[johnbryanpeters]

Originally posted by narlus
head to the velvet elvis in vegas and get hitched.

i know plenty of atheistic couples who are legally married. VT doesn't have any JoPs?

Well, for a start, I'm no longer an atheist, I'm an agnostic.

And for seconds, I still don't want to carry the baggage that's associated with the word marriage. Just look at the sort of critters that crawl out trying to defend it from imagined threats.

Maybe marriage is the true perversion? In its original context, it meant that the male owned the female, literally.

J

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
No kidding. Where are you going with that?

to the point, that recreational sex is irrelevant as the being the actual bond between people to establish a marriage.

u can or cannot have sex to be a marriage. (there are no laws that make u have recreational sex with your partner, even though is a divorve causal). so for the government, what kinda of sex u have, doesnt matter to give u the rights of a married couple.

even if you wanted to ban anal sex, it would be non-sense saying its because is unnatural, because under that definition (non reproductive sex is unnatural), oral sex would be unnatural too, masturbation also, and blablabla. then on the grounds on unnaturality all those practices should be banned. and thats non-sense. i just use this example to proof the fallacy of the argument of unnatural sex. (for BS, because i've done this a lot, but seems q just realized only when i write so).

am saying so, only to shred the "reasons" people think gay marriage should be illegal. now that most of their "reasons" are flawed, how can u still go against it?


now, since only reproductive sex (in fact, even genital intercourse with anticonception devices would be unnatural, because sex ultimate purpose is reproduction), would be the only one allowed, and everything else that is "unnatural" then its just some form of masturbation. and again, this is an obviously purposely wrong argument.

what does this have to do with gay marriage? well, gay couples deserve the same rights under the law, because they are bonding, they need the same contract, with the same guarantees, responsabilities y rights of marriage, because they are 2 conscent adults making the contract. even if their sex life is however they want, its still of no matter for the government in the decision of giving them the rights of a married couple, is they choose to spend their lifes together

its not about whether sodomy is right or not (which as i said above, is irrelevant for the government), people can engage in whatever they want under conscent, and that should not exclude them from getting rights, like marriage and stuff like that.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by ALEXIS_DH
to the point, that recreational sex is irrelevant as the being the actual bond between people to establish a marriage.

u can or cannot have sex to be a marriage. (there are no laws that make u have recreational sex with your partner, even though is a divorve causal). so for the government, what kinda of sex u have, doesnt matter to give u the rights of a married couple.

even if you wanted to ban anal sex, it would be non-sense saying its because is unnatural, because under that definition (non reproductive sex is unnatural), oral sex would be unnatural too, masturbation also, and blablabla. then on the grounds on unnaturality all those practices should be banned. and thats non-sense. i just use this example to proof the fallacy of the argument of unnatural sex. (for BS, because i've done this a lot, but seems q just realized only when i write so).

am saying so, only to shred the "reasons" people think gay marriage should be illegal. now that most of their "reasons" are flawed, how can u still go against it?


now, since only reproductive sex (in fact, even genital intercourse with anticonception devices would be unnatural, because sex ultimate purpose is reproduction), would be the only one allowed, and everything else that is "unnatural" then its just some form of masturbation. and again, this is an obviously purposely wrong argument.

what does this have to do with gay marriage? well, gay couples deserve the same rights under the law, because they are bonding, they need the same contract, with the same guarantees, responsabilities y rights of marriage, because they are 2 conscent adults making the contract. even if their sex life is however they want, its still of no matter for the government in the decision of giving them the rights of a married couple, is they choose to spend their lifes together

its not about whether sodomy is right or not (which as i said above, is irrelevant for the government), people can engage in whatever they want under conscent, and that should not exclude them from getting rights, like marriage and stuff like that.

Dude...

You just wrote for like 10 minutes and said absolutely nothing.

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Dude...

You just wrote for like 10 minutes and said absolutely nothing.

well it doesn't read like a proposal... you never know though.

Actually, as English is his second language, I think some valid points were lost in the translation.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Originally posted by ohio
Many fundamentalist christians would call heterosexual oral sex a perversion of the mind that leads the individual to try and mate in a way that is not possible.

