Problem with homophobic girls

DeadHand

BetterThanThou wrote: »

I'm gay, so you can't call me homophobic, but I'd never knowingly sleep with a bisexual

I think it's likely that some of the most venomous homophobes are secretly gay or have savagely self repressed their own homo sexuality.

Being gay certainly makes you less likely to be homophobic but it doesn't mean you can't be. No more than a woman couldn't be misogynistic.

wexie

Czarcasm wrote: »

(of course I'm fairly vanilla in my sexual antics anyway at my age, you're unlikely to catch me swinging from the rafters any time soon, I have a phobia about breaking my neck... such is the price of being a square/prude/<insert other term I couldn't care less about here>).

I've actually had to ask builders recently to make sure the rafters in my new bedroom are 'extra sturdy'.....true story....:D

Mrs. Wexie was not impressed with me

Czarcasm

DeadHand wrote: »

I think it's likely that some of the most venomous homophobes are secretly gay or have savagely self repressed their own homo sexuality.

I never get this, and I'm not having a go at you, but by that logic, the KKK wish they were black.

I don't think so?


Is it just one of those things people tell themselves to make sense of what seems like a simple hatred of people for the obvious justification that they claim?

Lou.m

Tilly wrote: »

Are you a goat?

No, I would imagine cloven hooves are hard to type with.

wexie

DeadHand wrote: »

I think it's likely that some of the most venomous homophobes are secretly gay or have savagely self repressed their own homo sexuality.

It's late and I'm tired, so I'll leave y'all with the wisdom of Ron White

I said "We're all gay, buddy. It's just to what degree are you gay."
And he goes, "That's bull****, man. I ain't gay at all."
And I go "Yeah, you are. And I can prove it."
He goes "Fine. Prove it."
I go, "All right. Do you like porn?"
He says "Yeah, I love porn. You know that."
I said, "Oh, and do you only watch scenes with two women?"
And he goes, "No, I'll watch a man and a woman makin' love."
And I say "Oh, and do you like the guy to have a flabby, half-flaccid penis?"
And he goes "No, I like big, hard, throbbing cock..."

dd972

Cracked it, start an LGBT Traveller thread, kill two birds with one stone

DeadHand

Czarcasm wrote: »

I never get this, and I'm not having a go at you, but by that logic, the KKK wish they were black.

I don't think so?


Is it just one of those things people tell themselves to make sense of what seems like a simple hatred of people for the obvious justification that they claim?

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. I don't think the situations are comparable at all.

The self repressed homo sexual of a homophobe doesn't wish he was gay, he wishes he wasn't. He hates and fears his own sexual nature so he hides and/or denies it. He projects that hatred on to others openly like him.

You see these cases pop up in the States now and again of fairly odious religious operators who attack and condemn the gay community, threatening them with fire and brimstone, until their own dalliances with rent boys get exposed.

Czarcasm

DeadHand wrote: »

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. I don't think the situations are comparable at all.

The self repressed homo sexual of a homophobe doesn't wish he was gay, he wishes he wasn't. He hates and fears his own sexual nature so he hides and/or denies it. He projects that hatred on to others openly like him.

You're still making awful leaps in logic to suggest that a person must be gay if they're so vocal about their hatred of gay people. Occams razor and all that - they just don't like gay people, no reflection on their own sexuality.

You see these cases pop up in the States now and again of fairly odious religious operators who attack and condemn the gay community, threatening them with fire and brimstone, until their own dalliances with rent boys get exposed.

Emm, that was one politician or preacher or whatever the hell he was, and even then you're talking a mere handful at that rate as opposed to the amount of actual real homophobia in society.

It just, to me anyway, seems a tad juvenile to say "they hate gay people so they're probably gay themselves", and of course because it's put about by gay people who pour scorn on a gay man, is it not a bit of a self-defeating, self-contradicting cliche?

jill_valentine

Czarcasm wrote: »

It just, to me anyway, seems a tad juvenile to say "they hate gay people so they're probably gay themselves", and of course because it's put about by gay people who pour scorn on a gay man, is it not a bit of a self-defeating, self-contradicting cliche?

There's actually quite a bit of backing to it. Men expressing the strongest homophobia tend to demonstrate a proportionate arousal to homosexual porn.

