Seven-year old announces he's gay

Show Time

When i was seven the only thing on my mind was did the Action Man jet pack really work. It did not and my older brother kicked the sh1t out of me for breaking his toy.

Sindri

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

He's only 7, he has no idea if he is gay or not and he has no idea what sex actually is.

The mother is a ****ing idiot.

I don't think that's true.


Until Freud children were believed to be asexual, but they are not. Far from it. Children have sexual impulses just like everyone else. It changes during adolescence yes, due to hormones and brain development and becomes more intense. But children do have sexual impulses and do think about sex.

I find it hard to believe people think that they do not. They must be extremely misinformed.

PrincessLola

Children do have sexual feeings, they usually just lack the language to understand them and express them. If this kid knows what being gay means then I'd believe him for now (sexuality is fluid afterall).

Also I remember from being in primary school ten years ago that children were very homophobic, does anyone know if kids are still homophobic or if it has changed?

Seachmall

PrincessLola wrote: »

(sexuality is fluid afterall).

Are you suggesting people can transition between being gay and straight?

Liam Byrne

PrincessLola wrote: »

(sexuality is fluid afterall)

Since when ?

PrincessLola

Seachmall wrote: »

Are you suggesting people can transition between being gay and straight?

Not all people can. But many (mainly women) are sexually fluid. Look up the 'Kinsey Scale', theres a spectrum.

Seachmall

PrincessLola wrote: »

Not all people can. But many (mainly women) are sexually fluid. Look up the 'Kinsey Scale', theres a spectrum.

The Kinsey Scale is a static scale of measurement, not a theory on sexuality (or it's "fluidity").

It doesn't suggest you can seamlessly move between the points.

UglyBolloxFace

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Your daughter's a lesbian. And good on her:)

I don't think she is. She definitely has a leaning towards boys, Olly Moors, One direction, she told me someone the other day was cute (can't remember who but they were male). She never says the same thing about females now. But it wouldn't have surprised me either way if she was or she wasn't and for the first 5/6 years of her life we pretty almost expected it due to various things she said.

Edit: Bressie, that's who it was!

seamus

phasers wrote: »

Do seven year olds actually notice other boys and girls in that way?

Yep.
I don't remember being 7, but there's plenty of documentary evidence of me being besotted with girls in my class at 6/7/8/9 years of age. I think I fairly consistently had a crush on at least one girl most of the way through primary school. I didn't understand it of course.

Ask any teacher of young kids (even at 4), and they'll tell you that you'll often see blatant crushes going on between some of the kids. The kids don't understand it, it's just primal stirrings driving them to "like" other kids.

I would have big concern about a child declaring that they're gay. Not because of the gay thing, but because they don't know what it means. Imagine a 7 year old boy declaring that "I want to have sex with women"

There's the additional "stigma" issue. A child who declares in front of his friends that he's gay at 7 years of age is going to have a very rough time for the next ten years - especially if it turns out he's not gay.

Born to Die

I was 12 before I realised I could get pleasure from my genitalia.

No Glee in my day.

CrazyRabbit

My only problem with all this is the parents publicising it. There's no need and no benefit to the child. It can only cause problems for him.

As for the boy identifying himself as gay...well, maybe he is and maybe he isn't. At 7, is it really such a big deal anyway? It's not like he's out dating, or involved in anything sexual. For now, it's just a word and a feeling that he is more comfortable feeling 'attracted' to males. As he gets older, his sexual identity will develop naturally and he may find that he is gay, straight, bisexual, transgender or something else.

Remember, you don't suddenly become 'gay' or become 'straight' once you reach a certain age. It's something that develops over time. So perhaps at his stage of development, he finds boys 'handsome' instead of finding girls being 'pretty'. Perhaps this will change...or not.

Right now, I'd be more comfortable saying the boy is gay-curious or gay-leaning rather than 100% outright gay. It's too early for his sexuality to be fully developed.

Stiffler2

Seachmall wrote: »

1. Kid watches Glee.
2. Kid mimics popular Glee character.

It's what kids do.

I watched James Bond as a kid and despite what I told my parents I am not, nor was I ever, a fucking spy.

I blame the parents for this "fault"

PrincessLola

Seachmall wrote: »

The Kinsey Scale is a static scale of measurement, not a theory on sexuality (or it's "fluidity").

It doesn't suggest you can seamlessly move between the points.

So people are always attracted to what they are attracted to and they NEVER change?

I'm not saying 'omg you can catch teh ghey!' I'm just saying sometimes at different life stages and hormonal fluctuations some women change preferences.

Seachmall

PrincessLola wrote: »

So people are always attracted to what they are attracted to and they NEVER change?

I'm not saying anything.

I'm questioning the accuracy of the following.

sometimes at different life stages and hormonal fluctuations some women change preferences.

Liam Byrne

PrincessLola wrote: »

Seachmall wrote: »

The Kinsey Scale is a static scale of measurement, not a theory on sexuality (or it's "fluidity").

It doesn't suggest you can seamlessly move between the points.

So people are always attracted to what they are attracted to and they NEVER change?

I'm not saying 'omg you can catch teh ghey!' I'm just saying sometimes at different life stages and hormonal fluctuations some women change preferences.

Surely they change preferences in terms of the type of guy (or girl) that they want, rather than actually changing their overall preference ?

Jesus Wept

The best thing they can do is save the memory so that in years to come if he turns out to be hetro, they can regale any future girlfriends of the story.

johnr1

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Surely they change preferences in terms of the type of guy (or girl) that they want, rather than actually changing their overall preference ?