You can't have it both ways, boss. Once you're allowing yourself to put your ding dong in anything but the hoo hoo, you're walking down a slippery slope.

And they (those fundamentalist Christians) are wrong. If they would read their Bible they would realize that oral sex is not condemded. In fact there is a whole book of the Bible that is devoted to romantic and physical love with a spouse (the Biblical definition of course).

Once again uninformed (or misinformed) Christians shooting thier mouths off and making themselves and Christains as a whole look stupid.

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

Originally posted by narlus
head to the velvet elvis in vegas and get hitched.

i know plenty of atheistic couples who are legally married. VT doesn't have any JoPs?

I read that too fast. I thought you said aesthetic couples.

 

[Andyman_1970]

On my insanely long, hot and lonely road ride last night I came up with a few observations on this subject.

Observation 1: If the ancient Romans were on of the most permissive cultures (that I can think of) in which homosexuality, pedophilia and the like were openly accepted. I wonder if there are any records of homosexual marriage from that time? And if not why? I’m sure there are other ancient cultures that were permissive, I just can’t think of any others. It would be interesting to know if are records of same sex marriages from those times.

Observation 2: Do you think this issue of same sex marriages comes up in poverty stricken countries like somewhere in Africa or say Bangladesh? Not counting the political environment in those specific places or any other poor country, as I’m sure that has a bearing on how “open” a homosexual could be. My point is, I wonder if this phenomenon of same sex marriage is unique to developed / wealthy countries?

I certainly don’t have the answers to these questions, just some food for thought.

 

[golgiaparatus]

1st off: Yes I didd mean Greek (thanks). But just for the record... I never said anything about women being mostly for procreation. Or true love being only for men.

And 2nd: i think you misunderstood my statement or did not read it carefully. Also I dont think you read the statements above that I was replying to/using as reference for my response.

Several pages back Jr_B said something about a THEORY, stating that homosexuality is more prevelent in overpopulated society and that it is natures way of controlling overpopulation.

My statement earlier about a trend was more of a response to that. I was saying that it is probably more of a trend than a reaction of mother nature to overpopulation (though that would be cool and greatly beneficial for the planet).

As far as it being a trend... It is the fvcking in thing (lesbianism moreso than male homosexuality). Just because you may be in an area where this is not happeneng doens mean that it is not happening. I look around and I see dozens of women, that I have known for years to be hederosexual, calling themselves lesbians or bisexual. Right now the most extreme liberal thing that a person can be is homosexual. By the way many of the people I am observing are friends of mine and I can tell wether they are for real or not. usually when they are not for real they treat their homosexuality like a shiny new car instead of their life. And as for homosexuals not being glad that they are homosexual. Bull s}{it, I think that a small percentage of gay people feel inflicted. The rest, they feel enlightened. Dont believe me? Talk to them. I have many gay friends and clients and Ill tell you what, they are damn proud of it and will shout it to the heavens with joy.

By the way, I live in the Bible Belt so its not that prevelent comparitively speaking. Go to Seattle, Kansas City, Los Angeles. It seems like half the people you meet are gay, oh and they are damn proud of it too.

Also. When I say "homosexuality is a trend" I dont mean to take away from people who actually ARE gay. I am, in NO WAY saying that all gay people are following some fad, just some.

[EDIT I work in the art industry BTW so what I observe to be the "in" thing in my arena may not be the "in" thing in yours. My observations are correct though for my environment(sp)]

Originally posted by ohio
wow. do you really believe that?

I've watched a few friends come out, and I wouldn't wish what they went through on anyone...

and since when was gay the "in" thing? even gay people don't think gay is cool. maybe it's different on OK, but do you all of a sudden see 17 yea olds shedding their A&F gear for sequins and sleeveless shirts?

edit: by the way it's Greek society you're thinking of. They believed that women were mostly for procreation, and that a true bond of love could only exist between men. Kind of like modern fraternities... They also created foundation for our modern society in terms of science/technology, philosophy, art, and language. So you can see how homosexuality TOTALLY corrupted their moral and technical progress.

 

[golgiaparatus]

There are some African cultures that were openly homosexual and bisexual.