First link I found, for example:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201204/are-homophobic-people-really-gay-and-not-accepting-it

Czarcasm

jill_valentine wrote: »

There's actually quite a bit of backing to it. Men expressing the strongest homophobia tend to demonstrate a proportionate arousal to homosexual porn.

First link I found, for example:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201204/are-homophobic-people-really-gay-and-not-accepting-it

Did you actually read through your own first link you found? Because I did, and all I saw was a shocking poor methodology and loaded testing to produce the results they wanted.

Attitudes towards gay and lesbian people are an important part of current political issues like the legality of same-sex marriage and employment nondiscrimination. Yet little scientific research has been done on what drives such anti-gay attitudes.

One would imagine for an issue of this magnitude and of such importance to humanity as this, that they would draw subjects from a broader cross-section of society than a handful of college jocks who spend all day in locker rooms measuring their penises against each other anyway without prompting.

Before each of the 50 trials, participants were subliminally primed with either the word "me" or "others" flashed on the screen for 35 milliseconds, which is too quick to even be consciously perceptible to the participants. They were then shown the words "gay," "straight," "homosexual," and "heterosexual" as well as pictures of straight and gay couples, and the computer tracked precisely their response times. A faster association of "me" with "gay" and a slower association of "me" with "straight" was taken to indicated an implicit gay orientation.

Finally, the researcher measured participants' level of homophobia—both overt, as expressed in questionnaires on social policy and beliefs, and implicit, as revealed in word-completion tasks. For the implicit measure, students wrote down the first three words that came to mind, for example for the prompt "k i _ _". The study tracked the increase in the amount of aggressive words elicited after showing participants the word "gay" for 35 milliseconds.

They were what? Prepped and subliminally influenced without their knowledge? I'm surprised they could even write, let alone finish a sentence, and there are some whoppers of assumptions made to suggest or imply that test results implied homosexuality.

As with all studies, this one had several limitations. As the authors pointed out, all participants were college students, so it may be helpful in future research to test these effects in younger adolescents still living at home and in older adults who have had more time to establish lives independent of their parents and to look at attitudes as they change over time. Additionally, given the correlational nature of many of the present findings, causal and developmental inferences cannot be reliably made. Finally, it is important to point out that implicit measures are not a perfect window into an individual’s psyche or “true” sexual orientation.

Despite these limitations, this series of studies helps us understand the roots of homophobia, specifically that in some cases it may represent repressed same-sex attractions.

Pardon my french, but it does in it's hole help us understand anything about homophobia. It only does that if you're willing to make it up as you go along, employ subjects that are given to frequent instances of homoerotic behaviour, all that naked prancing around the locker room, the bum slapping after a touchdown, the cheeky playful towel whipping in the showers... all in the name of brotherhood bonding of course, American college jocks, big into that stuff.

I can't help but wonder why the people who conducted these studies or wrote the article doesn't just come out and admit to some woeful selection bias in play here. Who is the author anyway?

Dr. Mustanski is the Director of the IMPACT LGBT Health and Development Program. You can follow the Sexual Continuum blog by becoming a fan on Facebook. I periodically live tweet from research conferences on sexuality and you can follow me @sexualcontinuum

Oh. I see, he wouldn't be biased at all either then. Not half.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I think a lot of straight or gay people operate under the assumption that bisexual people are mad for sex or difficult to satisfy sexually and it's just not true. I like having sex with men and with women, but if I'm in a relationship where I'm in love I'm not thinking "oh I wish they had a different set of genitals". My bisexuality does NOT impact my ability to be monogamous or have a fulfilling relationship with someone.

On the one hand I'm delighted that I'm bisexual because life is so beautiful, and being bisexual gives you a perspective on a lot of things. On the other hand, it's hard to find a place or an identity because people don't think my sexuality exists in the same way that theirs does. I like girls and boys and the sex they have with me, I'm not kidding myself or them, I'm just bang in the middle of a spectrum that everyone is on.

Wibbs

Lou.m wrote: »

No, I would imagine cloven hooves are hard to type with.

I found it quite easy with practice...

Mckenzie Large Teaspoon wrote: »

I think a lot of straight or gay people operate under the assumption that bisexual people are mad for sex or difficult to satisfy sexually and it's just not true. I like having sex with men and with women, but if I'm in a relationship where I'm in love I'm not thinking "oh I wish they had a different set of genitals". My bisexuality does NOT impact my ability to be monogamous or have a fulfilling relationship with someone.