I don't claim to more than a slight knowledge of this subject Liam, but you need to study this a bit more if you really don't believe that sexuality of SOME people fluctuates a bit before it settles down, or that some people supress their true sexuality till well advanced in life, only to suddenly have an awakening in middle age.

Btw the Kinsey report (largely discredited now) suggests among things, that all sexuality is on a sliding scale with some people on the extremities - the people who were totally sure of their sexuality throughout their lives with no doubts, and some people in the middle, - true bisexuals, with all other mixes scattered along it. That bit of the report makes sense to me from having conversations with people, and from reading peoples experiences.
Example: for years, I couldn't understand why a straight identifying man would ever have a sexual experience with another man, (clearly some do) but it makes sense if he is not on the extreme hetro end of the scale as I am. Same goes for women if not moreso, as I believe a larger proportion of straight identifying women report some same sex leanings

From Wikipedia :
The Kinsey scale, also called the Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale,[1] attempts to describe a person's sexual history or episodes of his or her sexual activity at a given time. It uses a scale from 0, meaning exclusively heterosexual, to 6, meaning exclusively homosexual. In both the Male and Female volumes of the Kinsey Reports, an additional grade, listed as "X", was used for asexuality.[2][3] It was first published in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) by Alfred Kinsey, Wardell Pomeroy and others, and was also prominent in the complementary work Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). Numbers between 1 and 5 indicate bisexuality.[1]

benway

Personally, I'm pretty sure that I knew I very much liked girls well before puberty, certainly when I wasn't much older than 7.

Just wondering if there's a danger it might go a bit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtrbFYyHNTg

later12

I don't think it's any harm at all to allow a kid believe he might be gay. What's the worst that could happen? That he might have to get used to the idea of being straight when he reaches his teens? So what, the gays are doing that all the time.

The important thing is that the parents do not try to influence their son's behaviour or identity beyond what is reasonable, and that they politely ignore his claim on homosexuality for the moment, just as they would ignore his professions of love for his female classmates.

Liam Byrne

johnr1 wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Surely they change preferences in terms of the type of guy (or girl) that they want, rather than actually changing their overall preference ?

I don't claim to more than a slight knowledge of this subject Liam, but you need to study this a bit more if you really don't believe that sexuality of SOME people fluctuates a bit before it settles down, or that some people supress their true sexuality till well advanced in life, only to suddenly have an awakening in middle age.

Suppressing what you are and then later stopping suppressing it is not the same as changing it.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

later12 wrote: »

I don't think it's any harm at all to allow a kid believe he might be gay. What's the worst that could happen? That he might have to get used to the idea of being straight when he reaches his teens? So what, the gays are doing that all the time.

The important thing is that the parents do not try to influence their son's behaviour or identity beyond what is reasonable, and that they politely ignore his claim on homosexuality for the moment, just as they would ignore his professions of love for his female classmates.

Aren't you the guy who tried to convince me that there is no such thing as choice and that it's all pre-determined by environment...?!

johnr1

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Suppressing what you are and then later stopping suppressing it is not the same as changing it.

Yes Liam, you're right there.

I'll take it from your pedantic response that you agree with the general point I'm making though.

.

Liam Byrne

johnr1 wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Suppressing what you are and then later stopping suppressing it is not the same as changing it.

Yes Liam, you're right there.

I'll take it from your pedantic response that you agree with the general point I'm making though.

.

What's pedantic about it? I'm simply stating the facts, and people twisting them by being "non-pedantic" is something that gets on my nerves.

I really hate the way people try to dismiss valid facts and subtleties as "pedantic" or "populist" or whatever; the facts are the facts, and basing an argument on a blurred or mis-stated version of them is misleading.

later12

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Aren't you the guy who tried to convince me that there is no such thing as choice and that it's all pre-determined by environment...?!

Certainly not. I described my belief in the validity of determinism... I am not interested in convincing others of anything. Anyway, what is your point?

johnr1

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What's pedantic about it? I'm simply stating the facts, and people twisting them by being "non-pedantic" is something that gets on my nerves.

I really hate the way people try to dismiss valid facts and subtleties as "pedantic" or "populist" or whatever; the facts are the facts, and basing an argument on a blurred or mis-stated version of them is misleading.

Where am I twisting facts?

Do you actually contend that SOME people's sexuality is not fluid or subject to any change at any stage of their lives ?

Educate yourself.

Liam Byrne

johnr1 wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What's pedantic about it? I'm simply stating the facts, and people twisting them by being "non-pedantic" is something that gets on my nerves.

I really hate the way people try to dismiss valid facts and subtleties as "pedantic" or "populist" or whatever; the facts are the facts, and basing an argument on a blurred or mis-stated version of them is misleading.

Where am I twisting facts?

Do you actually contend that SOME people's sexuality is not fluid or subject to any change at any stage of their lives ?

Educate yourself.

You dismissed my stating of facts as "pedantic".

I don't understand or claim to understand any person's sexuality other than my own, and I have no urge to educate myself in relation to something that will have absolutely no bearing on my life......people's sexuality is their own business....if they want to consider it fluid and can meet someone who accepts that point of view, then good on them.

All I said was that the people who suppress and later embrace it can't be included in statistics relating to "change".

johnr1

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You dismissed my stating of facts as "pedantic".

I don't understand or claim to understand any person's sexuality other than my own, and I have no urge to educate myself in relation to something that will have absolutely no bearing on my life......people's sexuality is their own business....if they want to consider it fluid and can meet someone who accepts that point of view, then good on them.

All I said was that the people who suppress and later embrace it can't be included in statistics relating to "change".

No, what you said in response to Princess Lolas correct statement that sexuality can be fluid was : "since when?".

