SERIOUS QUESTION
Asked by blogdaughter Machelle of Quality Weenie in the comments to
this post:
Why is it that teenage/early adult males can not handle a gay man being around them?
Do they fear "catching" it?
Does it make them feel less of a male?
Does it make them feel that uncomfortable that they just don't want to deal with it?
I've mulled this over, and I'm not really sure myself. About the only thing I can think of is "they're insecure about their manhood".
Which sounds like a cliche, but this is what I mean - teen males know that they're expected to act "manly", but they don't yet understand what all that would entail (they're probably a little fuzzy on the honesty, integrity & discipline aspects of manhood at that point - hopefully they'll figure out that those are the REAL keys). What they DO understand about manhood at this point is the concept of penile-vaginal copulation. That's the one aspect of manhood they're certain about. So, when placed in a situation of uncertainty, they fall back on what they can count on to demonstrate their manhood - defending their love of vagina.
That's my theory. Others are welcome in the comments.
Posted by: Harvey at
10:38 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 206 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Personally, I don't mind being around gays and I never have.
If I have a friend who I find out later is gay it doesn't change my opinion of them.
However, what bothers me are the flamboyant ones. Many seem like, since they are attracted to men they have to make themselves into an annoying stereotype. They don't understand that it's their demeanor and not their sexuality that gives everyone around them the urge to punch their teeth out.
I know flamboyant guys who are straight (or at least claim to be)and I can't tolerate them either.
Also, one of the most annoying things anyone can do, gay or straight, is be compelled to bring up their sexuality at least every four sentences.
Most gay men I have known do this. As well as lesbians and frat guys.
And that's why I can't stand any of them.
To sum up: It's not the sexual preference that bothers me, it's having to constantly be reminded that I'm in the presence of a gay man.
And, of course, I can't speak for all young men, but I do know quite a few that agree with me about this.
Posted by: Joey at August 26, 2007 11:56 AM (4wcQq)
2
Could be that being young, they look at all the women they're attracted to and don't like the idea of another dude being attracted to them.
IMHO
Posted by: ChrisA at August 26, 2007 01:20 PM (TnrKn)
3
I don't think all teenagers are that way, but I know many that are. I think that some of them just don't like the thought of another guy hitting on them. Hell I'm an adult and really don't care if someone is gay or not, but I really am not comfortable with a guy hitting on me. I may not care if someone is gay, but that doesn't mean I don't think it's wrong.
Posted by: Contagion at August 26, 2007 02:51 PM (loeSs)
4
Given the harvest of homosexual activities that the world has been blessed with I can understand the reaction of young men to hyomosexual contact. Would a visit to an AIDs ward would be a tremendous boaster to the gay lifestyle? As if there aren't enough problems and misery in the world, do we really need more such problems?
Posted by: Thomas Jackson at August 26, 2007 06:32 PM (A2ZNt)
5
It's because the gay guy dresses better.
All joking aside, I agree with Joey. I've known several gay flaming drama queens who go out of their way to annoy the shit out of everyone around them then cry "homophobia" when you call them on it. My response is usually something along the lines of "I'd think you were an asshole even if you were straight"
Posted by: Graumagus at August 26, 2007 06:46 PM (YUKdz)
6
In my case it was real simple. When I was 19 and 20 I spent time in the San Francisco Bay Area, first at the body and fender shop called the Oak Knoll Naval Hospital in Oakland, then in the Marine Barracks at Treasure Island there in San Francisco Bay.
Oddly, before then I had no particular thoughts about gays, they were none of my business. Getting propositioned twelve times in a block was just a little much.
Posted by: Peter at August 26, 2007 09:11 PM (d5KYk)
7
Also, a few years ago I had a flaming gay roommate.
One time I walked in on him masturbating.
Ten minutes later I was the drunkest I've ever been.
Posted by: Joey at August 26, 2007 11:46 PM (4wcQq)
8
Adolescent males are still finding their identity, and really aren't comfortable around anyone that they can't identify with. They also cannot handle being around elderly people, babies, and toddlers. Since a large part of the adolescent male's identity is the Search for Trim, then someone whom he should identify but has actively rejected this identity (and especially one who advertises with every sentence through characteristic speech patterns) is someone assaulting his world-view.
Posted by: Phelps at August 27, 2007 01:40 PM (0Nw5i)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Here's Your Answer
(cross-posted from
IMAO)
In a terribly off-topic comment to a John Edwards post, anonymous commenter with no contact information Yak asks:
Exactly why is the U.S. deployed in Iraq, according to you?
Fine.
Let's stop mincing words.
We're in Iraq because Muslims have stated over and over and over that their only goal is to kill all non-Muslims.
After 9/11, we started taking them at their word, and since we didn't want to be killed, our only choice was to start killing Muslims before they killed us.
Iraq had Muslims in it, so it was as good a place to start as any. In fact, better than most, because it was in the heart of Muslim country, and having troops there gives us a credible force-projection threat throughout the entire putrid, corrupt, murderous Muslim region. It's easier to kill Muslims in other countries from Iraq than it is from Kuwait.
