Homophobia, Homosexuality and Men

Boston

iptba wrote: »

Of course financial benefits for the couple mean others are paying for it. So society may decide it only has so much resources from taxes, etc. So, in reply to the first point, there can be a reason (which might be nothing to do with homophobia) even if some/many/most may disagree with the reason.

Then the correct response is to reduce the tax benefits for all married couples rather then arbitrary restricting who can get married.

iptba

Boston wrote: »

Then the correct response is to reduce the tax benefits for all married couples rather then arbitrary restricting who can get married.

Correct is a strong word. In most things in life there are shades of grey or sometimes alternative possibilities. An alterative response might be to restrict benefits to either all couples who have children or even perhaps gay couples who have children.

There can be unintended consequences with changes. Could lots of heterosexual men or women decide to marry each other (i.e. person of the same sex) for the tax breaks?

Boston

iptba wrote: »

Correct is a strong word. In most things in life there are shades of grey or sometimes alternative possibilities. An alterative response might be to restrict benefits to either all couples who have children or even perhaps gay couples who have children.

There can be unintended consequences with changes. Could lots of heterosexual men or women decide to marry each other (i.e. person of the same sex) for the tax breaks?

Assumption being that the tax benefit is for the purpose of children. Child benefit is for children. I like the way you added "(person of the same sex)". IT shows you're aware of the flaw in that argument. There is nothing stopping heterosexuals from getting married for tax benefits nor homosexuals getting married for tax benefits. The reality is that the tax benefits don't really matter that much unless you're a cohabiting couple sharing expenses with one of you earning significantly less then the other. Nowhere that gay or civil marriage has been legalised has seen an increase in fraudulent marriages.

iptba

Boston wrote: »

The reality is that the tax benefits don't really matter that much unless you're a cohabiting couple sharing expenses with one of you earning significantly less then the other.

Is inheritance tax not also an issue?

iptba

Boston wrote: »

Nowhere that gay or civil marriage has been legalised has seen an increase in fraudulent marriages.

What is the definition of increase? Have there been cases of fradulent marriages?

Boston

Yes, but we're talking about reasons gay people would want to get married. Few people are thinking "In 40 -50 years, you'll have to pay tax on my half of the house otherwise".

iptba

Boston wrote: »

Yes, but we're talking about reasons gay people would want to get married. Few people are thinking "In 40 -50 years, you'll have to pay tax on my half of the house otherwise".

Ok, I haven't thought about the idea much so the discussion will tease out some issues for me. I'm sure people will give out to me but maybe there should be an upper limit for marriage? Inheritance tax can be quite substantial.

Boston

iptba wrote: »

What is the definition of increase? Have there been cases of fradulent marriages?

Well mate, it falls to you to demonstrate there has been an increase in fraudulent marriages for tax purposes since it's your argument against gay marriage. By increase I mean an increase beyond what would be the normal percentage. I mean northern Island has had civil partnership for awhile now but there hasn't been a huge flood of people looking to tie the knot so far for lover nor for money.

Additionally, given how difficult it is to get divorced* in this country I don't see a lot of people doing so on a whim.

*you could of course get in annulled, but then you'd open yourself up for prosecution for tax fraud.

iptba

Boston wrote: »

Assumption being that the tax benefit is for the purpose of children. Child benefit is for children.

Well perhaps that is what it is designed for even if it might be a blunt way of achieving it. It could be "sharpened" as I say to apply to just couples with children.

Boston

iptba wrote: »

Well perhaps that is what it is designed for even if it might be a blunt way of achieving it. It could be "sharpened" as I say to apply to just couples with children.

But it isn't. Nothing more I can say then that. Unless the benifits are restricted to just couples with (dependent) kids, the arguement falls flat on its face. Also, rather irrelevant as the number one tax benefit, the sharing of tax credits doesn't actually matter that much if both partners are in full time employment earning similar amounts.

Dr Galen

call me an old romantic but I struggle to believe that the main reason for any couple to get married is the tax breaks.

CDfm

Its the tear and share brioche with the icing and chocolate in bed on a saturday morning.

Dr Galen

totally OT CDfm










they are ****ing delicious, especially with hot chocolate

/OT-ness, serious hats on

CDfm

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

totally OT CDfm



they are ****ing delicious, especially with hot chocolate

/OT-ness, serious hats on

If thats what they want - I think we should give in to them.

