Gay?

randomgirly · Post by **randomgirly** » Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:19 pm 0

Truemetaluk wrote:
randomdude wrote:.. and there was that thing..with his fingers...
I think you had better explain yourself, young man

Yes. Please do.

Stone · Post by **Stone** » Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:35 pm 0

Yay, Harlequin's not dead

Welcome back

I must say though...I did mistake randomdude for a girlie first time I looked at the pic

I did doubletake though, so it's not as bad as you might immediately assume

As for Harly's point with overtly non-straight behaviour though, point completely taken. Personally I'm happy to hug males but I don't think I'd go as far as kissing them. Funny thing is though, people tend to peg me as a homophobe, which I'm not. It's just that overtly feminine gay males (or 'sceners' as I discovered they get called. Shudder) irritate the living fuck out of me. Nothing personal

Stone

Post by **Jedburgh** » Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:35 pm 0

Harlequin wrote:What the hell. I couldn't resist the thread. Does this mean that I'm going to have to start posting properly again, and even answering the PMs?...

Please do. Good to have you back, Harly

randomgirly · Post by **randomgirly** » Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:37 pm 0

Stone wrote:I must say though...I did mistake randomdude for a girlie first time I looked at the pic

Hehe

Harlequin · Post by **Harlequin** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:05 am 0

Jedburgh wrote:Good to have you back, Harly

Stone wrote:Yay, Harlequin's not dead
Welcome back

Thanks, folks

. I've been posting in the Events section for a few days (regarding the upcoming Jolly and the need for some people to be persuaded to use the Travel Fund) but now I seem to be back in Bleatings again.

Stone wrote:As for Harly's point with overtly non-straight behaviour though, point completely taken. Personally I'm happy to hug males but I don't think I'd go as far as kissing them.

Not even one who's just scored a goal?

Stone wrote:Funny thing is though, people tend to peg me as a homophobe, which I'm not. It's just that overtly feminine gay males (or 'sceners' as I discovered they get called. Shudder) irritate the living fuck out of me. Nothing personal

"Sceners"? That's a new one on me. Mind you, I tend to avoid the "scene" (which, as I recall, tends to comprise a similar mix of people to that portrayed in the Queer as Folk series). I, too, find it difficult to endure the company of loud, camp queens for long periods. That written, some of the campest men I know are straight (and, on the whole, lovely blokes)

.

H.
_________________
"If you take an Oriental person and spin him around several times, does
he become disoriented?"
[Unknown]

Yak · Post by **Yak** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:04 am 0

I think possibly one reason that people feel threatened by the idea of someone being "gay" is that most people have a very sterotypical idea of what "gay" actually means, in part through what they see in the media and indeed in part because of the way that certain gay people actually like to act and behave - through this stereotype people get the idea that gay people are always going to be flamboyantly so, always up for casual sex and living a life that revolves entirely around their sexuality; and of course it is *not* that way for everyone on the planet who prefers a partner of the same gender. But that is what a lot of people see, and I guess they feel threatened by that. Certainly this fear is far more prevalent amongst males, but then part of growing up a bloke is to grow up insecure about such things; even from an early age playground taunts hold up being a "queer" or a "poof" as things that deserve scorn and exclusion.

Speaking for myself, I would be uncomfortable around *anybody* of whatever orientation if it seemed that that was their entire *life*... whether that was a straight bloke who lived to shag women and who talked of nothing else, or a gay man who was just gay, gay, gay all the time and never actually... well.. just a bloke occasionally

.

I think that false idea that all same-sex inclined people are *always* thinking about sex and *always* into multiple partners combines with fears and insecurities instilled from an early age to produce a level of paranoia in some people where they assume that if someone is gay then *of course* they want to shag *them* and are lusting after *their* body (which is just as stupid as assuming that *every* woman you *ever* meet wants your Konix Speedking in her personal area)... so they can never relax and be around gay people because they can't accept that they are anything but an object of lust. And a lot of blokes aren't rational enough to reason around that fear.

Speaking for myself again, I don't like to be around people of either orientation whose whole life revolves around their sexuality, and I get very uncomfortable around people who think that sex is to be shared with everyone; I'm an old-fashioned one partner one person type, it seems. I certainly wouldn't want to *hurt* people like that - it's their choice, and who am I to judge - but I wouldn't want to be around them.