Then you said : "Surely they change preferences in terms of the type of guy (or girl) that they want, rather than actually changing their overall preference ?"

A question mark at the end of a sentence afaik denotes a question that the person wants answered unless it's rhetorical.

I answered both your questions, only for you to nitpick at the definition of changing, in which you were correct but still being pedantic.

The general point is that Yes, SOME people's 'general preferences' to use your own loaded term, DO change.

I've bolded some of your last post, to which I can only respond: If you have no wish to educate yourself beyond your own experience, don't be surprised when people don't put too much weight on your opinion.

Now if you insist on being argumentative, go argue with someone else.

Frankly you're boring me.

.

JJayoo

"Gay. I'm gay."

My world paused for a moment, and I saw the "geez, Mom, didn't you know that already?" look on my son's face.

I got off the phone and leaned down to eye level with him and rubbed my nose against his. "I love you so much."

When the kid says he's gay he gets positive reinforcement.

Liam Byrne

johnr1 wrote: »

No, what you said in response to Princess Lolas correct statement that sexuality can be fluid was : "since when?".

That would have been the post that implied that fluidity was the norm, particularly among women ?

Because she didn't say that it "can be" fluid - she said :

sexuality is fluid, after all

The "since when" is perfectly valid in that context, but you read what you wanted rather than what she wrote.

Can I ask why you chose to completely change what she wrote in order to negate my point ?

If she had said "can be", then I wouldn't have asked "since when?"

Then you said : "Surely they change preferences in terms of the type of guy (or girl) that they want, rather than actually changing their overall preference ?"

Again, in context.

I answered both your questions, only for you to nitpick at the definition of changing, in which you were correct but still being pedantic.

Clarification and nitpicking are two separate things.

The general point is that Yes, SOME people's 'general preferences' to use your own loaded term, DO change.

"loaded" term ?

Now if you insist on being argumentative, go argue with someone else.

Frankly you're boring me.

.

Given your use of "pedantic", "nitpicking" and "loaded", combined with your explicit removal of the original sweeping generalisation that I queried, it's clear that I'm not the one being argumentative; as I said - and as you even admitted - I'm just clarifying the facts.

wonderfulname

penelopeanne wrote: »

Kids as young as seven should be protected from tv programmes with ANY sexual content. It is just too young. That is what having parents is for. Up to the age of 18 our parents are supposed to protect us from anything that might hurt us. I see a child of seven as far too young to know what sex is all about. I'm straight, I'm gay... at SEVEN. God Knows, we're children for a short enough time. I had no idea of sexual preference or anything like that until I was at least 13 and then fancied the latest popstar, who happened to be male, and then my hormones took over, and I knew I fancied boys. I'm sure if I announced to my mother when I was 7, Mum I'm straight, she would have given me a clout. You just don't announce these things. That child sounds like a right little ****e, spoiled brat, who is sooo precocious. These yanky kids drive me madddd..

Good for you, that's your experience. Here's mine; at 7 I was of the impression boys and girls went together and that was it, yet I still had little crushes on girls, but I didn't understand them and brushed them aside, I didn't say I was gay until I was 12/13, only because I didn't know it existed. The only lesbian I'd ever seen when I was young was yer one on emmerdale, and I just didn't get it, at all, just some crazy lady and her friend to me, just like any two unrelated unmarried people.

Which is why I don't see the point in stopping kids watching glee, my little cousin watches it because he loves musical theatre (I think my family may be a strong case for the genetics argument) but he is completely oblivious to any of the more grown up aspects of the show, he likes Blaine because Blaine acts cool, he doesn't understand the implications of him being 'gay', he's drawn his own lines but they're nonsensical and innocent. Stop looking at things through your own, more experienced eyes, and consider what a child might be making of them.

Sindri

Right, 9 pages into this thread, who the fuck is Blaine*?



*Or maybe more importantly who the fuck did he fuck?

wonderfulname

Glee character, kind of obvious from the context, me thinks you're just trying to hide the fact you keep posters of him on your bedroom wall

Sindri

wonderfulname wrote: »

Glee character, kind of obvious from the context, me thinks you're just trying to hide the fact you keep posters of him on your bedroom wall

Posters?:eek:

Pffttt, I have a tattoo of him on my left testiclé.:)

Seachmall

johnr1 wrote: »

No, what you said in response to Princess Lolas correct statement that sexuality can be fluid was : "since when?".

Then you said : "Surely they change preferences in terms of the type of guy (or girl) that they want, rather than actually changing their overall preference ?"

A question mark at the end of a sentence afaik denotes a question that the person wants answered unless it's rhetorical.

I answered both your questions, only for you to nitpick at the definition of changing, in which you were correct but still being pedantic.

The general point is that Yes, SOME people's 'general preferences' to use your own loaded term, DO change.

I've bolded some of your last post, to which I can only respond: If you have no wish to educate yourself beyond your own experience, don't be surprised when people don't put too much weight on your opinion.

Now if you insist on being argumentative, go argue with someone else.

Frankly you're boring me.

.

His point was not pedantic. And dismissing it as so is a nonsensical way of dismissing it.

The claim was that people's sexuality can be fluid. Using the Kinsey scale that means it can move from 2 to 3 down to 2 up to 4 etc. over the course of a lifetime.

Now you're suggesting that people can be fixed on a 2 but might suppress it to appear as a 1 and later in life begin opening up and acting as a 2.

That's not the same as what was originally claimed and Liam pointing that out was absolutely correct as opposed to letting the claim go unchallenged because you changed the interpretation of it.