But seriously, isn't it what everyone wants.

Tarzan007

amacachi wrote: »

I really don't give a **** if someone is straight or gay. I hate campness/loudness, which apparently makes me homophobic.

It might not be PC correct but gotta agree their. Some gays want to be picked on if you ask me, persecution complex.

Boston

Same way some cork men have a massive chip on their shoulder.

fonecrusher1

Boston wrote: »

Same way some cork men have a massive chip on their shoulder.

Thing is i don't really think there is anything anybody can say without getting a fairly snappish and just generally derogatory remark from you.

I'm a bit overweight myself & usually get the old fat jokes aimed at me....its just a laugh, i don't bitch & moan about it.
Ginger haired people get the piss taken out of them all the time.
Black people have to endure bigotry the gay folks could only dream of.

I used to take the piss out of a gay dude i worked with all the time & vice versa. Oh & he couldn't stand ultra camp gay people.

Boston your not even gay yet you contribute vigorously to this thread as if you were a gay bloke with a chip on your shoulder?? Whats that about.:rolleyes:

CDfm

Boston wrote: »

Same way some cork men have a massive chip on their shoulder.

Cork had an openly gay bar from the 70s and not in the back street either but on McCurtain St which is on the main drag-like D'Olier St is in Dublin.

So I dont imagine Cork gays ever had a chip on their shoulder-at least not in my lifetime.

pikachucheeks

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

I'm a bit overweight myself & usually get the old fat jokes aimed at me....its just a laugh, i don't bitch & moan about it.
Ginger haired people get the piss taken out of them all the time.
Black people have to endure bigotry the gay folks could only dream of.

I actually think it's quite sad, the way people will tease each other and "joke" about certain things.
Sure, it can be argued that joking about a topic can lessen the taboo around it, but often, that fun, light-hearted way of joking can go too far.

Overweight people shouldn't have to deal with abuse from other people about being heavy. It can be a sensitive issue - in the same way being gay can be.

Just because someone is different than you doesn't mean you have the right to slag them or subject them to jokes. Not everyone finds them funny!
Being "different" in society can actually be very hard for people, without them having to deal with the taunts of others.

Also, just because it might happen people "all the time" doesn't make it acceptable or OK.

fonecrusher1

pikachucheeks wrote: »

I actually think it's quite sad, the way people will tease each other and "joke" about certain things.
Sure, it can be argued that joking about a topic can lessen the taboo around it, but often, that fun, light-hearted way of joking can go too far.

Overweight people shouldn't have to deal with abuse from other people about being heavy. It can be a sensitive issue - in the same way being gay can be.

Just because someone is different than you doesn't mean you have the right to slag them or subject them to jokes. Not everyone finds them funny!
Being "different" in society can actually be very hard for people, without them having to deal with the taunts of others.

Also, just because it might happen people "all the time" doesn't make it acceptable or OK.

Yeah but in the real world thats the way it goes.
Its nice & all to day dream about some sort of utopian alternate reality where everyone is perfectly nice to each other & everyones holding hands & singing but its pie in the sky IMO.
In all fairness its called banter & i'd much rather have it that way than a fake environment where people smile & say hello but the minute your out of the room talk **** about you.

I'll take the piss out of anyone to their face, within reason & of course accept a few jokes at my expense.
But what i will not do is side step a certain minority because they think their untouchable.
Do you think a person in a wheelchair would appreciate being avoided like the plague when it comes to a bit of good natured mocking?
If anything its an insult to them.

Giselle

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

But what i will not do is side step a certain minority because they think their untouchable.
Do you think a person in a wheelchair would appreciate being avoided like the plague when it comes to a bit of good natured mocking?
If anything its an insult to them.

Huge HUGE difference between mocking someone who could use a few pounds or has ginger hair, and mocking a persons life altering disability.

If you have to mock a wheelchair bound person, find something else to mock them about other than that.

Its not about being untouchable, its about manners and compassion.

fonecrusher1

Giselle wrote: »

Huge HUGE difference between mocking someone who could use a few pounds or has ginger hair, and mocking a persons life altering disability.

If you have to mock a wheelchair bound person, find something else to mock them about other than that.