In my life I have had a few experiences with humans either side of the fence, as it were; and yet I have never looked at a bloke and fancied him, or looked at a woman and fancied her. It doesn't seem to work like that for me. The desire to be intimate with someone seems to be predicated semi-infinitely more on neural correlations than physical attributes. The only occasions upon which I have acted contrary to that (purely out of a misguided feeling of obligation, of doing something because I "ought" to for whatever reason) have always ended badly. So basically for me to even show signs of interest I would have to know the other person well enough to know that it would be appropriate or it would never happen, so nobody sensible should be upset by it, I hope.

I say "sensible" because there are undoubtedly people who would be uncomfortable just because they *knew* I have experimented on both sides, for all the reasons outlined above. But such people I wouldn't give a toss about not knowing anyway, so hey

.

Just my $0.02, as they say in yankieland.

\
(:-) - Yak
/

dr_memory · Post by **dr_memory** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:13 am 0

Yak wrote:I think possibly one reason that people feel threatened by the idea of someone being "gay" is that most people have a very sterotypical idea of what "gay" actually means, in part through what they see in the media and indeed in part because of the way that certain gay people actually like to act and behave - through this stereotype people get the idea that gay people are always going to be flamboyantly so, always up for casual sex and living a life that revolves entirely around their sexuality; and of course it is *not* that way for everyone on the planet who prefers a partner of the same gender. But that is what a lot of people see, and I guess they feel threatened by that.

And the other side of that is that people tend to only "see" the flamboyant ones, because of course the less flamboyant ones don't tend to register as "gay" or whatever on the old social radar. And, speaking frankly, a lot of the more flamboyant ones tend to be that way because they've only recently come out and are thus still a little insecure about that...and people pick up on the insecurity, and that's never comfortable to be around.

On the gripping hand, going full-on flaming from time to time is fun.

Any excuse to dress up and act silly, really.

Yak · Post by **Yak** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:21 am 0

dr_memory wrote: On the gripping hand, going full-on flaming from time to time is fun. Any excuse to dress up and act silly, really.

Oo, Jerry Pournelle... he once mentioned Atari ST Colourspace in half a sentence in passing in his BYTE magazine column back in the mid-80s. He did.

\
(:-) - Yak
/

Ahchay · Post by **Ahchay** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:23 am 0

dr_memory wrote:On the gripping hand, going full-on flaming from time to time is fun. Any excuse to dress up and act silly, really.

Fuck. You need an excuse these days? Why does no-one *ever* tell me these things!

Um, more seriously...

Yak wrote:I say "sensible" because there are undoubtedly people who would be uncomfortable just because they *knew* I have experimented on both sides, for all the reasons outlined above. But such people I wouldn't give a toss about not knowing anyway, so hey

I couldn't agree more, but luckily there is a word for those people.

I'd like to extend the "always-going-on-about-it" thing though if I may. Any human being who is entirely focused on a single issue - whether that be sex (regardless of gender), parenthood, job, football or even (whisper it) computers-and-games-and-that - is hard work, and often not worth the effort...

Cheers
Chris

Atty · Post by **Atty** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:26 am 0

Ahchay wrote:
dr_memory wrote:On the gripping hand, going full-on flaming from time to time is fun. Any excuse to dress up and act silly, really.
Fuck. You need an excuse these days? Why does no-one *ever* tell me these things!

Um, more seriously...

Yak wrote:I say "sensible" because there are undoubtedly people who would be uncomfortable just because they *knew* I have experimented on both sides, for all the reasons outlined above. But such people I wouldn't give a toss about not knowing anyway, so hey
I couldn't agree more, but luckily there is a word for those people.

I'd like to extend the "always-going-on-about-it" thing though if I may. Any human being who is entirely focused on a single issue - whether that be sex (regardless of gender), parenthood, job, football or even (whisper it) computers-and-games-and-that - is hard work, and often not worth the effort...

Cheers
Chris

Awww... What are us Obsessive compulsives meant to do now?