Not only does the Kinsey scale not suggest that but so far no evidence has been presented to suggest that's true. You telling him to educate himself on the matter is also bogus, if you're claiming it you back it up. Otherwise don't expect us to take your word for it.

sunflower27

What does 'at seven, our son is identifying as gay' mean?

Just that he said 'I am gay'?

Liam Byrne

Seachmall wrote: »

The claim was that people's sexuality can be fluid.

Worse - the claim was that it is fluid; there was absolutely no allowance for it not to be.

I correctly refuted that false and over-generalised claim.

But yes - the other point applies too; releasing / indulging a previously suppressed urge does not support the above claim that sexuality is fluid, although to be fair to johnr they did begrudgingly acknowledge that I was correct.

I guess it takes a clear and unbiased head to acknowledge the facts without muddying the waters with inappropriate phrasing and generalisations.

The King of Moo

sunflower27 wrote: »

What does 'at seven, our son is identifying as gay' mean?

Just that he said 'I am gay'?

That seems to be the case here. Apart from the kid saying he's gay and wants to be Blaine's boyfriend, there's no indication of whether he genuinely feels that he's gay, or whether he's just imitating Blaine.

We're only getting the mother's perspective, so it's hard to know what's going on in the kid's head.

xsiborg

this kid is trolling his parents for attention, and his parents (his mother in particular) obviously has a "loony liberal" agenda that she's pushing, in order for others to see how "liberal" she is and give her a pat on the back and say "isn't she great". in my opinion, the mother's mindset comes across as even more childish than the seven year old child, as it is her that perpetuates a story and pimps out her sons personal life just to get attention for herself!

it reminds me of the way that my own seven year old son here (well, not here right now, as he's in school), but he used sometimes act out in an uber-effeminate way because he knews it got him attention. he used see my facepalm reaction, but after a while i just became indifferent. now when he does a hips out to the sides walk towards me with the big "problem?" grin on his face, i just say "yeah, whatever!".

we have become a society where we are far too quick nowadays to put labels on everything, not just a person's sexuality, but also their mental state or their thought processes, or even how after one single opinion, we quickly label them as a bible-bashing conservative. only last week i learned the "difference" between left and right-wing views, simply because they are labels that are bandied around a lot nowadays, particularly on this site.

i was one told by an amateur pop-psychologist that i "identified myself as cisexual", "as WHAT now?", i thought to myself. quick google later and it just means im straight, nothing i didnt know already, but that person got to use a big word that day in an efort to make themselves sound like an intellectual. (freuds theories by the way, for me for me at least, hold no water, but thats a debate for another day).

and on a completely not unrelated note, i was at a relative of my wife's birthday party one day, it was her child's birthday, i was having a great day, few whiskey's down, next thing i heard a voice behind me say "get out of my way, gay-boy!", i turned around and had to look down and there was a little six/seven year old girl with an unpleasantly scowly face on her. instinctively i suppose, i just came out with "go fúck yourself!". she ran off crying to her mother, almost as if she'd transformed from acting like a little teenage tramp with a filthy mouth, into a sweet, innocent little child again.

later that day of course it didnt help matters that i tried the chocolate birthday cake, and it was as DRY! so dry in fact that when mixed with the whiskey from earlier on, it formed a sticky ball like a clot in my throat and i almost choked before i managed to bring it up, along with everything else i'd eaten for soakage that day. my wife's relatives were so quick to take my wife to one side and have a "quiet word" with her (that somehow they felt the need to tell everyone else they took her aside, attention seeking for themselves- "aren't i great!"), but the lowdown of it was that they had quickly labelled me an alcoholic, even though they'd only just met me that day!

tl;dr?

it's in our nature to try and label and compartmentalise everything and try and reason and explain it to ourselves, because it makes us as human beings feel better about knowing ourselves and take comfort in our ability to box and label everything neatly and say it is "just so". but every day i come across people who ascribe to be liberal in their thinking, yet have no understanding nor comprehension of diversity or the idea that something can exist outside their own little bubble universe because the unknown that they cannot explain, label, and compartmentalise, quite frankly scares the shít out of them!

johnr1

xsiborg wrote: »

this kid is trolling his parents for attention, and his parents (his mother in particular) obviously has a "loony liberal" agenda that she's pushing, in order for others to see how "liberal" she is and give her a pat on the back and say "isn't she great". in my opinion, the mother's mindset comes across as even more childish than the seven year old child, as it is her that perpetuates a story and pimps out her sons personal life just to get attention for herself!

it reminds me of the way that my own seven year old son here (well, not here right now, as he's in school), but he used sometimes act out in an uber-effeminate way because he knews it got him attention. he used see my facepalm reaction, but after a while i just became indifferent. now when he does a hips out to the sides walk towards me with the big "problem?" grin on his face, i just say "yeah, whatever!".

we have become a society where we are far too quick nowadays to put labels on everything, not just a person's sexuality, but also their mental state or their thought processes, or even how after one single opinion, we quickly label them as a bible-bashing conservative. only last week i learned the "difference" between left and right-wing views, simply because they are labels that are bandied around a lot nowadays, particularly on this site.

i was one told by an amateur pop-psychologist that i "identified myself as cisexual", "as WHAT now?", i thought to myself. quick google later and it just means im straight, nothing i didnt know already, but that person got to use a big word that day in an efort to make themselves sound like an intellectual. (freuds theories by the way, for me for me at least, hold no water, but thats a debate for another day).

and on a completely not unrelated note, i was at a relative of my wife's birthday party one day, it was her child's birthday, i was having a great day, few whiskey's down, next thing i heard a voice behind me say "get out of my way, gay-boy!", i turned around and had to look down and there was a little six/seven year old girl with an unpleasantly scowly face on her. instinctively i suppose, i just came out with "go fúck yourself!". she ran off crying to her mother, almost as if she'd transformed from acting like a little teenage tramp with a filthy mouth, into a sweet, innocent little child again.