Its not about being untouchable, its about manners and compassion.

Look don't try to make me out to be 'the bad guy' here please, i can spot it a mile away & my thanks seeker detection machine is going nuts.;)

And if you make an accusation like that against me again im going to put in a complaint against you.

You know fine well what i meant is to take part in a bit of humorous banter & nothing to do with mocking anyones disability.

Giselle

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Look don't try to make me out to be 'the bad guy' here please, i can spot it a mile away & my thanks seeker detection machine is going nuts.;)

And if you make an accusation like that against me again im going to put in a complaint against you.

You know fine well what i meant is to take part in a bit of humorous banter & nothing to do with mocking anyones disability.

Accusation?

Irony, much?

OldGoat

Simmer down everyone. Don't make me throw bans and infractions around.

CDfm

Its an interesting thread.

Does anyone slag off gays anymore or indeed how sensitive are they about it. thats a question only a homosexual could answer.

this evening driving i was listening to newstalk and the sports guys were talking about justin fashnu the first £1 million pound black player and first and probably last openly gay footballer. At Nottingham Forest Brian clough subjected him to homophobic rants and put him on loan and spoke badly of him for years. He (fashanu)also was a devout christian.He commited suicide in fairly tragic circumstances.

So it is true that certain families and careers are closed to homosexuals or that even joking about it can affect a persons personal and professional life.

This in a way that having ginger hair or needing to loose a few pounds cant compare.

Boston

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Thing is i don't really think there is anything anybody can say without getting a fairly snappish and just generally derogatory remark from you.

I'm a bit overweight myself & usually get the old fat jokes aimed at me....its just a laugh, i don't bitch & moan about it.
Ginger haired people get the piss taken out of them all the time.
Black people have to endure bigotry the gay folks could only dream of.

I used to take the piss out of a gay dude i worked with all the time & vice versa. Oh & he couldn't stand ultra camp gay people.

I see, you've been surround your entire life be assholes so you've decided to thats the way to behave. Black women have it harder then black men, so really black men should just shut the fuk up. You're a genus.

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Boston your not even gay yet you contribute vigorously to this thread as if you were a gay bloke with a chip on your shoulder?? Whats that about.:rolleyes:

I'm trying to live up to you, my ideal.

CDfm wrote: »

Cork had an openly gay bar from the 70s and not in the back street either but on McCurtain St which is on the main drag-like D'Olier St is in Dublin.

So I dont imagine Cork gays ever had a chip on their shoulder-at least not in my lifetime.

You know, I find it incredibly hard to understand the points you make and how they relate to the discussion at hand. It's as if you're replying to a conversation in your head.

CDfm

Boston wrote: »

You know, I find it incredibly hard to understand the points you make and how they relate to the discussion at hand. It's as if you're replying to a conversation in your head.

You mentioned Cork - I thought it was worth pointing out that to my knowledge Cork has had a gay community in the open since the 70s. I thought it was worth pointing out.

In the context of the thread I felt it was worth pointing out.

Boston

Anybody reading your reply would be forgiven for thinking I said gay cork men have a chip on their shoulder, which is seemingly how you took it up.

CDfm

Ah boston - you are assuming I am gay -which I am not. I was making a factual comment that in some places it is more acceptable than in others.Cork being one.

I also made a point about careers etc.

Boston

CDfm wrote: »

Ah boston - you are assuming I am gay

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I've no idea where you pulled that out of none. I've reread my post and I cannot see how you reached that conclusion.

CDfm

Boston wrote: »

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I've no idea where you pulled that out of none. I've reread my post and I cannot see how you reached that conclusion.

Boston -this thread is all about you and only can be read or commented on in the context of your posts. I didnt get that.

Whatcha wanna talk about next :rolleyes:

Boston

You quote me and you reply, but your replies to my posts make no sense, and now you're claiming that they are replies to other people?

hunter164

I couldn't care less if someone I knew was gay or not it's their choice doesn't make them any less of a man.

OldGoat

Boston, CDfm, stop snipeing and get on with the thread. Ye are like a pair of oul queens bickering in the bar of The King William IV. :-)
As entertaining as you both might find it the rest of us are searching for some kernals of useful information and opinion in this thread.

CDfm

oh OG the shame i am feeling at being mentioned in the same post as boston is too much. I am chastened.