There is a dude that studied this, he went into these cultures and actually looked for homosexuality. I saw some discovery channel type thing about him and how people are skeptical about his opinions because he was gay himself and had built sexual relationships with many of the people he was studying. With minimal yahoo searching I bet you could turn up this dude's name.

Originally posted by Andyman_1970
On my insanely long, hot and lonely road ride last night I came up with a few observations on this subject.

Observation 1: If the ancient Romans were on of the most permissive cultures (that I can think of) in which homosexuality, pedophilia and the like were openly accepted. I wonder if there are any records of homosexual marriage from that time? And if not why? I’m sure there are other ancient cultures that were permissive, I just can’t think of any others. It would be interesting to know if are records of same sex marriages from those times.

Observation 2: Do you think this issue of same sex marriages comes up in poverty stricken countries like somewhere in Africa or say Bangladesh? Not counting the political environment in those specific places or any other poor country, as I’m sure that has a bearing on how “open” a homosexual could be. My point is, I wonder if this phenomenon of same sex marriage is unique to developed / wealthy countries?

I certainly don’t have the answers to these questions, just some food for thought.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

This seems like a really heavy subject for a sleepy Friday morning...I think I need more coffee sludge to keep up with the rest of you quick-witted folks today

Anywho, this particular topic stayed with me in the late hours of the evening as I continued working from home yesterday. I finally got into a nice philosophical debate with a friend of mine who's in Florida right now...

I have to say that one: It's kind of a silly subject. Why is it we care what others do in the bedroom, or who they share it with? I mean to be perfectly honest, I would hate it if someone ever chose to enforce their value system upon me...and as a result I choose to not enforce the world views that define who I am and what my moral code is upon others. Kind of a live and let live.

Also, I've lived in several other countries, and after leaving them, while having been horribly shocked by some things there I came away with the realization that Americans are horrible prudes and gossips, and we focus far too much attention on the issue of Sex. There is nothing wrong with the pleasure of the flesh....and I've never understood the need to condemn those who choose to enjoy what is natural to your body? How can it possibly be an abomination if it "feels" right, and or good?

And here we insert Jr's standard line of: So long as it's between consenting adult (humans) it's nobody elses business. Unless of course it's burly, and then we'll overlook the Dolphins... Luv ya hon!!!

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit

"Americans are horrible prudes and gossips, and we focus far too much attention on the issue of Sex. There is nothing wrong with the pleasure of the flesh....and I've never understood the need to condemn those who choose to enjoy what is natural to your body? How can it possibly be an abomination if it "feels" right, and or good?"

- America is still attached more than it thinks to its Puritan roots for sure.

BTW you forgot to mention the really big one Americans are most of all far too JUDGEMENTAL.

Too bad we (as a nation) cant just say, "If someone isnt hurting anyone, then leave the the fvck alone". That will happen some day, when the world is a more enlightened place, and when we are all long since dead.

- JB

 

[DHiDave]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Yes, we're also the only animals that walk on two legs, besides a couple of types of birds. We're also the only ones to creat art and football. Your argument's lame.

Well thanks for being so open minded!

I guess you're having trouble with comprehension. Let me explain a little further....

Humans have created these rules to live by; specifically that homosexuality is viewed negatively while heterosexuality is not. Obviously we need heterosexual relationships for procreation. Homosexuality comes from people wanting to enjoy another person from the same sex in a sexual way. So, long ago a bunch of white men decided that homosexuality was a damnable offense and only the perverse would partake in the act. Does this mean that homosexuality is indeed wrong? Not really. In your eyes it is. In my eyes it isn't. It's merely a difference of opinion.

Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you have the right to force that opinion on me. If I want to have sex with another man then you can't say anything to me about it because it's none of your business.

Maybe your god will condemn homosexuals. I don't have a god, so naturally mine won't. Just because you think something is wrong or perverse doesn't make that a truth, as it is just an opinion.

The Supreme Court ruled that sodomy is no longer an illegal act in this country. Woohooo!

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Woo Hoo...

Say it again...

Originally posted by DHiDave
Well thanks for being so open minded!

I guess you're having trouble with comprehension. Let me explain a little further....

