So now the folks who ran the Festival portion of the Millenium March on Washington claim their money’s been stolen and can’t ante up the $750,000 they promised to the organizers, which would have paid almost half of the cost of the march.
Embezzlers or legitimate theft?
The FBI is on it.
I saw the link on PlanetOut.com (one of the March’s major sponors) through a Yahoo link here.
Thoughts?
Esprix
Hi Esprix,
Sorry if this was covered before, but out of all the gay people you know, what percentage (if any) would say they were born gay as opposed to chosing the lifestyle?
Thanks,
A girl
In last week’s Savage Love column, Dan mentions all the things that can be used for a little backdoor fun, but then says “never bananas; trust me, KST, never bananas”.
So, why not? Or do I not want to know?
Well, bananas have sharp bristles on the ends, they can break off, and since they don’t have a flared base they can get lost inside. Inserting anything other than a prick, a finger, a dildo - basically, non-brittle, durable objects with flared bases - is a Very Bad Idea.
Matt (or anyone else on the Gay Guy staff):
In Dan Savage’s column, he seems to object to bananas, but approve of cucumbers. I didn’t do too well in my vegatable taxonomy courses, but as far as I remember, cucumbers do not have flared bases.
Any thoughts?
**
Matt (or anyone else on the Gay Guy staff):
In Dan Savage’s column, he seems to object to bananas, but approve of cucumbers. I didn’t do too well in my vegatable taxonomy courses, but as far as I remember, cucumbers do not have flared bases.
Any thoughts?
**
Bananas don’t work as any kind of sexual object because they cannot handle a lot of pressure. Squeeze them even the slightest and the fruit portion squirts out. So, I guess it doesn’t really matter whether it’s safe or not because after a couple of thrusts you would only have an empty banana peel left anyway.
Cucumbers on the other hand are firmer and could probably handle a greater workout.
Though, I’m hardly an expert. Why use vegetables when you can order a Goodvibes catalogue?
A Girl asked:
Sorry if this was covered before, but out of all the gay people you know, what percentage (if any) would say they were born gay as opposed to chosing the lifestyle?
[/QUOTE]
Actually, no, this question as never been asked.
I have never met a single person who has ever said they chose their sexual orientation - every single one of them, gay, lesbian, bisexual, straight, or somewhere in between, has said it was something they just knew about themselves from their earliest inklings of self-awareness, even before any kind of sexual self-awareness (for example, I had a wild crush on a boy in 4th grade, which would have made me about 9 years old). The only “choice” involved was whether to acknowledge the fact and deal with it, ignore it and hope it went away, or actively repress it and try to be something they weren’t.
phouka and Billdo, basically what they said. If you’re going to use something as a dildo, you want something that’s stiff and will remain so. You also want something big enough that you can keep your grip on it and not {ahem} misplace it anywhere. Besides, I thought food and sex went hand-in-hand anyway? 
There’s also the possibility that Dan Savage had his own little mishap with a banana and didn’t want to get into details (which would surprise me, as he’s not exactly shy).
Esprix
Gay Guy:
If I were interested in things going hand-in-hand, do you think I would have to ask about them here? It’s the other parts that we have questions about.
Dear Gay Guy,
Have there been any studies done of the average testosterone levels of gay men vs. straight men? If so, were any significant differences detected? Were levels of any other hormones discovered to be significantly different between the gay male and straight male population?
– tracer, who is going to watch An American in Paris some time in the next week and wonders if it will imbue him with a sudden desire to have sex with other men.
tracer asked:
Interesting question. I found a couple things on a cursory search of the net. From ReligiousTolerance.org, “What causes sexual orientation?”:
And this one is from http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~allies/www_resources/sexual_orientation.html:
So, basically, no, there aren’t testosteronal or hormonal differences between straight and gay men. There is evidence of a “gay gene” that sometimes is and sometimes isn’t “activated” in some individuals.
(I also came across some studies on male/female social characteristics and their prevalence among gay men and lesbians, but I’ll post that another time. The conclusion seemed to be that there was a high percentage of male children who acted in non-stereotypically masculine ways that turned out to be gay, but that the traits themselves seemed to be inborn and not learned behavior, particularly in a society that discourages such behavior.)
What it comes down to is that no one knows why people turn out gay, straight, bi- or asexual; or, more specifically, the combination of nature and nurture are so complex they will probably never be understood.
Then again, who’d want to? I like the universe the way it is.
Esprix
Dear Gay Guy,
Recently I was listening to Dr. Dell, on KGO AM 810, and he mentioned a scientific study that asked the question, “Why has evolution not eliminated homosexual activity?” Unfortunetly he began talking about this study as I arrived at work and could not listen to what the “experts” said. He said that a reference to the article would be posted on the web at
As of yet the study has not been posted there, so in the mean time I was wondering what your views on this are. How is it that homosexuality has not been “weeded” out since gay men can not procreate. When the study is posted I will come back with what the “experts” had to say. Thanks
-N
Dear Gay Guy,
I just took a look at www.backdoorman.com .
For those of you who don’t know, this is a gay male porn site. And I only looked at it because it was mentioned in this week’s The Onion – honest! 
Oh, and I’ve turned off automatic URL parsing for this message, because Contestant #3 got kicked off the SDMB for posting a URL with the actual domain name X’ed out, and the message board software turned it into a link, and the link happened to point to a porn site.
Anyway, I noticed one of the guys on one of backdoorman.com’s banner ads looked surprisingly like Leonardo DiCapprio. Is DiCapprio generally considered a “hottie” by gay men?
Not being any kind of sociological or biological expert, I can only talk out loud regarding my own opinion.