Goduznt Xzst

CDfm wrote: »

You mentioned Cork - I thought it was worth pointing out that to my knowledge Cork has had a gay community in the open since the 70s. I thought it was worth pointing out.

You mentioned the 70's - I think the story of Harvey Milk from the 70's is quite interesting, so much so that a film titled "Milk", starring Sean Penn was released in 2008 about his life. He passed a Gay Rights ordinance for San Francisco but before reaching his prime, was shot down and assassinated by Dan White. Just last year Obama posthumously awarded him the "Presidential Medal of Freedom"

In the context of the thread I felt it was worth pointing out.

CDfm

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

In the context of the thread I felt it was worth pointing out.

It depends where you are coming from with it.

In the Ireland I grew up in in the 1980s in Ireland you had gaybashing in Dublin and the concept was not around in Cork. There was a Cork Lord Mayor Dennehy whose first cousin is the Drag Queen Danny La Rue and the Mayor held a Civic reception for him.That probably was a catalyst for change.Has there ever been a Civic Receptioin for Gays in Dublin.

So times change and areas change but not all at the one time. Obama hasnt given a Presidential medal of honour to any Salt Lake City gays -has he?

I saw a thread last year about a guy in Cavan who had nowhere to socialise and someone suggested he went to Mullingar. i would never have thought of Mullingar. Some areas will be more tolerant than others.

What I want for my kids is that they be happy. A lot of parents in the past and probably some now would have reservations because in their world view and experience would have been to be gay was to be an outcast.

It was in that context I posted and it was intended to be tongue in cheek.

HalloweenJack

Doesn't bother me whether someone's gay or not. It doesn't affect whether I like them or not.

The OP brought up the issue of stereotypes and, unfortunately, these still prevail today. For instance, if I'm in a pub watching football, I assume there are no gay people there. Also, if I meet someone who is camp, I assume they're gay. I think that's just because of the society I grew up in.

Dr Galen

ok, to try and bring things back on-topic a bit more. In my OP I asked about sterotypes and if they still exist in the modern mans mind.

It appears, even subconsiously they do to an extent. My question is this; what steps could we take as a group in society (men that is) to banish these sterotypes to where they belong?

iptba

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

ok, to try and bring things back on-topic a bit more. In my OP I asked about sterotypes and if they still exist in the modern mans mind.

It appears, even subconsiously they do to an extent. My question is this; what steps could we take as a group in society (men that is) to banish these sterotypes to where they belong?

Well, I'm going to awkward and point out that I believe that on average there are some differences in the interests and tastes of gay men and that in some areas they might be a bit what might be classically called "feminine".

I think on the average interest in a playing or watching contact sports like rugby, soccer and gaelic will be higher in a cohort of heterosexual men than gay men while the average interest in/pleasure from fashion, ice skating, dancing, flowers, yoga, interior design, musicals, etc will be higher in a group of gay men than a group of heterosexual men. As I said, having either trait in my mind is neither positive or negative and there can be a range with both groups, a bit like you would see in heterosexual women but not necessarily the same (i.e. some women do enjoy rugby, etc).

I don't think it's like a stereotype like kerrymen are stupid which has no basis.

P.C.

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

ok, to try and bring things back on-topic a bit more. In my OP I asked about sterotypes and if they still exist in the modern mans mind.

It appears, even subconsiously they do to an extent. My question is this; what steps could we take as a group in society (men that is) to banish these sterotypes to where they belong?

OK, here is an answer that is not quite an answer - but lets see if you can follow my point.

I bought a motorbike last year.

If I told my father (or if he found out), he would:
1.) tell me to sell it - if that did not work
2.) tell my mother to tell me to sell it - if that did not work
3.) ask me if I still wanted to be 'part of this family' - if that did not work
4.) not speak to me - if that did not work
5.) threaten to 'cut' me out of the will

not sure what he would try after that, but I am sure there would be something.


Most of my co workers know that I ride a bike, and most accept it (one guy also rides a bike, and we are always comparing notes), but (and now for the 'funny bit') one of my co workers, who is openly gay, kept on making jokes about me riding a bike -

- he kept saying that I am too 'clean cut' to be a real biker
- I was just going through a 'mid life crisis' and would get over it
- I am not the 'biker type'
etc.


