The Gay Thread

Quote: ams288

Bold added for emphasis.

This is half right. Everyone knows about bathhouses (assuming you live in the vicinity of one), but most young gays wouldn’t go anywhere near them because it’s pretty much just creepy ass old men who visit them.

I just think it's funny that I 100% support the right of homosexuals to do whatever they want, and yet, AZDuffman apparently knows 1000x more about gay culture than I ever hope to learn or could ever possibly care about. None of this will ever have an impact on me.

It may well have "impacted" him directly earlier in life; such unwanted, uninvited "attention" could be difficult to work through without some resulting damage.

Such as homophobia.

Not saying he was molested, not saying he wasn't.

Even if that were the case, there's really no reason to be concerned with what adults are doing with other consenting adults.

I think prostitution is pretty disgusting and regard male and female prostitutes, as well as those engaged in pornography, male or female, as whores...but that doesn't mean that I don't think they should have the legal right to do those things as long as everyone is consenting.

I agree but where is the line to be drawn?

I recall a macabre news item years ago where a guy, I think in Germany, put the word out that he wanted somebody to volunteer to be slaughtered and eaten (cannibalism).

I can't recall how it ended, but the point is would you be OK with that, even if both consented?

Me, I'd have a hard time giving it my blessing.

Same with bad parents teaching / encouraging their kids to lie; or a bad president encouraging his followers to storm the Capitol.

Consent alone is not a "get out of jail free" card, there's something more to the equation but I can't articulate it.

Quote: missedhervee

I agree but where is the line to be drawn?

I recall a macabre news item years ago where a guy, I think in Germany, put the word out that he wanted somebody to volunteer to be slaughtered and eaten (cannibalism).

I can't recall how it ended, but the point is would you be OK with that, even if both consented?

Me, I'd have a hard time giving it my blessing.

Same with bad parents teaching / encouraging their kids to lie; or a bad president encouraging his followers to storm the Capitol.

Consent alone is not a "get out of jail free" card, there's something more to the equation but I can't articulate it.

I tend to think that, when we talk about drawing lines, we look to the most taboo things that simply aren't occurring very frequently.

When it comes to the German guy, I'd have a really hard time finding a way to legally condone that. Not that the penalty is all that serious in every state, but most states do have laws against desecration of a corpse, so I'm sure it would fall under that.

It's kind of an odd thing, but the current legal system does have varying penalties based on an act being, "Outrageous."

On the other hand, it seems like I would almost have to support this because I support both acts that are based on consent, and also think that doctor assisted suicide should be legal for anyone at any time. Can I really draw the line at the fact that the guy is not a doctor? I really don't see where else your example goes against anything that I would allow.

I don't know how you can be against a parent teaching their kids to lie. Most parents teach this by example, anyway, or at least they teach trying to conceal part of the truth, again, by example. Santa Clause is a lie, for one thing. I've never really taught my kids to lie or not to lie; they can decide for themselves when lying is or is not appropriate in their lives. I think my ex-wife goes the typical route of just straight teaching the kids not to lie. They're going to grow up and sometimes lie anyway, so I don't see how it matters.

Quote: missedhervee

I agree but where is the line to be drawn?

I recall a macabre news item years ago where a guy, I think in Germany, put the word out that he wanted somebody to volunteer to be slaughtered and eaten (cannibalism).

I can't recall how it ended, but the point is would you be OK with that, even if both consented?

Me, I'd have a hard time giving it my blessing.

Same with bad parents teaching / encouraging their kids to lie; or a bad president encouraging his followers to storm the Capitol.

Consent alone is not a "get out of jail free" card, there's something more to the equation but I can't articulate it.

Well in most States that would actually be legal (not the part of somebody soliciting volunteers to be killed), but cannibalism on its own. Cannibalism is actually legal in most of the U.S. if you obtain the meat legally (through consent or yourself through removal of your own body) though this is realistically challenging (which is why most criminals regarded as cannibals are charges with murder or theft of bodies, not actually cannibalism). But, the consensus seems to be if it is truly consensual (no force or undue pressure), there is no law against it (in most places in the U.S.).

Remember, eating/consuming any part of the human body is cannibalism (in its simplest definition), so any culture or religion that encourages new mothers/parents to keep/eat the placenta after a new birth is technically cannibalistic (which is more common than many people realize even among "new age" types...).

This is one of those things that people naturally assume is illegal, but actually is not (in the U.S.) .

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/cannibalism
(This even cites the German case that you referred to).

Gay men make up less than 2% of the population. Who cares what they do.
It's like black people make up 12% of the population but about 80% of the
people in power on TV shows. Judges, police captains, mayor's, governors,
generals, high school principals, you name it. If it's a position of power
there's a black actor filling it. Makes Hollywood feel all warm and fuzzy. In
real life we've got Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, that insane Lightfoot woman
in Chicago and Whoopsie Goldfarb. Oh boy..

Quote: Mission146

Where? I have never heard of any city that has this and have lived in two major cities. I guess I could believe rest areas, but I figured hooking was just a big thing at those, in general.

You have never heard of them because you never looked for one. There will be some in any big city, probably in the gay areas. In Pittsburgh that would mean start looking in Shadyside. Or google for them if you want.