+1. IMHO and in my experience someone who is bisexual is just as likely or not to cheat or be dissatisfied in a relationship as someone who is straight or gay. It makes no difference. It's not about the genitals.

wexie

Mckenzie Large Teaspoon wrote: »

I think a lot of straight or gay people operate under the assumption that bisexual people are mad for sex or difficult to satisfy sexually and it's just not true. I like having sex with men and with women, but if I'm in a relationship where I'm in love I'm not thinking "oh I wish they had a different set of genitals". My bisexuality does NOT impact my ability to be monogamous or have a fulfilling relationship with someone.

damm you electrowoman, is your mission in life to destroy my dreams one at a time or something? :mad:

I guess thats the kidnapped by sexcrazed-bisexual-cheerleaders fantasy off the list

Vet Thrower

takamichinoku wrote: »

Always seems like there's some sort of inherent thing built into people that's only able to handle binary options.

Pay close attention, for I'm about to show you how to make 563 dollars every hour from the comfort of your own home.

jimgoose

wexie wrote: »

...I guess thats the kidnapped by sexcrazed-bisexual-cheerleaders fantasy off the list

Preference vs. prejudice notwithstanding, I think we can all agree that "Jimgoose and his Sex-Crazed Bisexual Cheerleaders" would be a truly superb name for an electro-soul-punk-folk band. :cool:

Annasopra

Czarcasm wrote: »

Emm, that was one politician or preacher or whatever the hell he was, and even then you're talking a mere handful at that rate as opposed to the amount of actual real homophobia in society.

One? Theres been lots more than 1. I could probably with a few hours research get 100 or so names.

Annasopra

Vet Thrower wrote: »

Pay close attention, for I'm about to show you how to make 563 dollars every hour from the comfort of your own home.

What?

What has your point got to do with binarism?

pickarooney

_Redzer_ wrote: »

We were brought up in a society were we were supposed to be disgusted by homosexuality. I've witnessed it all growing up from primary school onwards that that stuff is sick, except for lesbians, that's hot.

Obviously that has an effect on you. I had to overcome my own irrational disgust of gay sex just so I could grow up and be a healthy gay man.
I've friends who are ok with homosexuality, but some are disgusted by gay sex. Why? There's actuality no good, logical reason as to why, it's the culture we grew up in.

You might say it's not their preference, so it's ok, but I'm not disgusted my women and straight sex -because I never grew up in a world which told me to.

A lot of people are a buit physically repulsed by the thought of obese people or elderly people having sex. Is that because they were told to be or just because it's their natural response to the image?

spurious wrote: »

I doubt the George is the optimum place to pick up a lady, unless of course, you are a lady yourself.

If you were a hot chick, sick to the back teeth of being drooled over by half-cut gobshïtes and wanted a dance in peace, you might head to a gay bar. You'd probably assume any men you met there, if straight, were at least open-minded. With that, and the lack of competition, the odds are pretty good.

Maphisto wrote: »

Good word I'm going to use it it more.

Phallophobic, for that extra bit of Greek, with bonus alliteration.

Muise... wrote: »

You might even enjoy the rush of the dissonance...

Now there's a good title.

P_1

I must admit to finding it curious how bisexuals seem to catch flak from some of the louder elements of both the gay and straight communities. I think the promiscuity argument is a generalised myth. You get gay and straight horn dogs but that doesn't mean that all gay and straight people are horn dogs, the same way that one bisexual people being a horn dog does not equate to all bisexuals being horn dogs.

I wonder if it's down to people being used to considering their own sexuality being black and white and get confused/alarmed by encountering somebody who has more of a grey nuance to theirs.

DeadHand

Czarcasm wrote: »

You're still making awful leaps in logic to suggest that a person must be gay if they're so vocal about their hatred of gay people. Occams razor and all that - they just don't like gay people, no reflection on their own sexuality.





Emm, that was one politician or preacher or whatever the hell he was, and even then you're talking a mere handful at that rate as opposed to the amount of actual real homophobia in society.

It just, to me anyway, seems a tad juvenile to say "they hate gay people so they're probably gay themselves", and of course because it's put about by gay people who pour scorn on a gay man, is it not a bit of a self-defeating, self-contradicting cliche?