Humans have created these rules to live by; specifically that homosexuality is viewed negatively while heterosexuality is not. Obviously we need heterosexual relationships for procreation. Homosexuality comes from people wanting to enjoy another person from the same sex in a sexual way. So, long ago a bunch of white men decided that homosexuality was a damnable offense and only the perverse would partake in the act. Does this mean that homosexuality is indeed wrong? Not really. In your eyes it is. In my eyes it isn't. It's merely a difference of opinion.

Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you have the right to force that opinion on me. If I want to have sex with another man then you can't say anything to me about it because it's none of your business.

Maybe your god will condemn homosexuals. I don't have a god, so naturally mine won't. Just because you think something is wrong or perverse doesn't make that a truth, as it is just an opinion.

The Supreme Court ruled that sodomy is no longer an illegal act in this country. Woohooo!

 

[DHiDave]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Religion has absolutely nothing to do with the stance I've taken, other than the fact that we must respect a huge portion of society subscribes to religious thinking, which is anti-gay in this respect.
To me, its all about protecting the values I hope future americans will have. I dont want children being forced to choose between Gay or Straight as an equal option. I think that's what this will eventually come to if we let it progress too far.

By this logic, I believe that you think homosexuality is a choice? That is a assumption that isn't based on fact.

Besides, the civil war was fought because the south was just protecting it's values.....slavery.

 

[DHiDave]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
You're wrong again.

The penis cannot tell the difference between the feeling of a mouth or a vagina. A clitoris is stimulated in the same way as well. The attraction in the mind is where the difference lies, not in the actual feeling of pleasure.

My penis can tell the difference between my wife's mouth and vagina.

My wife's vagina can tell the difference between my mouth an penis.

There is no logic in your statement.

The attraction in the mind.....is your perception of reality and not my reality of perception.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Dude...

You just wrote for like 10 minutes and said absolutely nothing.

hmmm, well, i guess i can put it this way.

elmo said to cookie monster:hey!, gay marriage should not be illegal!!
cookie monster answered: why?.
elmo repplied: well gays are also people, and the government should grant the rights of a married couple to any 2 humans who want to share their lifes.

but cookie monster was intrigued by this argument, and asked,

cookie monster: how come? only straight people should marry because they are the only ones who can mate??

and elmo told him

elmo: well, actually mating is not the purpose a marriage. so u dont need to mate, and the government doesnt require you to mate to give a couple the rights of a marriage.

cookie monster: elmo, i still dont understand?

elmo: well cookie monster, u cannot, and the government doesnt use mating as a tool for defining a married couple. so legally it cannot be used to deny marriage rights to gays.

cookie monster: elmo, but thats stiil wrong!!, they are sodomites

elmo: well CM, even if they are, it still doesnt matter, because sodomy is (stretching the definition) a masturbation, but instead of using a hand, u use a sphincter.
their sex life dont matter, they are just 2 humans who wish to share their lives, thus the govt should grant them the rights of 2 humans who wish to share their lives.

CM: uhmm, i guess u r right. but they are still sodomites and should not marry because they are sodomites.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Originally posted by Serial Midget
well it doesn't read like a proposal... you never know though.

Actually, as English is his second language, I think some valid points were lost in the translation.

well, yeah, posting here is a good exercise, actually i guess better than english composition 101 and 102 together. and ridemonkey doesnt charge me 6 credit-hours for it!!

 

[Andyman_1970]

Originally posted by DHiDave
By this logic, I believe that you think homosexuality is a choice? That is a assumption that isn't based on fact.

Besides, the civil war was fought because the south was just protecting it's values.....slavery.

Homosexuality is a choice, as much as being a pedophile is a choice, or having sex with a dolphin is a choice. If your homosexual you can chose to act on those desires, or chose not to. It's a lifestyle choice, that's why it was removed from the DSM4 (the manual shrinks use to diagnose psychological issues with).

If you go with the doctored revisionist PC history, yeah the civil war was fought over slavery (bad stupid sountherners, shame shame). Actually, it was fought over economics, unfair taxation, tariffs, and states rights, the slavery deal was a "side issue".

 

[Andyman_1970]

Originally posted by DHiDave
Does this mean that homosexuality is indeed wrong? Not really. In your eyes it is. In my eyes it isn't. It's merely a difference of opinion.