later that day of course it didnt help matters that i tried the chocolate birthday cake, and it was as DRY! so dry in fact that when mixed with the whiskey from earlier on, it formed a sticky ball like a clot in my throat and i almost choked before i managed to bring it up, along with everything else i'd eaten for soakage that day. my wife's relatives were so quick to take my wife to one side and have a "quiet word" with her (that somehow they felt the need to tell everyone else they took her aside, attention seeking for themselves- "aren't i great!"), but the lowdown of it was that they had quickly labelled me an alcoholic, even though they'd only just met me that day!

tl;dr?

it's in our nature to try and label and compartmentalise everything and try and reason and explain it to ourselves, because it makes us as human beings feel better about knowing ourselves and take comfort in our ability to box and label everything neatly and say it is "just so". but every day i come across people who ascribe to be liberal in their thinking, yet have no understanding nor comprehension of diversity or the idea that something can exist outside their own little bubble universe because the unknown that they cannot explain, label, and compartmentalise, quite frankly scares the shít out of them!

I should be kicked for reposting this essay of a post, but I felt it was highly relevant, on a par almost with the fact that I had a sandwich just there for lunch.

The King of Moo

xsiborg wrote: »

this kid is trolling his parents for attention, and his parents (his mother in particular) obviously has a "loony liberal" agenda that she's pushing, in order for others to see how "liberal" she is and give her a pat on the back and say "isn't she great". in my opinion, the mother's mindset comes across as even more childish than the seven year old child, as it is her that perpetuates a story and pimps out her sons personal life just to get attention for herself!

it reminds me of the way that my own seven year old son here (well, not here right now, as he's in school), but he used sometimes act out in an uber-effeminate way because he knews it got him attention. he used see my facepalm reaction, but after a while i just became indifferent. now when he does a hips out to the sides walk towards me with the big "problem?" grin on his face, i just say "yeah, whatever!".

we have become a society where we are far too quick nowadays to put labels on everything, not just a person's sexuality, but also their mental state or their thought processes, or even how after one single opinion, we quickly label them as a bible-bashing conservative. only last week i learned the "difference" between left and right-wing views, simply because they are labels that are bandied around a lot nowadays, particularly on this site.

i was one told by an amateur pop-psychologist that i "identified myself as cisexual", "as WHAT now?", i thought to myself. quick google later and it just means im straight, nothing i didnt know already, but that person got to use a big word that day in an efort to make themselves sound like an intellectual. (freuds theories by the way, for me for me at least, hold no water, but thats a debate for another day).

and on a completely not unrelated note, i was at a relative of my wife's birthday party one day, it was her child's birthday, i was having a great day, few whiskey's down, next thing i heard a voice behind me say "get out of my way, gay-boy!", i turned around and had to look down and there was a little six/seven year old girl with an unpleasantly scowly face on her. instinctively i suppose, i just came out with "go fúck yourself!". she ran off crying to her mother, almost as if she'd transformed from acting like a little teenage tramp with a filthy mouth, into a sweet, innocent little child again.

later that day of course it didnt help matters that i tried the chocolate birthday cake, and it was as DRY! so dry in fact that when mixed with the whiskey from earlier on, it formed a sticky ball like a clot in my throat and i almost choked before i managed to bring it up, along with everything else i'd eaten for soakage that day. my wife's relatives were so quick to take my wife to one side and have a "quiet word" with her (that somehow they felt the need to tell everyone else they took her aside, attention seeking for themselves- "aren't i great!"), but the lowdown of it was that they had quickly labelled me an alcoholic, even though they'd only just met me that day!

tl;dr?

it's in our nature to try and label and compartmentalise everything and try and reason and explain it to ourselves, because it makes us as human beings feel better about knowing ourselves and take comfort in our ability to box and label everything neatly and say it is "just so". but every day i come across people who ascribe to be liberal in their thinking, yet have no understanding nor comprehension of diversity or the idea that something can exist outside their own little bubble universe because the unknown that they cannot explain, label, and compartmentalise, quite frankly scares the shít out of them!

Are you sure he's definitely trolling you? He must've acted that way at least one before you facepalmed. It doesn't mean that he's gay, just that he might actually enjoy acting that way, rather than doing it to annoy you.
Nowadays it's more normal for young boys to see modes of behaviour traditionally considered non-masculine, but now not so frowned upon. He might see characters like the two gay characters in Glee who behave in a stereotypically gay effeminate manner, and imitate them.
I'm not saying you're wrong, it just might be good to look at why he's doing it, and if he's enjoying it, maybe not discourage him.

As for "cissexual," I'm pretty sure that means you identify with your particular sexual persuasion, and don't have any elements of your identity that clash with it, from your perspective. So a straight cismale would be straight and consider themselves to be masculine in a traditional sense, or at least not having any gay or effeminate characteristics.

As for the party incident: people might have been quick to judge you, but if you look at it from their perspective, you can see how it looked bad! Especially if they also saw you cursing at the little girl, which was quite over the top.

sunflower27

The King of Moo wrote: »

As for the party incident: people might have been quick to judge you, but if you look at it from their perspective, you can see how it looked bad! Especially if they also saw you cursing at the little girl, which was quite over the top.