So, do sterotypes still exist in the modern mans mind?

Yes.

What steps can we take to banish these sterotypes?

Not much, BUT what YOU can do is live your life the way you want to.
Do the things that make you happy, and enjoy yourself.

CDfm

Well it is changeing because your colleague is openly gay who felt comfortable enough teasing you about not being a leather clad biker

what age are you that your dad would make an issue of the bike

Dr Galen

iptba wrote: »

Well, I'm going to awkward and point out that I believe that on average there are some differences in the interests and tastes of gay men and that in some areas they might be a bit what might be classically called "feminine".

I think on the average interest in a playing or watching contact sports like rugby, soccer and gaelic will be higher in a cohort of heterosexual men than gay men while the average interest in/pleasure from fashion, ice skating, dancing, flowers, yoga, interior design, musicals, etc will be higher in a group of gay men than a group of heterosexual men. As I said, having either trait in my mind is neither positive or negative and there can be a range with both groups, a bit like you would see in heterosexual women but not necessarily the same (i.e. some women do enjoy rugby, etc).

I don't think it's like a stereotype like kerrymen are stupid which has no basis.

can i ask what your basing your thoughts on here? experience? stats? anecdotes?

iptba

Mystik Monkey wrote: »

can i ask what your basing your thoughts on here? experience? stats? anecdotes?

It's a model I've built up in my head. Mainly based on anecdotes, experiences, observations as well as reading a little bit on the research over the years. It seems to work.

I've seen some evidence from research that homosexual males have differences of various sorts to heterosexual males. So I've extrapolated that in a way to areas where there are appear to be differences.

The alternative would appear to be that there are no differences between heterosexual men and homosexual men which doesn't seem correct. Although perhaps might seem more PC to some.

How does one explain the apparent differences in interests in these areas if there are no differences? Is it just purely socialised behaviour/behaviour because of "gay culture"? I'm not convinced.

Of course, some people would say there are no differences between men and women, only physical ones (e.g. muscle mass), any other differences are due to socialisation but again I think there is something underlying which leads to average differences.

It would actually appear to be easier to argue the case that all differences between men and women are socialised than to argue that there are no differences between heterosexual and homosexual men as generally homosexual men will have been socialised in a similar way to heterosexual men growing up.

Here's a random study:
Women 'share same emotional brain traits' as homosexual men
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1026992/Women-share-emotional-brain-traits-homosexual-men.html#ixzz0hiWNF9K0

CDfm

Just an aside.

It might sound silly but I have always thought of the word homosexual to denote a kind of normality.I suppose that is probably because the homosexuals I know as friends would be called "straight acting" by some.

I dont know if I am expressing this properly but the word gay I have always associated with feminine type behavior or camp acting and that being affected mannerisms like "lovey" stuff.

And this from a guy who went into a clothes shop recently looking for a tie like " John Munch SVU" would wear. ( Ican hear my daughter say -he did he really did)

mudokon

ronaldoshaky wrote: »

Any liberal way you paint it, it still isnt natural.

This has to be the most ridiculous argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality doesnt only occur in the human species.

According to University of Oslo zoologist Petter Böckman, about 1,500 animal species are known to practice same-sex coupling, including bears, gorillas, flamingos, owls, salmon and many others.

If homosexuality is natural in the animal kingdom, then there is the question of why evolution hasn't eliminated this trait from the gene pool, since it doesn't lead to reproduction.

Link

I don't have any friends who are gay but it wouldnt bother me as their private life is none of my business. I have worked with homosexual guys before, one who was very camp & another who would have been classed as "straight acting".

I had more trouble dealing with the "straight acting" guy but that was more down to his attitude. He used to go on about homosexuality as if it made him special in some way & he would mention the fact that he was gay any chance he could. Whereas the camp guy was effeminate by nature but would never mention it & you just got used to his ways & accepted him for it.

CDfm

mudokon wrote: »

This has to be the most ridiculous argument against homosexuality. Homosexuality doesnt only occur in the human species.

Dolphins and penguins too

I had more trouble dealing with the "straight acting" guy but that was more down to his attitude. He used to go on about homosexuality as if it made him special in some way & he would mention the fact that he was gay any chance he could. Whereas the camp guy was effeminate by nature but would never mention it & you just got used to his ways & accepted him for it.