Maybe your god will condemn homosexuals. I don't have a god, so naturally mine won't. Just because you think something is wrong or perverse doesn't make that a truth, as it is just an opinion.

The Supreme Court ruled that sodomy is no longer an illegal act in this country. Woohooo!

In your eyes it's not wrong.

(for example) In my eyes it's not wrong to go kill someone, I don't think it's wrong to do that. So that's my opinion, case closed I didn't think it was wrong.

(for example) I don't think it's wrong to have sex with a child, that's my opinion, and that's my desires. I have a right to fulfill my desires and be happy don't I?

God (from the Christian point of view) does not single out homosexuals for "condemnation" regardless of what those wacko fundamentalist say or spout off.

 

[DHiDave]

Originally posted by Andyman_1970
In your eyes it's not wrong.

(for example) In my eyes it's not wrong to go kill someone, I don't think it's wrong to do that. So that's my opinion, case closed I didn't think it was wrong.

(for example) I don't think it's wrong to have sex with a child, that's my opinion, and that's my desires. I have a right to fulfill my desires and be happy don't I?

God (from the Christian point of view) does not single out homosexuals for "condemnation" regardless of what those wacko fundamentalist say or spout off.

Yes, but in my argument I'm not hurting anyone. In your argument you are committing an act on someone who doesn't want to participate. Apples and oranges my friend.

My entire argument is based on the belief that no one has the right to tell me what I can and cannot do with another consenting adult.

Your argument is based on fulfilling desires without consequences and inflicting that upon unwilling participants.

 

[golgiaparatus]

LMAO!!!!

Good to put it into his terms...hehehe

Originally posted by ALEXIS_DH
hmmm, well, i guess i can put it this way.

elmo said to cookie monster:hey!, gay marriage should not be illegal!!
cookie monster answered: why?.
elmo repplied: well gays are also people, and the government should grant the rights of a married couple to any 2 humans who want to share their lifes.

but cookie monster was intrigued by this argument, and asked,

cookie monster: how come? only straight people should marry because they are the only ones who can mate??

and elmo told him

elmo: well, actually mating is not the purpose a marriage. so u dont need to mate, and the government doesnt require you to mate to give a couple the rights of a marriage.

cookie monster: elmo, i still dont understand?

elmo: well cookie monster, u cannot, and the government doesnt use mating as a tool for defining a married couple. so legally it cannot be used to deny marriage rights to gays.

cookie monster: elmo, but thats stiil wrong!!, they are sodomites

elmo: well CM, even if they are, it still doesnt matter, because sodomy is (stretching the definition) a masturbation, but instead of using a hand, u use a sphincter.
their sex life dont matter, they are just 2 humans who wish to share their lives, thus the govt should grant them the rights of 2 humans who wish to share their lives.

CM: uhmm, i guess u r right. but they are still sodomites and should not marry because they are sodomites.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by Andyman_1970
Homosexuality is a choice, as much as being a pedophile is a choice, or having sex with a dolphin is a choice. If your homosexual you can chose to act on those desires, or chose not to. It's a lifestyle choice, that's why it was removed from the DSM4 (the manual shrinks use to diagnose psychological issues with).

If you go with the doctored revisionist PC history, yeah the civil war was fought over slavery (bad stupid sountherners, shame shame). Actually, it was fought over economics, unfair taxation, tariffs, and states rights, the slavery deal was a "side issue".

I sort of agree with this. I think that it is a choice of wether or not to act on the desires. But I think it is the desires that maye a person gay or not isnt it?

I mean if a person is very attracted to others of the same sex he or she is gay, wether or not the desires are acted upon.

Also I think that if someone has a homosexual encounter a couple of times and ends up deciding that he/she dislikes same sex relationships then I would say that person is not gay.

Anyway, It "sounds" like your classifying a person hedero or homo sexual based solely on their acts and not their desires.

Anyway....IMHO. Its all a big grey area anyway.

CIVIL WAR: I also believe it had a great deal to do with the fact that Lincoln was raising an army put down rebeling americans and thus invading his own country.