Well, she called him gay-boy. If she can't take the heat.... just saying

xsiborg

The King of Moo wrote: »

Are you sure he's definitely trolling you? He must've acted that way at least one before you facepalmed. It doesn't mean that he's gay, just that he might actually enjoy acting that way, rather than doing it to annoy you.
Nowadays it's more normal for young boys to see modes of behaviour traditionally considered non-masculine, but now not so frowned upon. He might see characters like the two gay characters in Glee who behave in a stereotypically gay effeminate manner, and imitate them.
I'm not saying you're wrong, it just might be good to look at why he's doing it, and if he's enjoying it, maybe not discourage him.

oh trust me, after raising him for seven years so far, i know him well enough to know when he's trolling. this is just one, one, in many many behaviours that he knows gets on my tits.

to give you another example- i had a €250 worth of a universal remote control (a harmony 1000). my son was about four at the time, he called me to look at something, but i was busy on the phone. i finished on the phone five minutes later and went in to see what he wanted. he was standing beside the aquarium with a solid poker face on him. i went to reach foe the remote to turn down the tv.

then i saw my son still standing beside the aquarium, i thought to myself "oh no you didnt!", oh yes he fúcking did! there was the remote settling on the bottom of a 120 litre aquarium like a fancy ornament!

many many more examples, but too many to go into here. i simply dont read into and analyse his behaviour too much, he's a child! they do shít!

The King of Moo wrote: »

As for "cissexual," I'm pretty sure that means you identify with your particular sexual persuasion, and don't have any elements of your identity that clash with it, from your perspective. So a straight cismale would be straight and consider themselves to be masculine in a traditional sense, or at least not having any gay or effeminate characteristics.

this sounds like a long winded way of saying im straight, but thank you for the affirmation of what i knew already, just in a less long winded way.

The King of Moo wrote: »

As for the party incident: people might have been quick to judge you, but if you look at it from their perspective, you can see how it looked bad! Especially if they also saw you cursing at the little girl, which was quite over the top.

i couldn't care less how a complete pack of strangers to me, judged me, or thought otherwise of me. i could display the same judgemental attitude of her parents that would allow their daughter to use such coarse language and show such disrespect to a complete stranger.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

xsiborg wrote: »

this kid is trolling his parents for attention, and his parents (his mother in particular) obviously has a "loony liberal" agenda that she's pushing, in order for others to see how "liberal" she is and give her a pat on the back and say "isn't she great". in my opinion, the mother's mindset comes across as even more childish than the seven year old child, as it is her that perpetuates a story and pimps out her sons personal life just to get attention for herself!

Writing an article for a blog is now "loony liberal"...??

it reminds me of the way that my own seven year old son here (well, not here right now, as he's in school), but he used sometimes act out in an uber-effeminate way because he knews it got him attention. he used see my facepalm reaction, but after a while i just became indifferent. now when he does a hips out to the sides walk towards me with the big "problem?" grin on his face, i just say "yeah, whatever!".

we have become a society where we are far too quick nowadays to put labels on everything, not just a person's sexuality, but also their mental state or their thought processes, or even how after one single opinion, we quickly label them as a bible-bashing conservative. only last week i learned the "difference" between left and right-wing views, simply because they are labels that are bandied around a lot nowadays, particularly on this site.

i was one told by an amateur pop-psychologist that i "identified myself as cisexual", "as WHAT now?", i thought to myself. quick google later and it just means im straight, nothing i didnt know already, but that person got to use a big word that day in an efort to make themselves sound like an intellectual. (freuds theories by the way, for me for me at least, hold no water, but thats a debate for another day).

and on a completely not unrelated note, i was at a relative of my wife's birthday party one day, it was her child's birthday, i was having a great day, few whiskey's down, next thing i heard a voice behind me say "get out of my way, gay-boy!", i turned around and had to look down and there was a little six/seven year old girl with an unpleasantly scowly face on her. instinctively i suppose, i just came out with "go fúck yourself!". she ran off crying to her mother, almost as if she'd transformed from acting like a little teenage tramp with a filthy mouth, into a sweet, innocent little child again.

later that day of course it didnt help matters that i tried the chocolate birthday cake, and it was as DRY! so dry in fact that when mixed with the whiskey from earlier on, it formed a sticky ball like a clot in my throat and i almost choked before i managed to bring it up, along with everything else i'd eaten for soakage that day. my wife's relatives were so quick to take my wife to one side and have a "quiet word" with her (that somehow they felt the need to tell everyone else they took her aside, attention seeking for themselves- "aren't i great!"), but the lowdown of it was that they had quickly labelled me an alcoholic, even though they'd only just met me that day!

tl;dr?

it's in our nature to try and label and compartmentalise everything and try and reason and explain it to ourselves, because it makes us as human beings feel better about knowing ourselves and take comfort in our ability to box and label everything neatly and say it is "just so". but every day i come across people who ascribe to be liberal in their thinking, yet have no understanding nor comprehension of diversity or the idea that something can exist outside their own little bubble universe because the unknown that they cannot explain, label, and compartmentalise, quite frankly scares the shít out of them!

Sounds a bit like you pretty much reacted the ame was as the mother in the opening post. Feck it, don't draw attention to it in the child's eye (he probably isn't even aware of the article). The liberal bug must be catching...!

Agree with you on the bit abotu lables.

xsiborg wrote: »

i couldn't care less how a complete pack of strangers to me, judged me, or thought otherwise of me. i could display the same judgemental attitude of her parents that would allow their daughter to use such coarse language and show such disrespect to a complete stranger.

This, I would agree with, too.