Harlequin · Post by **Harlequin** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:29 am 0

Yak wrote:I think that false idea that all same-sex inclined people are *always* thinking about sex and *always* into multiple partners combines with fears and insecurities instilled from an early age to produce a level of paranoia in some people where they assume that if someone is gay then *of course* they want to shag *them* and are lusting after *their* body (which is just as stupid as assuming that *every* woman you *ever* meet wants your Konix Speedking in her personal area)... so they can never relax and be around gay people because they can't accept that they are anything but an object of lust. And a lot of blokes aren't rational enough to reason around that fear.

Also, in many cases, there seems to be a fear of not being able to control one's response if a sexual situation were to occur. One of my favourite studies into homophobia, in which heterosexual men watched gay porn with meters attached to their genitals, found a much higher level of sexual response among established homophobes than among those who didn't give a shit

.

Yak wrote:Speaking for myself again, I don't like to be around people of either orientation whose whole life revolves around their sexuality,

I can understand this to some extent. People who experience excessive prejudice (or greatly fear such prejudice) over a single aspect of themselves can end up defining themselves by that sole aspect, largely because that aspect seems to be so important to others, This can also be the case regarding, for example, ethnic backgrounds, skin colours or religions. Knowing this, however, doesn't make such people less irritating to be around (think of Matt Lucas's "only gay in the village"). Personally, I'm not "A gay" any more than I'm "a blue-eyed" or "a bespectacled".

Yak wrote:[...] and I get very uncomfortable around people who think that sex is to be shared with everyone; I'm an old-fashioned one partner one person type, it seems.

I've been a bit of a slag in my youth

. There's sex, though, and love and physical attraction and the three can exist separately, or in any combination, with different persons. I long for another monogamous relationship but I'm willing to shag virtually anyone who I find physically or mentally attractive[0]

.

Atlas' Apprentice wrote:Awww... What are us Obsessive compulsives meant to do now?

Stick to boring everyone about how obsessive-compulsive we are?

H.

[0] Writing figuratively, at least. Firstly, I tend to find buggery boring[1] and secondly, I'm crap in bed anyway these days

.

[1] Pun, as usual, intended

.

_________________
"The paradoxical_and tragic_situation of man is that his conscience is
weakest when he needs it most."
[Erich Fromm -- "Man for Himself"]

gilesgoat · Post by **gilesgoat** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 9:19 am 0

Yak wrote:through this stereotype people get the idea that gay people are always going to be flamboyantly so, always up for casual sex and living a life that revolves entirely around their sexuality; and of course it is *not* that way for everyone on the planet who prefers a partner of the same gender. But that is what a lot of people see ...

Yes, definitely this is "the common orientation" that is usually
percieved.

While I am aware that OF COURSE "you can't think everybody acts
this way" this is more or less the (or one of) "stereotype"
(and we all know that usually stereotypes are not correct but ..)
about gays.

Ok, I can say I've been quite much "around" gay "communities/people"
while in was in the US cause most of the friends I knew where and
I was simply among them ..

Well .. in many cases this stereotype is quite true, young guys doing
college and such looks more for "entretainement" than "stable
relationships" and this "model" is true and apply very well, I've
seen it myself many times, not just one.

And OF COURSE is not a model that applies "to gay only" I know
quite some straight people very willing and able to do the same
but anyway it seems it's "quite frequent" (if you allow me to say this)
to find such model around gays.

Yak wrote: Speaking for myself again, I don't like to be around people of either orientation whose whole life revolves around their sexuality, and I get very uncomfortable around people who think that sex is to be shared with everyone; I'm an old-fashioned one partner one person type, it seems. I certainly wouldn't want to *hurt* people like that - it's their choice, and who am I to judge - but I wouldn't want to be around them.

I agree with you Yak here "300%", for those who never seen and
read my website I've written long ago something about that
in my section http://www.gilesgoat.com/notsharing.htm
that basically says the same of above.

I don't want to hurt anybody but I say "live and let live, and please
do not interfere with me".

I can't hide this, but I have big wounds

that are still on the
way to be healed due to "people that thinks that everything
can/should be shared among 'friends' " ..

I draw a big line and definitely I made a choiche in my life that is
"not for me, I can stand it, it hurts me" .. full stop ..

Yak wrote: In my life I have had a few experiences with humans either side of the fence, as it were; and yet I have never looked at a bloke and fancied him, or looked at a woman and fancied her. It doesn't seem to work like that for me. The desire to be intimate with someone seems to be predicated semi-infinitely more on neural correlations than physical attributes.