Yeah, yeah, I watched the movie, but it was a really accurate movie

 

[valve bouncer]

Originally posted by ALEXIS_DH
hmmm, well, i guess i can put it this way.

elmo said to cookie monster:hey!, gay marriage should not be illegal!!
cookie monster answered: why?.
elmo repplied: well gays are also people, and the government should grant the rights of a married couple to any 2 humans who want to share their lifes.

but cookie monster was intrigued by this argument, and asked,

LOL Alexis....nice mate except in this situation Shirly would be poor repressed Bert and Ernie would be arguing why they should do the business. Bert really wants to say yes but he's far too straight.
Actually Shirly reminds of Kevin Spacey's neighbour in American Beauty....I think he doth protest too much....come out of the closet Shirly, this dolphin thing is just a smokescreen....

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Andyman_1970
And they (those fundamentalist Christians) are wrong. If they would read their Bible they would realize that oral sex is not condemded.

I wasn't referring to a biblical argument. I couldn't care less what the Bible says. I was pointing out the correct interpretation of Burly's evolutionary argument. It just so happens that that interpretation aligns well with fundamentalist christian belief.

By the way, the "revisionist" history that you speak of, is actually only found in extremely conservative modern textbooks. For the true ultra-liberal POV (often labelled incorrectly as "revisionist") have a look at works by James Loewen and Howard Zinn. I think you'll find no such lies, though you may disagree with the interpretations/implications.

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
I dont want children being forced to choose between Gay or Straight as an equal option. I think that's what this will eventually come to if we let it progress too far.

Just out of curiosity, at what age or point did you choose to become a heterosexual?

The Cheese

 

[valve bouncer]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
Just out of curiosity, at what age or point did you choose to become a heterosexual?

The Cheese

He won't understand the question Suzy, I've dealt with him before, he has strange ideas.......he'll reply with something like "when did you choose you were human?"

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

Originally posted by valve bouncer
He won't understand the question Suzy, I've dealt with him before, he has strange ideas.......he'll reply with something like "when did you choose you were human?"

Why would he think I WAS human?

The Cheese

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
Why would he think I WAS human?

The Cheese

He wouldn't. You represent yourself as a woman.

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by Andyman_1970
Actually, it was fought over economics, unfair taxation, tariffs, and states rights, the slavery deal was a "side issue".

I can't believe I just read this... the civil war was all about slavery - everthing else you mention was related, but significantly less important to the main issue.

States Rights:

Feds - Slavery is BAD, stop it now.

Southern States - It's our right, leave us lone...

EDIT: Slavery was the one element that tied all the other issues together. I still cannot believe I just read this.

 

[valve bouncer]

Originally posted by johnbryanpeters
He wouldn't. You represent yourself as a woman.

He he .....Our old Shirly is still having a hard time dealing with female emancipation let alone gay rights, poor thing he is

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
Just out of curiosity, at what age or point did you choose to become a heterosexual?

The Cheese

Actually....to be perfectly honest, I don't know that I ever made a conscious choice, but I know when I made a conscious recognition of what I preferred and didn't I had a girl have a crush on me once...who I thought was a nice person that I didn't want to hurt...thus I had to consciously recognize and realize that I was different than some of my friends in that I prefer boys (more along the American norm)...and I hadn't consciously picked out the differences prior to then or recognized that many of my close friends preferred members of the same sex...

I was probably 15 when I made the conscious recognition of it...how many of you have had to do that?

 

[valve bouncer]

Originally posted by Serial Midget
I can't believe I just read this... the civil war was all about slavery - everthing else you mention was related, but significantly less important to the main issue.

States Rights:

Feds - Slavery is BAD, stop it now.

Southern States - It's our right, leave us lone...

EDIT: Slavery was the one element that tied all the other issues together. I still cannot believe I just read this.

SM- I'm intersted in this issue as a non-American with an interest in American history but might I sugggest it's something for another thread...If you start one I'll follow

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by Serial Midget
YO MOMMA!!!

Geez Midge no need to bring family into this!

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
Actually....to be perfectly honest, I don't know that I ever made a conscious choice, but I know when I made a conscious recognition of what I preferred and didn't I had a girl have a crush on me once...who I thought was a nice person that I didn't want to hurt...thus I had to consciously recognize and realize that I was different than some of my friends in that I prefer boys (more along the American norm)...and I hadn't consciously picked out the differences prior to then or recognized that many of my close friends preferred members of the same sex...