****, don't tell me I'm turning in a ****ing conservative....!

xsiborg

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Writing an article for a blog is now "loony liberal"...??

nope, thinking you're the only liberal in the village IS loony liberal though! she may not have got the memo that said there was no need to make a point of stating in the article that she had many gay friends, it's like someone using the old "im not racist, but..." line, before they go on to make some point like the intended reader would never have heard of homosexuality before reading her article. the reader is now officially enlightened- giant rainbow colored enamel badge is in the post, wear it and display it with pride, shove it in people's faces to watch them squirm uncomfortably because straight people are totes afraid they'll catch the ghey, and secretly they're all gay anyway, they just wont admit it because they're all intolerant bigots, whereas we're (she subscribes to the gay "community" idea obviously, whereas i myself subscribe to the "all people are individuals" that i came up with all by myself and i'll assume you'd never heard of til you read it here! (badge is in the post!)) all enlightened, and stuff.

what the author fails to realise is that most people don't care for her support, much less need it, as she displays a severe lack of any form of intelligence with her only thing she feels is worthy to broadcast to the world about herself, is not actually about herself, she just outed her own son to the world in what i consider to be the cruellest fashion possible, purely to feed her own ego!

after such a display of arrogance, she should probably start now to prepare him for the world of hurt and misunderstanding she has just inflicted on her son, just to make herself appear like the "cool liberal mommy".

silly cow should never have been given a medium to air her nonsense, nor the fact that she places a greater emphasis on her appearance to her friends than she does about the welfare and well being of her son.

next week we'll see another mother who declares to the internet that her one year old told her with his first words that he was gay, and the world's media will have forgotten about that seven year old, but his classmates won't, and because we don't live in an ideal world, they will, with great enthusiasm and delight, proceed to rip the living píss out of that unfortunate little seven year old boy, but that's ok, because his cool mommy loves him, and just to keep her happy, the father says the little boy is "awesome", through clenched teeth.

the father at least is somewhat aware that the worlds media are watching and ripping the unholy píss out of the wagon cool mommy.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Sounds a bit like you pretty much reacted the ame was as the mother in the opening post. Feck it, don't draw attention to it in the child's eye (he probably isn't even aware of the article). The liberal bug must be catching...!

i in no way reacted the same way as the mother! the first time he did the hip walk, i looked at him as he approached me and the exact words out of my mouth were "the fúck???".

same way i reacted when he walked out dressed in his mothers dress with her boots on and a full face of what has to be said was quite skillfully applied make-up for a three year old!

and so on, and so on and so on, many other examples unrelated to the topic at hand. keep in mind too that i never once questioned or suggested that my son may or may not be gay/straight, hell even quiltbag, because personally speaking, i couldn't care less about his sexuality, that's his own business.

all that concerns me is that at seven years of age he knows his 12 times tables, can tell me where kilkenny or khartoum is by not referring to google maps, but to an actual atlas (remember those?), that he can read books, encyclopediae, the classics of literature, inform himself and become learned enough to make decisions for himself and be able to realise that all he see's on tv, it's not real!

of couse as my son is only seven, he watches tom and jerry on the bomerang channel, where they try and bump each other off with all manner of acme tools. he doesnt watch shítty, juvenile, unrealistic american drivel that to me seems to be a catch-all platform for all minorities, and that singing is a cure-all for everything.

tl;dr? this kids mother should be told to grow the fúck up and stop seeking attention and validation for herself by vicariously promoting her child as a new model for a new society.

even shorter version? bítch is batshít crazy.


apologies for the salty language, but this sort of new world order nonsense really gets on my tits.

Caveman1

I've heard it all now, I know some people say that your born gay but theres no way you can be totally sure at 7, why have the parents broadcast this to the world ?

wonderfulname

sunflower27 wrote: »

What does 'at seven, our son is identifying as gay' mean?

Just that he said 'I am gay'?

Exactly, she's differentiating between him calling himself gay, and him actually being gay.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

xsiborg wrote: »

nope, thinking you're the only liberal in the village IS loony liberal though! she may not have got the memo that said there was no need to make a point of stating in the article that she had many gay friends, it's like someone using the old "im not racist, but..." line, before they go on to make some point like the intended reader would never have heard of homosexuality before reading her article. the reader is now officially enlightened- giant rainbow colored enamel badge is in the post, wear it and display it with pride, shove it in people's faces to watch them squirm uncomfortably because straight people are totes afraid they'll catch the ghey, and secretly they're all gay anyway, they just wont admit it because they're all intolerant bigots, whereas we're (she subscribes to the gay "community" idea obviously, whereas i myself subscribe to the "all people are individuals" that i came up with all by myself and i'll assume you'd never heard of til you read it here! (badge is in the post!)) all enlightened, and stuff.

what the author fails to realise is that most people don't care for her support, much less need it, as she displays a severe lack of any form of intelligence with her only thing she feels is worthy to broadcast to the world about herself, is not actually about herself, she just outed her own son to the world in what i consider to be the cruellest fashion possible, purely to feed her own ego!

after such a display of arrogance, she should probably start now to prepare him for the world of hurt and misunderstanding she has just inflicted on her son, just to make herself appear like the "cool liberal mommy".

silly cow should never have been given a medium to air her nonsense, nor the fact that she places a greater emphasis on her appearance to her friends than she does about the welfare and well being of her son.

next week we'll see another mother who declares to the internet that her one year old told her with his first words that he was gay, and the world's media will have forgotten about that seven year old, but his classmates won't, and because we don't live in an ideal world, they will, with great enthusiasm and delight, proceed to rip the living píss out of that unfortunate little seven year old boy, but that's ok, because his cool mommy loves him, and just to keep her happy, the father says the little boy is "awesome", through clenched teeth.

the father at least is somewhat aware that the worlds media are watching and ripping the unholy píss out of the wagon cool mommy.



i in no way reacted the same way as the mother! the first time he did the hip walk, i looked at him as he approached me and the exact words out of my mouth were "the fúck???".