Quote: Gandler

Your use of cruising was clearly stated in the context of taking cruises (like ships). Now you are trying to spin it as if you meant anyone wandering town for no reason (which is not a term anyone actually uses in 2021, not even the police in GA use this anymore) and that I should have known what you mean..... If somebody says "They are cruising and going for fun" while taking vacation, everyone knows what they mean (they are talking about going on a cruise)....

No normal person would think I was talking about going on a cruise vacation. Not if they in the slightest understand the context. Maybe a female pre-7th grade who had parents who sheltered her from life. We all remember a few of those in school. But an adult has probably heard the term.

Quote:

I don't know a lot of your pop culture or sports reference (actually any in the immediate above post) so I am not even going to get into that. As for what I should know about "gay culture", I am almost positive I know far more non-straight people than you do, and probably spend much more time in progressive establishments than you (what you would probably call "gay bars"). So I know what people think on the ground (not in a Hollywood or mythical setting).

So now you are going to tell me you hang out in gay bars and have never heard any of this? Do you know how hard that is to believe?

Quote:

In any case what you view as "reality" seems to be narrow, because you keep sliding away actual data and instead focus on anecdotes and urban legends.... And, then seem to think that because I don't know some obscure movie or some ancient reference to be some ultimate gotcha.... You dismiss maps, you dismiss STD/STI rates, you dismiss historical data, and hyperfocus on what you think people do because of what you have head at some point in the 90s. I am not sure that I am the one living in denial (though I am open-minded enough to leave open the possibility). I have already conceded that any sex outside of marriage increases the risk of STD/STIs (including AIDs/HIV amongst countless others), I don't think anyone denies this.

I am not talking "urban legends." I am talking reality. Do you know why gays historically get persecuted? It is because of these kinds of behaviors and the problems it causes. Go back to the Roman Empire it would still have been happening. Go to some tribe somewhere and it will still have been happening. Why? Because human nature does not change, it is the same then as it is now.

You actually think I meant there are maps that tell of areas reserved for gays? Seriously, if you thought that you should concern yourself for how many things about life you do not know. I will give the example again. Kordell Steward got arrested, or supposedly did, for lewd acts. Whether he did or not (the record may have been buried) the point is when the place was mentioned everyone in town knew that was a known area where gays looked for random sex with other gays. No "map" was needed, it just became the known area. When an area gets that reputation gays flock there and straights avoid it at least after dark.

Quote:

What is your solution for dealing with "gay culture"? Outlaw it? Ban all sex outside of marriage (which often leads to an exclusive focus on gay sex)? If you don't want the government involved in personal/medical decisions how do you change behavior that you deem undesirable or dangerous?

My "solution" is be aware what is going on. Gays have gotten enough enough power in Hollywood to force content producers to show gays as just these regular people in numbers far in excess of their actual numbers. If a gay is shown in a negative way they will try to destroy said producer same as they try to destroy anyone who does not go along with them.

Since you have a hard time with context "producer" does not mean the person per se, it means the outfit who makes the content.

What the gay lobby is doing is propaganda straight out of 1930s fascist and communist playbooks. And it is having the same effect now as it did then. Your reactions in these posts shows it.

Quote: AZDuffman

No normal person would think I was talking about going on a cruise vacation. Not if they in the slightest understand the context. Maybe a female pre-7th grade who had parents who sheltered her from life. We all remember a few of those in school. But an adult has probably heard the term.



So now you are going to tell me you hang out in gay bars and have never heard any of this? Do you know how hard that is to believe?



I am not talking "urban legends." I am talking reality. Do you know why gays historically get persecuted? It is because of these kinds of behaviors and the problems it causes. Go back to the Roman Empire it would still have been happening. Go to some tribe somewhere and it will still have been happening. Why? Because human nature does not change, it is the same then as it is now.

You actually think I meant there are maps that tell of areas reserved for gays? Seriously, if you thought that you should concern yourself for how many things about life you do not know. I will give the example again. Kordell Steward got arrested, or supposedly did, for lewd acts. Whether he did or not (the record may have been buried) the point is when the place was mentioned everyone in town knew that was a known area where gays looked for random sex with other gays. No "map" was needed, it just became the known area. When an area gets that reputation gays flock there and straights avoid it at least after dark.




My "solution" is be aware what is going on. Gays have gotten enough enough power in Hollywood to force content producers to show gays as just these regular people in numbers far in excess of their actual numbers. If a gay is shown in a negative way they will try to destroy said producer same as they try to destroy anyone who does not go along with them.

Since you have a hard time with context "producer" does not mean the person per se, it means the outfit who makes the content.

What the gay lobby is doing is propaganda straight out of 1930s fascist and communist playbooks. And it is having the same effect now as it did then. Your reactions in these posts shows it.

"Do you know why gays historically get persecuted" ......

That is a line almost pulled verbatim rom the Third Reich (just replace, gays with Jews, because "they have been behaving bad everywhere they have been through history).... So I don't think you are in a position to call people fascist for wanting equality....

The idea that there is a gay lobby manipulating the media, is the same kind of thinking that the "Jews control the banks and media for their agenda".... Its just demonization with no basis in reality....