

I'm not a geneticist, and I don't think they are all fulla shit.

 

[glamorilla]

Well, we could discuss the need for "fitting into a stereotype." I have always been amazed at the false bravado and machismo that many men feel is how they should behave. Even more so, I think some of them feel a societal expectation to act that way.

That seems like a worthwile type of discussion to have, from both the heterosexual as well as homosexual standpoints. Indeed, if the participants really looked for similar reasons why such dynamics exist, some of us might just understand the other guy's point of view a little better.

Or you could just keep up with the snippy remarks. Your choice.

what kind of response do you expect to someone proudly and purposefully stating they have bigoted tendencies?

how would you have reacted had this thread been titled "I don't hte jews~just the money grubbing ones".?

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

You kids are way too sensitive...lighten up!

 

[Queersetti]

You kids are way too sensitive...lighten up!

Why don't you go sit on the couch in your jockey shorts and watch a football game or something?

 

[killallhippies]

I think it's more than possible. I say this because I have taught four and five year olds in the public school system. I have seen my share of little boys that love to go to the housekeeping center and dress in women's clothes and whose every action is more feminine than masculine. I have no idea what these little boys grow up to be, but I am more than willing to assume that a good majority of them will be gay.

what does that prove? that could very easily be learned behavior and playing with dolls and playing house does not make someone gay. but anyway...