I’m not sure that relegating homosexuality to merely a question of procreation is fair to homosexuality itself (after all, there’s a lot more to human relationships than just sex), but for the sake of this argument I can see why it would be. Given that, and given some studies I’ve seen, there is a very good reason Ma Nature has given us the gift of homosexuality - population control.
There have been studies (and I don’t have the cites at hand) where population density and homosexual activity were compared in mice. In a low population density with adequate food and water the rate of homosexuality was what was normally found in animals (anywhere fro 3-10%). However, when the density was increased and food and water started to become more scarce, the percentage increased in relation to the density increase. The conclusion was that homosexuality was a form of population control. This could be an answer.
Now, obviously, we’re human, not mice, which is why I say using this kind of an argument when dealing with relationships isn’t relevant, but from a purely bio-socio point of view, this might be at least one possible answer.
Esprix
Uh-huh. Sure. And I only read PlayGirl for the articles.
Anyway, I noticed one of the guys on one of backdoorman.com’s banner ads looked surprisingly like Leonardo DiCapprio. Is DiCapprio generally considered a “hottie” by gay men?
[/QUOTE]
Depends on the gay man. Just like women, tastes vary - some like sensitive types, some like 'em young, some like manly men, some like facial hair, etc. ad nauseum. Despite what Tiger Beat might tell you, not all girls find Leo attractive. Personally, I think he’s muglied out as he’s gotten older and found him cuter when he was younger, but I wouldn’t kick him out of bed for eating crackers. (When asking a female friend if she’d kick a certain someone out of bed for eating crackers, her reply was to ask, “Hmmm… before or after?” ;))
Now, Von Flores (Agent Sandoval, “Earth: Final Conflict”), he’s another story…
Esprix
**
Not being any kind of sociological or biological expert, I can only talk out loud regarding my own opinion.
I’m not sure that relegating homosexuality to merely a question of procreation is fair to homosexuality itself (after all, there’s a lot more to human relationships than just sex), but for the sake of this argument I can see why it would be. Given that, and given some studies I’ve seen, there is a very good reason Ma Nature has given us the gift of homosexuality - population control.
**
[tossing in my $0.02]
There is also the fact that homosexuals do reproduce, contrary to popular belief. You have several centuries of societal pressure for homosexuals to be in straight reltionships where they produce children, hence passing on their genetic material. Also, being homosexual doesn’t mean their is no drive to reproduce. Females need only a sperm donor and it’s not that strange for a male couple to seek out a surrogate mother. Or even for a lesbian couple and a gay couple to produce a child together.
Also, there are several theories that state if homosexuality is genetic, then it needs a enviromental trigger. So the genetic material can get passed on for several generations through heterosexual activity before there is a trigger.
I also like the idea of homosexuals as population control. Childless homosexual couples can contribute to society without producing additional resource consumers. That can have just as much value to the survival of the speciaes as producing offspring.
beakerxf wrote, re. a genetic basis for homosexuality:
True, they would have value to the survival of the species as a whole, but they would not contribute to the survival of their genes (including the hypothetical genes they have that made them homosexual).
This should apply a negative selection pressure to those genes and, theoretically, eventually drive them completely out of the population. (Then again, hemophilia should also have been driven out of the population by now by the same mechanism, so maybe I’m just pissing into the wind.)
Not if they’re contributing to the propogating of their genes by helping to care for their relatives. If Gay Uncle Joe can increase the chances of his brother’s kids surviving by helping to take care of them (since he has no kids of his own), his genes will be passed on, just not as directly. Perhaps a single non-breeder among ten related breeders can increase the chances of the children’s survival enough to ensure that enough kids make it that the non-breeder’s genes are passed on by proxy, even if s/he does not procreate.
Just out of idle curiosity, since all of you gay people are possessed with the inate ability to sense “one of your kind”, I was wondering if you could tell me definitively whether or not Ricky Martin is gay. And for all who are interested, he is at the top of my “who would you do if you went the other way” list, followed by Brad Pitt, and after that I really haven’t concerned myself, as it’s an entirely hypothetical list.
I’ll offer some thoughts on the evolutionary angle as well. How long, in relation to human history, has it been that homosexuals have been able to choose not to repropuce? Many years ago, in a more agrarian society, having children to help on the farm was indispensible for survival into old age. I think that the short timespan that most humans have been free to live without offspring has not been long enough to measurably affect anything. Evolution is, after all, a slow process.
I’m pretty curious about your first gay feelings when you were a kid. Who was your first schoolboy crush?
tracer, I’m certainly no sociobiologist, so I can’t address the facts of the issue with any authority. I think, however, that Gaudere certainly makes a good point - genes can be passed on by families as well as individuals of that family.
Another point I’d raise is that although there is some genetic/biological evidence as to the existence of homosexuality, it seems there is an equal amount of environmental factors influencing it as well. The combination of the two seem to be inextricably linked, so trying to figure out the biological reasons why homosexuality hasn’t been “bred out” might only be looking at half the equation. Like you said, hemophilia is still around, too, so obviously there are other factors at work than just the passing on of genes. Any biologists or geneticists in the house? 
waterj also makes a good point from an historical perspective. Up until just the past century or so, homosexuals did reproduce - it was just simply “the way things are done.” If you were working class, you married - period. If you were middle- or upper-class, you married, but dallied on the side. Either way, you married and had kids - that’s just the way it was in those societies. (We’re talking the majority - obviously some people didn’t.) And now that it’s ok not to get married, more and more gay men and lesbians are having kids anyway through artificial methods.
Genetic or not, it’s been around since the evolution of mammals and it’s going to be around as long as they are.
Esprix