Absolutely "300%" agree with you again in that too..

Sex is not only "a physical thing" is much more than that, or at least
so I percieve it.

Yak wrote: The only occasions upon which I have acted contrary to that (purely out of a misguided feeling of obligation, of doing something because I "ought" to for whatever reason) have always ended badly. So basically for me to even show signs of interest I would have to know the other person well enough to know that it would be appropriate or it would never happen, so nobody sensible should be upset by it, I hope.

*SIGHS* .. I learnt myself some "very hard ways" that you can never
be something you are not, nor try to think "I am able to do something,
I can be the same" when your feelings tell you something completely
different.

Some things, are so deep inside us that "they don't change", it's really
"our nature" ... if one is not inclined/ready to do/accept some things
even if sometime it may happen our "good will" lead us to do some
things because we feel we "ought" something ... the results are
often disasters ...

Some things really can't be "ought" .. if there's even one small bell
ringing saying to you "there's something I don't percieve as good"
it's much better to stop in advance and try to understand/see what
this really is ..

And if it "does not work", it simply does not work ... better you forget
about him/her and take another road .. if things cannot really change ...

Thanks Yak, you really said quite some things I maybe wanted to say
myself so you gave me the opportunity to quote your sentences.

Life is not "easy" .. yes it can be .. but that's not what I look for ..
my "easy" time is finished long ago .. and even if some really
good moments have been left me nothing but pain at the end

Better to leave past as it is and look with hope at the future ...

randomdude · Post by **randomdude** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 12:46 pm 0

Stone wrote: I must say though...I did mistake randomdude for a girlie first time I looked at the pic I did doubletake though, so it's not as bad as you might immediately assume

Woo! Thats taken as a compliment.

randomdude · Post by **randomdude** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:58 pm 0

Yak wrote:
Speaking for myself, I would be uncomfortable around *anybody* of whatever orientation if it seemed that that was their entire *life*... whether that was a straight bloke who lived to shag women and who talked of nothing else, or a gay man who was just gay, gay, gay all the time and never actually... well.. just a bloke occasionally .

Hrm. I have to interject here. Isn't this the same as your Fluffiness thing? or your coding thing?

Yak wrote: Speaking for myself again, I don't like to be around people of either orientation whose whole life revolves around their sexuality,

Has the Yak really just said that? Doesn't your life revolve around Fluffiness?

aureole · Post by **aureole** » Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:58 pm 0

Yak wrote:I think possibly one reason that people feel threatened by the idea of someone being "gay" is that most people have a very sterotypical idea of what "gay" actually means, in part through what they see in the media and indeed in part because of the way that certain gay people actually like to act and behave - through this stereotype people get the idea that gay people are always going to be flamboyantly so, always up for casual sex and living a life that revolves entirely around their sexuality; and of course it is *not* that way for everyone on the planet who prefers a partner of the same gender.

But from my own observations at university, when people were first coming out, they desperately wanted some image to associate with, to attach a label to themselves out of pride, and thus started dressing in the "stereotypical image" of a gay person from the media. So I when I first got to uni, I believed the media-stereotype of gay people wasn't true to life, then a lot of people I met there proved me wrong. Of course, most people then whiled back after a while and didn't (as you said) form a large part of their identity around their sexuality, but merely incorporated it into who there were.

Yak wrote: Speaking for myself again, I don't like to be around people of either orientation whose whole life revolves around their sexuality, and I get very uncomfortable around people who think that sex is to be shared with everyone; I'm an old-fashioned one partner one person type, it seems. I certainly wouldn't want to *hurt* people like that - it's their choice, and who am I to judge - but I wouldn't want to be around them.

I think there is a large amount of crossover: there's a whole gay scene - for some people their sexual orientation plays a part in what they do in their spare time, where they drink, who they meet and so forth. I think some straight men feel vaguely threatened by the notion of a mysterious world that they can't fathom with it's own rules, meets, secrets and customs.

Actually, on a tangent, what does make me think is the co-opting of gay culture as cool, and gay bars suddenly being the "places to be seen" and having hordes of cackling thirty-something women descend on them as gay men are much nicer and won't leer at them.
[quote="yak]
Just my $0.02, as they say in yankieland.
[/quote]

All very though-provoking...