This is all very bordering on Nietzschean social construct stuff to me.

I dont undertand it and would be embarressed to ask any of my friends. I am better off as I am accepting people as they are.

You have stereotypes and people do act up to them or conform to them. In lots of situations people take their cues on behavior from around them and thats not restricted to homosexuals. Teachers behave like teachers, and hairdressers like hairdressers, and its a job. Homosexuals wont have those cues around them so no small wonder that some get confused on how to behave. The rest of us do -so why should they behave differently.

What I see from my son and his contemporaries is that they have no problem accepting that one or two of them are gay. Whereas when I grew up you wouldnt have had that. I imagine lots of homosexuals emigrated - certainly those I was aware of or knew in college did.

I come from a small town and there were local unmarried guys living at home working in the family business or farms or whatever who still live there living very sad lonely lives. So modern life is better.

mudokon

CDfm wrote: »

This is all very bordering on Nietzschean social construct stuff to me.

I dont undertand it and would be embarressed to ask any of my friends. I am better off as I am accepting people as they are.

I don't know much about social construct but if you are suggesting that I am embarrassed by it then you would be wrong.

I never made it clear what irked me about the "straight acting" guy but he used to make outlandish statements along the lines of he was better at his job due to his sexual orientation or that homosexuals were somehow free of all the ills that affect the rest of society (crime etc)

CDfm wrote: »

You have stereotypes and people do act up to them or conform to them. In lots of situations people take their cues on behavior from around them and thats not restricted to homosexuals. Teachers behave like teachers, and hairdressers like hairdressers, and its a job. Homosexuals wont have those cues around them so no small wonder that some get confused on how to behave. The rest of us do -so why should they behave differently.

While this is true it is also compartmentalised, A teacher will act as a teacher for the period that they are at work but they won't act like that all the time. Obviously there will be some over lapping in behaviours between scenarios (work & social) but they are not purely defined by one or the other.

As for homosexuals getting confused about how to act like all other cases regardless of sexuality it is about acting accordingly in relation to the social situation. I would expect the same level of professionalism from a heterosexual or a homosexual in whatever capacity they are employed if I am involved in business dealings with them.

I do take the point that there will be limited scenarios for homosexuals to see examples of how to behave especially in the formative years of homosexuality. I suppose this depends on the age when they first become attracted to members of the same sex & how well they cope with it internally.

CDfm wrote: »

What I see from my son and his contemporaries is that they have no problem accepting that one or two of them are gay. Whereas when I grew up you wouldnt have had that. I imagine lots of homosexuals emigrated - certainly those I was aware of or knew in college did.

I come from a small town and there were local unmarried guys living at home working in the family business or farms or whatever who still live there living very sad lonely lives. So modern life is better.

I agree that modern life is better as people are freer to live a lifestyle that would have been frowned upon in the past. Hopefully we will get to the stage where homosexual partnerships are given the same rights as heterosexual partnerships in civil matters.

A little tangent of this is that I dont really agree with gay pride celebrations as such. For me pride is something you should take in something you have acheived not something that you were never in control of. I see sexuality as a small part of who a person is, not a defining characteristic.

I'm not saying they should be ashamed either but does it really need to be shouted from the rooftops? I know there are other benefits to these celebrations such as the profile it brings in terms of getting equal status in civil matters due to the numbers that turn out to these events.

Gers_punto

my best mate recently told us all he was gay....

Big woop he is still the same guy that we all learned to trust ,have the craic etc, etc.

he has prob been gay his whole life it dosent mean now that he has told us he is going to turn into a different guy. We accapted him without knowing that he is gay,now we know it dosent change things. If anything it has made the banter between our group of friends even better eg. when we great each other its usually with a playful insult like "how ya ya big tool"

now it goes " well john ya big gay" and he replys " how ya, ya big straight bast**rd"..:D:D

CDfm

I wouldn't worry about the nervous humour part. Groups have dynamics and now you know if you see him with a guy no questions need be asked.

When i was in college there was a guy at the edge of our group who was very camp (and as it turned out gay) and unsure of his sexuality and we used to call him the bi-virgin.

Being gay was not how he ended up friends but because he was helpful to an unmarried mother we were friendly who he shared classes with. Thats what defined him.