same way i reacted when he walked out dressed in his mothers dress with her boots on and a full face of what has to be said was quite skillfully applied make-up for a three year old!

and so on, and so on and so on, many other examples unrelated to the topic at hand. keep in mind too that i never once questioned or suggested that my son may or may not be gay/straight, hell even quiltbag, because personally speaking, i couldn't care less about his sexuality, that's his own business.

all that concerns me is that at seven years of age he knows his 12 times tables, can tell me where kilkenny or khartoum is by not referring to google maps, but to an actual atlas (remember those?), that he can read books, encyclopediae, the classics of literature, inform himself and become learned enough to make decisions for himself and be able to realise that all he see's on tv, it's not real!

of couse as my son is only seven, he watches tom and jerry on the bomerang channel, where they try and bump each other off with all manner of acme tools. he doesnt watch shítty, juvenile, unrealistic american drivel that to me seems to be a catch-all platform for all minorities, and that singing is a cure-all for everything.

tl;dr? this kids mother should be told to grow the fúck up and stop seeking attention and validation for herself by vicariously promoting her child as a new model for a new society.

even shorter version? bítch is batshít crazy.


apologies for the salty language, but this sort of new world order nonsense really gets on my tits.

New world order is hardly libeal!!!!

Anyway, my point is that, after the initial reaction, you were clam, collecte and din't make an issue of it. Neither did she (at least, not to the child).

Pacifist Pigeon

What tell tail sign are there that a child is straight at 7 years old? Are there any? Do you just assume they're straight?

People seem to think that your sexual orientation is something that is imparted on you by your parents, it's not.

I'm gay, and I think, looking back now at some of my earlier memories from primary school, that there may have been some tell tail signs that I was gay - but I would never have had the ability at that age to define it.

It wasn't anything to do with how I acted (if you think all gay people are effeminate, you're wrong - I've always had a masculine disposition and being gay doesn't hinder my masculinity in the slightest) but the way I looked at other guys my age.

It more or less occurred to me in stages that I was attracted to guys when I was 11/12, then I realised that I was gay (to put a word on it) by about 14/15.

If this 7 y/o was genuinely gay, it would become far more apparent by the time the child reaches puberty. If the child wasn't genuinely gay, then it would become progressively harder for the child to conceal this fact when he reaches puberty.

I'd also like to point out, a male child who likes "girly" stuff doesn't really mean he's gay or straight. You can't make your child gay by giving him girly toys. Let's be clear on this, being gay is a matter of sexual attraction, not disposition. Sexual orientation doesn't point towards gender identity. Gender identity and sexual orientation are two different things. I find that these two are often confused. Being gay doesn't mean you're a camp Mr. Humphries who's oddly obsessed by fashion, has one of those strange lisps and works in a female dominated profession. That's a horrendous stereotype that seems to be prevalent throughout this thread.

xsiborg

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

New world order is hardly libeal!!!!

i never said it was, liberals themselves would seek to distance themselves as far as possible from this loony toon as they could, and i cant say i blame them. i wouldn't consider her liberal either, that would require the assumption that she is capable of independent thought, when clearly she is not, if she takes her parenting cues from a fictitious tv program.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Anyway, my point is that, after the initial reaction, you were clam, collecte and din't make an issue of it. Neither did she (at least, not to the child).

how can you say she didnt make an issue of it, when she took to broadcasting it on the internet? are you now going to claim that as a journalist she didnt realise that her cooings and cringeworthy ramblings would be swooped on by equally tedious hacks looking to fill a space on a slow news day?

here's news for her- her child is no longer unique or special, "my kid is gay" is so 2000 and late, the media has now moved on to "my kid is transgendered" as the next big "lets all gawk voyeuristically at the freaks" story, not so cleverly disguised as an "aren't we all so accepting and tolerant", "informative article".

if anything, this non-story only serves to highlight why some people shouldn't be allowed access to the internet, let alone write an inane and useless "blog" about "their son who identifies himself as gay".

in other news, my own son here announced he now identifies himself as a giraffe. he's got some neck!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

xsiborg wrote: »

i never said it was, liberals themselves would seek to distance themselves as far as possible from this loony toon as they could, and i cant say i blame them. i wouldn't consider her liberal either, that would require the assumption that she is capable of independent thought, when clearly she is not, if she takes her parenting cues from a fictitious tv program.

Ah, but you labeled her loony liberal in your... post... ages ago... ****, I really am harping on, amn't I? Sorry! Seriously, she's a journalist reporting a cutesy child story. That's about it. It's a bloody blog, for heaven's sake!

how can you say she didnt make an issue of it, when she took to broadcasting it on the internet? are you now going to claim that as a journalist she didnt realise that her cooings and cringeworthy ramblings would be swooped on by equally tedious hacks looking to fill a space on a slow news day?

I said she didn't make an issue to the child. He seems quite happy the way things were handled. Certainly no shame or guilt and i doubt he's going to be reading the blog!

here's news for her- her child is no longer unique or special, "my kid is gay" is so 2000 and late, the media has now moved on to "my kid is transgendered" as the next big "lets all gawk voyeuristically at the freaks" story, not so cleverly disguised as an "aren't we all so accepting and tolerant", "informative article".

if anything, this non-story only serves to highlight why some people shouldn't be allowed access to the internet, let alone write an inane and useless "blog" about "their son who identifies himself as gay".

in other news, my own son here announced he now identifies himself as a giraffe. he's got some neck!

Probably true. But if you can get someone to pay you for writing about your child in a harmless unintrusive way, wouldn't you?

Seriously, it's like the plush pieces you read about in womens mags all the time.