Ok, if you read my post properly instead of throwing occams razors at me you'd have noticed that I wrote some of the most venomous homophobes have repressed homosexual tendencies themselves, not all, most or even a lot.

Obviously, the vast majority of homophobes are going to be straight but homosexual homophobes can and do exist. The poster I was replying to claimed he couldn't be homophobic because he is gay. I was pointing out this wasn't the case.

I'm sure there has been more than one case of an anti-gay figure being discovered to like a bit of gay activity of a weekend themselves.

Bog Standard User

straight women like men to be men not camp women wanna be's

Czarcasm

DeadHand wrote: »

I'm sure there has been more than one case of an anti-gay figure being discovered to like a bit of gay activity of a weekend themselves.

Oh no question, and when I said a handful and Joey picked me up on it, a handful is still a handful, proportionately speaking. I just find it a bit of a juvenile and lazy cliche is all that like I said is a bit self-defeating. It just reminds me of certain minority fringes within LGBT lobby groups that try to further their cause by outing high profile public figures.

It's one of the things that tarnished my admiration for Harvey Milk, and to see it still going on today, sneering at the people they see as "the enemy" when they're foisted upon their own petard, it's not something that ever sat easily with me, smacks of high-minded hypocrisy really.

Vet Thrower

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What?

What has your point got to do with binarism?

It has everything to do with binary options. I don't know what binarism is.

DeadHand

Czarcasm wrote: »

Oh no question, and when I said a handful and Joey picked me up on it, a handful is still a handful, proportionately speaking. I just find it a bit of a juvenile and lazy cliche is all that like I said is a bit self-defeating. It just reminds me of certain minority fringes within LGBT lobby groups that try to further their cause by outing high profile public figures.

It's one of the things that tarnished my admiration for Harvey Milk, and to see it still going on today, sneering at the people they see as "the enemy" when they're foisted upon their own petard, it's not something that ever sat easily with me, smacks of high-minded hypocrisy really.

You didn't say a handful. You said "one".

You're replying to me yet none of that has anything to do with the point I made, little of what you wrote has anything to do with the point I made.

Strawman, anyone?

Czarcasm

DeadHand wrote: »

You didn't say a handful. You said "one".

Small hands are fantastic, they make everything feel bigger :pac:

They're not as fast as your nifty fingers ninja edit though

You're replying to me yet none of that has anything to do with the point I made, little of what you wrote has anything to do with the point I made.

Strawman, anyone?

Perhaps, but unintentionally so, my mind tends to drift off

bodice ripper

If someone doesn't like me solely because I am bisexual, that person is a jerk that I can do without in my life.

If someone doesn't fancy me solely because I am bisexual, that person is depressingly vanilla and to be pittied. Also, I would be surprised that the decision came all the way down to my sexuality as a deal breaker .

KingOfFairview

bodice ripper wrote: »

If someone doesn't like me solely because I am bisexual, that person is a jerk that I can do without in my life.

If someone doesn't fancy me solely because I am bisexual, that person is depressingly vanilla and to be pittied. Also, I would be surprised that the decision came all the way down to my sexuality as a deal breaker .

First sentence - yes, I agree.

Second sentence - I would have hoped gay or bi people would have adopted more of a 'whatever floats (or doesn't float) your boat' attitude regarding sexual preference. Having probably faced plenty of condescending condemnation of your own preferences, do you not think you're being a tad bigoted yourself?

Czarcasm

bodice ripper wrote: »

If someone doesn't like me solely because I am bisexual, that person is a jerk that I can do without in my life.

Each to their own and all, but if someone doesn't like ne solely because I'm straight, I'm not going to dismiss them as a jerk, I'm sure they have their reasons, perhaps they're bisexual but lean more towards women, unless the guy is ridiculously good looking. People can be superficial like that, I know I am.

If someone doesn't fancy me solely because I am bisexual, that person is depressingly vanilla and to be pittied. Also, I would be surprised that the decision came all the way down to my sexuality as a deal breaker .

They're to be pitied because they aren't sexually compatible with you? It's a good thing there are at least 300 more people to choose from then on any given night in the club!

I wouldn't care if you were the spit of Adele either, the fact you're bisexual would be a deal breaker for me personally, but again, you too have that same 300 people at least to choose from.