And now Muslims have two choices:
They can reform their vicious, degenerate religion so that it allows for peaceful co-existence with other religions and - after embracing this enlightened, live-and-let-live philosophy whole-heartedly - they can become productive members of the civilized world, much like post-WWII Germany and Japan.
OR
They can be exterminated like vermin.
All the rest of this crap about WMD's, and mass graves, and liberation, and oil fields, and insurgents is just so much political window-dressing. America is fighting for its life against an insidious, deadly ideology. The people who cling to that sick, 7th-century belief system must either change their minds or be killed.
I wish with all my heart that we had enough manpower to conquer every damn last Muslim nation on earth and root this virus out once and for all, but we don't. So we'll start in Iraq, dragging these barbarians kicking and screaming into the 21st century. After that, hopefully the rest of the Muslim world will get the point. If not, there will be further examples, nation by nation, until they do.
Then, when the Muslim world is either civilized or dead, the war will be over.
I hope that answers your question.
Posted by: Harvey at
06:13 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 358 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Yup - that about covers it. Good on ya, Harvey.
Posted by: Richmond at August 17, 2007 06:52 AM (XkZ30)
2
I can't believe I missed this yesterday... sheesh my brain is mush. Talk about a home run - you knocked this one clear into the Middle East. *grin*
Posted by: Teresa at August 17, 2007 07:10 AM (gsbs5)
Posted by: Susie at August 17, 2007 09:20 AM (Dw6Z5)
4
Harv, STOP beating around the bush and just tell us how you REALLY feel, I mean stop being so PC and just speak your mind.
JEEZ your just getting soft In your old age.
Posted by: blogless brother at August 17, 2007 09:50 AM (JeWGX)
5
It also has the side benefit of exposing the traitorous bastards and useful idiots in our own midst.
Unfortunately the powers that be have gallowsphobia
so none of the assholes have swung like they should.
Posted by: Graumagus at August 17, 2007 12:53 PM (msvPA)
6
Ah, must be nice to live in such simplistic ignorance. It's so much easier to let someone else tell you what to think instead of actually doing some research and knowing something about the subject you discuss - in this case 2000 years of history (until the 16th century, Islamic lands were centuries ahead of Europe medically, philosophically, economically, scientifically, etc.), the history of the Crusades (no, Christians weren't the good guys there), or the history of the Cold War (no, the U.S. wasn't the good guy there either).
Not to mention this large group of men who attacked people from hiding, running away when a counterattack was mounted, using snipers to pick off officers and terrorizing those who sympathized with the enemy . . . these men were, and still are, lauded as heroes . . . in the 1770s when they fought the British using terrorist, sorry guerilla, tactics.
Let's also look at reality:
Before the U.S. invade Iraq, according to the CIA and U.S. State Dept., Iraq:
a) was a second world country
b) was politically, economically stable, and
c) had no terrorist presence or leanings whatsoever.
After the U.S. invasion, according to the U.S. military, CIA, and State Dept, Iraq:
a) is a third world country
b) is politically and economically unstable, and
c) is a terrorist training ground.
Not only has the invasion failed to make the U.S. safer, it has actually made us less safe. But, the administration's misson has been accomplished: Cheney's company got a multi-billion dollar no bid contract, Cheney's gotten his kickback from that, and Dubya's personal vendetta has been successfully ended.
Yeah us!
Posted by: John at August 18, 2007 05:18 PM (I4ooZ)
7
Oh, and for Graumagen . . .
It was Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin (heard of them?) who said it is the duty of every true citizen and patriot to question their government rather than blindly accepting everything their leaders say. The latter is the surest way to destroy a democratic republic.
Related note, the previous post was not intended to support the tactics used by terrorists around the world (even the American and Irish terrorists, or those we funded throughout Central America in the 80s). Rather, it is meant to point out that the mess we are embroiled in right now is a direct result of screw ups made throughout the Cold War, especially during the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations which abandoned our Middle Eastern Cold War allies after completely screwing up their countries (Iraq and Afghanistan especially). Sadly, the present administration has chosen to remain utterly blind to history and this basic fact, therefore the administration refuses to understand the fact that this country is not an innocent and utterly blameless nation. At teh same time, by ignoring the history, they completely lack understanding of the motives of Terrorist leaders like Bin Laden (one of our Cold War allies, like Hussein, whom we abandonded when the Soviet state fell).
As we can learn from history, those who do not understand the enemy, whether deliberately or not, and those who do not respect their enemy are doomed to failure by underestimating the enemy - as this administration has done time and time again over teh last six years.
Posted by: John at August 18, 2007 09:06 PM (I4ooZ)
8
Hey John, Pass the Koolaid you commie bastard.
Posted by: unkawill at August 19, 2007 09:47 AM (YwdKL)
9
Hey John, why don't you move to another country? I'll bet Iran would welcome you with open arms. You sure don't belong in our country.
And when you get there, please drop dead!
Posted by: kodiakken at August 21, 2007 06:09 PM (quEoP)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
27kb generated in CPU 0.022, elapsed 0.1044 seconds.
70 queries taking 0.0901 seconds, 181 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.