I was probably 15 when I made the conscious recognition of it...how many of you have had to do that?

I went with some friends of mine to a gay bar once (prior to going I didnt know that the bar was a GAY bar). Anyway I had to, on more than one occasion say, "Yes you can buy me a drink but just know that no matter how drunk you get me I still like women".

Does that count?

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by valve bouncer
SM- I'm intersted in this issue as a non-American with an interest in American history but might I sugggest it's something for another thread...If you start one I'll follow

OK - but I am more into whips and chains aspects myself.

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
I went with some friends of mine to a gay bar once (prior to going I didnt know that the bar was a GAY bar). Anyway I had to, on more than one occasion say, "Yes you can buy me a drink but just know that no matter how drunk you get me I still like women".

I've been to a gay bar or two but no one ever offered to buy me a drink. Whats up with that???

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
I went with some friends of mine to a gay bar once (prior to going I didnt know that the bar was a GAY bar). Anyway I had to, on more than one occasion say, "Yes you can buy me a drink but just know that no matter how drunk you get me I still like women".

Does that count?

Okay I can one up that one (c'mon now...one upping stories are fun!)....

My ex and I went to a gay bar on Halloween once to celebrate my birthday. We both dressed up as jesters, painted our faces black and white, both wore tight black leather pants. He wore a long black shirt, I wore one of those backless string thingies that are so popular. Now admitedly, I have a fairly muscular back....but I'm extremely short...and most people would say I'm reasonably feminine looking...so this guy stared at us all night and we made a bet to see who would get the most phone numbers for the evening, sort of as a joke between us.

Well I thought the tall guy staring at us wanted to hit on my ex...:devil:
But as we left, the tall guy came over to us, and did the whole trip...fall...and grab for everything possible...on me!!! and the look on his face was absolutely priceless when he realized that I have NO package downstairs, and the packages upstairs were real!!!!

I won the bet!

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by Serial Midget
I've been to a gay bar or two but no one ever offered to buy me a drink. Whats up with that???

I have been called on occasion, a pretty boy hippy. For some reason I attract gay men like friggin flys to fly paper. Not a skill Im proud of since I am not gay but, oh well. Maybe its the hair? Or the skunky smell that seems to be stuck to all my clothes, hell, I dunno.

 

[Serial Midget]

This almost never happens to me...

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
Okay I can one up that one (c'mon now...one upping stories are fun!)....

My ex and I went to a gay bar on Halloween once to celebrate my birthday. We both dressed up as jesters, painted our faces black and white, both wore tight black leather pants. He wore a long black shirt, I wore one of those backless string thingies that are so popular. Now admitedly, I have a fairly muscular back....but I'm extremely short...and most people would say I'm reasonably feminine looking...so this guy stared at us all night and we made a bet to see who would get the most phone numbers for the evening, sort of as a joke between us.

Well I thought the tall guy staring at us wanted to hit on my ex...:devil:
But as we left, the tall guy came over to us, and did the whole trip...fall...and grab for everything possible...on me!!! and the look on his face was absolutely priceless when he realized that I have NO package downstairs, and the packages upstairs were real!!!!

I won the bet!

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
Okay I can one up that one (c'mon now...one upping stories are fun!)....

My ex and I went to a gay bar on Halloween once to celebrate my birthday. We both dressed up as jesters, painted our faces black and white, both wore tight black leather pants. He wore a long black shirt, I wore one of those backless string thingies that are so popular. Now admitedly, I have a fairly muscular back....but I'm extremely short...and most people would say I'm reasonably feminine looking...so this guy stared at us all night and we made a bet to see who would get the most phone numbers for the evening, sort of as a joke between us.

Well I thought the tall guy staring at us wanted to hit on my ex...:devil:
But as we left, the tall guy came over to us, and did the whole trip...fall...and grab for everything possible...on me!!! and the look on his face was absolutely priceless when he realized that I have NO package downstairs, and the packages upstairs were real!!!!

I won the bet!

Fall and grab?!! Thats genious. Note to self... FALL AND GRAB