Of course I could say that now in my current mindset, just like I figured I'd never be sexually attracted to black women or gingers, and, well, whaddya know, it just took a specific black woman or a specific ginger for me, a bit like a gay man who could never imagine himself attracted to women, and yet two high profile examples that immediately spring to mind are Freddy Mercury and Elton John.

jimgoose

bodice ripper wrote: »

If someone doesn't like me solely because I am bisexual, that person is a jerk that I can do without in my life.

If someone doesn't fancy me solely because I am bisexual, that person is depressingly vanilla and to be pittied. Also, I would be surprised that the decision came all the way down to my sexuality as a deal breaker .

osarusan

Czarcasm wrote: »

two high profile examples that immediately spring to mind are Freddy Mercury and Elton John.

Two? That's a mere handful.

P_1

Czarcasm wrote: »

They're to be pitied because they aren't sexually compatible with you? It's a good thing there are at least 300 more people to choose from then on any given night in the club!

I wouldn't care if you were the spit of Adele either, the fact you're bisexual would be a deal breaker for me personally, but again, you too have that same 300 people at least to choose from.

Of course I could say that now in my current mindset, just like I figured I'd never be sexually attracted to black women or gingers, and, well, whaddya know, it just took a specific black woman or a specific ginger for me, a bit like a gay man who could never imagine himself attracted to women, and yet two high profile examples that immediately spring to mind are Freddy Mercury and Elton John.

Just out of curiosity is that down to attraction, potential compatibility, a fear of being potentially cheated on or indeed anything else.

Not having a go, just genuinely curious.

Czarcasm

osarusan wrote: »

Two? That's a mere handful.

Big hands osarusan? PM Inbox overload imminent...

They were just two that immediately sprung to mind is all, or we had Redzer earlier in the thread giving it welly with his sexploits.

bboybaboy19

bodice ripper wrote: »

If someone doesn't fancy me solely because I am bisexual, that person is depressingly vanilla and to be pittied.

If someone thinks I'm vanilla solely because I don't fancy them because they're bisexual then that person is vanilla themselves and also to be pittied.

See how that logic works?

jimgoose

bboybaboy19 wrote: »

If someone thinks I'm vanilla solely because I don't fancy them because they're bisexual then that person is vanilla themselves and also to be pittied.

See how that logic works?

Or, to summarise the summary of the summary: Bitchaz be trippin'. :cool:

Czarcasm

P_1 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity is that down to attraction, potential compatibility, a fear of being potentially cheated on or indeed anything else.

Not having a go, just genuinely curious.

Potential sexual compatibility really P tbh -

Czarcasm wrote: »

No doubt that'll be counteracted by someone suggesting that you could never be sure either that your partner will be satisfied with just your willy, and while that might be true, you at least know from the outset there's a better chance they will be.


(of course I'm fairly vanilla in my sexual antics anyway at my age, you're unlikely to catch me swinging from the rafters any time soon, I have a phobia about breaking my neck... such is the price of being a square/prude/&lt;insert other term I couldn't care less about here&gt;).

I may as well go the whole hog and be completely honest but girl on girl just doesn't do it for me and when a girl tells me she's bisexual or lesbian, it conjures up an immediate mental image that for me is a bit of a let down, and electro mentioned it earlier that it would have no bearing on a relationship, but really, it does, because we're not even going to get to relationship stage if I'm not invested enough to get over that I don't feel I am mentally, psychologically, or emotionally equipped to satisfy a girl who is bisexual. Being able to satisfy her physically would be the least of my insecurities tbh.

"It's not you, it's me"

dd972

As regards Homophobia, the notion that all homophobes are repressed LGBT people is overtly simplistic 'part time Freud' claptrap, most of them are just absurdly irrational and a bit thick, neither do most of them spend sleepless nights in morbid terror of them as the 'phobic' part of the term implies.

There's also the macho posturing element as well, lots of blokes who bandy homphobic slurs and insults around in jest are trying to project an uber-straight jack the lad persona.

KingOfFairview

dd972 wrote: »

As regards Homophobia, the notion that all homophobes are repressed LGBT people is overtly simplistic 'part time Freud' claptrap, most of them are just absurdly irrational and a bit thick, neither do most of them spend sleepless nights in morbid terror of them as the 'phobic' part of the term implies.

I agree in general, but if they are a very anti gay right-wing American politician, its odds-on that they are gay

P_1

Czarcasm wrote: »

Potential sexual compatibility really P tbh -

I may as well go the whole hog and be completely honest but girl on girl just doesn't do it for me and when a girl tells me she's bisexual or lesbian, it conjures up an immediate mental image that for me is a bit of a let down, and electro mentioned it earlier that it would have no bearing on a relationship, but really, it does, because we're not even going to get to relationship stage if I'm not invested enough to get over that I don't feel I am mentally, psychologically, or emotionally equipped to satisfy a girl who is bisexual. Being able to satisfy her physically would be the least of my insecurities tbh.

"It's not you, it's me"

Ah that's fair enough. There's nothing wrong with something simply not being your cup of tea.

The_Captain

I don't think there's such a thing as a 'homophobe', in the sense that what one person finds homophobic is completely acceptable behaviour to another.

I've known idiots who took pride in their contempt of gays, because it shows how manly they are that they cant tolerate effeminate women :rolleyes:

But at the same time I've known straight guys with gay friends who wouldn't feel comfortable being alone in a room with them, convinced that a gay man is going to be trying it on with them as soon as the opportunity arises.

bodice ripper

The_Captain wrote: »

But at the same time I've known straight guys with gay friends who wouldn't feel comfortable being alone in a room with them, convinced that a gay man is going to be trying it on with them as soon as the opportunity arises.

...

osarusan

That image is stupid and ignorant.

bodice ripper

osarusan wrote: »

That image is stupid and ignorant.

well, you are entitled to your angry opinion, and to take life far too seriously.

Ah nuts

Relax Op

I'm straight and i can't get girls to sleep with me either.


They're all heterophobic!!

bodice ripper

bboybaboy19 wrote: »

If someone thinks I'm vanilla solely because I don't fancy them because they're bisexual then that person is vanilla themselves and also to be pittied.

See how that logic works?

Yeah, I am ok with your reading. you are entitled to feel that way. I don't think my feelings are reality.

P_1

bodice ripper wrote: »

...

People not having the same interests as you is not the same as homophobia and that kind of is really doing a disservice to people who are seeking equality.

Wibbs

P_1 wrote:

People not having the same interests as you is not the same as homophobia

Exactly. It's down to individual preference.

Case in point;

Czarcasm wrote: »

I wouldn't care if you were the spit of Adele either, the fact you're bisexual would be a deal breaker for me personally

If someone was the spit of Adele it would be a deal breaker for me, whereas a bisexual woman wouldn't be(so long as she wasn't the spit of Adele ). We all have different attractants and that's cool and how it should be. I personally don't like it when others try to force on me their idea of what is acceptable, acceptably attractive or not as the case may be.

Vet Thrower

_Redzer_ wrote: »

I had to overcome my own irrational disgust of gay sex just so I could grow up and be a healthy gay man.

The above comment is the most astounding thing I have ever read.

Here's a guy who thinks gay sex is disgusting. He examines his feelings for logical inconsistencies, like someone debugging computer code, and finds that he can't rationally back up this position. Therefore, he turns gay!!

Immanuel Kant's book A Critique of Pure Reason was 900 pages long. In one sentence, this guy makes the point better than he ever could.

Czarcasm

Vet Thrower wrote: »

The above comment is the most astounding thing I have ever read.

Here's a guy who thinks gay sex is disgusting. He examines his feelings for logical inconsistencies, like someone debugging computer code, and finds that he can't rationally back up this position. Therefore, he turns gay!!

Immanuel Kant's book A Critique of Pure Reason was 900 pages long. In one sentence, this guy makes the point better than he ever could.

Except that he was born gay, and people are not computer applications. The human brain is a far more complex instrument than logical arguments and IF, THEN, ELSE statements.

Vet Thrower

Czarcasm wrote: »

Except that he was born gay, and people are not computer applications. The human brain is a far more complex instrument than logical arguments and IF, THEN, ELSE statements.

What do you mean he was born gay? He said he thought it was disgusting! He had to force himself to get gay!!

osarusan

Czarcasm wrote: »

Except that he was born gay, and people are not computer applications. The human brain is a far more complex instrument than logical arguments and IF, THEN, ELSE statements.

If you take a look at some of that poster's other efforts on this thread,you might save yourself some typing time.