Here in my little suburb of Lakewood,Ohio guys go around hand-in-hand all the time(really,they never let go! 
Its apparently a gay-friendly town, thats why earlier I said I haven’t seen much discrimination. I haven’t.
I knew a guy who used to flirt with apparently straight guys, like saying Nice Butt!
Nothing ever happened to him, though.
Quite well, thank you. My boyfriend just found out he’ll be spending the next 3 years doing his residency here in Philadelphia, so now it’s up to me to decide if I stay and continue to date him or chuck it all and move to San Diego - either way, I think life will be the better for it. I continue slaving away at a temp job because it pays well, but my options are open, as soon as I figure out what to do with the rest of my life! My father is home from the hospital and doing well, and my family will finally be celebrating Christmas this coming Sunday. Family’s fine, friends are true… what more could a boy ask for? 
Thanks for asking!
Esprix
Dear Gay Guy:
Here in Vermont, the civil union bill was just past, which gives gays and lesbians the right to enter into a situation that is sort-of-like-marriage, but just different enough to shut up the “God People.” If you met someone, fell madly in love (the whole “I want to spend the rest of my life with you”) would you relocate to the Tundra State? Keep in mind that there are, on average, 155 days in a year where the temperature is below 32 degrees F.
Signed
-The Straight Chick Who Cut Her Hair And Therefore is Now Assumed By Her Extended Family to Be The Gay Chick.
Allow me to assure you that your town is in the minority, but look on the bright side - I bet it’s got a fabulous theatre district! The only places I’ve ever seen men or women holding hands in public are in the “gay parts of town,” sometimes known as “the ghetto” - Hillcrest in San Diego, Spruce Street in Philadelphia, duPont Circle in DC, etc.
Well that’s good! Some guys have the balls to flirt with people they’re not sure of, some don’t. Again, at least for me and my friends, it has to do with the comfort level of the surroundings they’re in at the moment.
I have two friends who had once made a decision to always give each other a peck on the cheek whenever they said goodbye. Their resolve was put to the test when they were the only two white guys at a subway stop crammed with blacks. They did kiss goodbye… and nothing happened, not even a snicker or a dirty look. We may not always feel comfortable, but that doesn’t always mean we’re in unsafe territory. Me, I try to be myself wherever I am, but I am always aware of my surroundings, and it does factor into my behavior.
Esprix
Actually, the civil union bill just passed the House, and is going on to the Senate and the Governor, both of whom are expected to pass it. I posted the details in the “Domestic Partnerships” thread in Great Debates.
And, you assume I haven’t asked someone to marry me. I did, last year - he lives in Canada. Sadly, he has not taken me up on the offer, and I’ve been dating someone else since then, so who knows if/when it will happen…
However, assuming it did, would I move to Vermont? No, although I am rather fond of Boston, and I live in Philadelphia, so the northeast is not unfamiliar to me. It seems to me that this is the first step in establishing similar legislation in most states, so eventually it will be available, if not at least recognized in other states. (California, for example, as a domestic partnership registry, but it does not go nearly as far as the Vermont legislation.) Also, gay couples have done without civil unions, marriages or domestic partnerships for decades, so most will simply continue to do so, but no doubt there will be some that will pilgrimage to Vermont, if not to live there then at least to get the document (if they can - I’m not sure what the residency requirements will be in order to get hitched).
I know I’m greatly looking forward to the next few months to see what happens.
Esprix
Esprix writes:
A search of Vermont’s statutes online turns up no residency requirement that I could find. The closest thing I could find is
Indicating that someone could legally cross the border into Vermont, go to any county clerk’s office and get the license. However, as far as whether a “civil union” license would be issued to out-of-staters, I find:
Since the idea behind “civil unions” is that they be identical to marriage under the laws of the state, my opinion would be that a couple entering Vermont from any state which does not recognize civil unions would be unable to register the union. There is in my mind a question as to what other states would be required to do under the Full Faith and Credit clause were a united couple registered in Vermont to move to another state. Eventually some couple in VT will move out of the state and attempt to assert their rights as a united couple in their new state. Will the court in the new state recognize the partnership as equivalent to marriage? Will the court recognize the partnership but, with no parallel civil union statutes outside the state, declare it without legal force? Or just ignore the union altogether? What do you suppose would happen if one half of one of these unions moved out of state and tried to marry an other-sex partner? IMHO these and other questions will serve as impetus for the VT supreme court to rule that the civil union law does not fulfill its mandate that same-sex couples be granted equal marital rights.
The climate being what it is here, the fact that it passed in the House means that it will pass in the Senate, and while Howard Dean (Governor) is a homophobic ass-face, he has claimed to be in favor of civil unions from the beginning.
The problem I foresee with the out-of-state thing is that many states have passed a “marriage is between a man and a woman” laws. I don’t know how that would effect a civil union, but I do know Vermont is fairly liberal, and the reaction to the ruling has caused the bigots to come out of the woodwork. My roommate is talking about moving out of state because she can’t deal with the hate that has emerged.
And Esprix: I simply meant “If you and the partner of your choice chose to enter into a legally binding act of couplehood…” not that you couldn’t find someone.
Sorry to have been away for so long. Uh, who is our first caller? Weirddave? OK, go ahead weirddave…
Well, it all depends on the women, but in my experience, fingers and tongue are usually preferred over faux-phallus sex toys. Toys are plastic, are often hard, and don’t always warm up to your body temperature. In addition, with digital penetration, it is usually possible to tell when you’re hurting your partner. Things just don’t feel right. Not so with toys. Finally, speaking for myself, I really don’t need to be penetrated that far. The most sensitive areas are always near the opening. On the other hand, phallic toys definitely have their place in role-play and S/M-type activities, if you’re into that. In short, yes, it does happen, but not as often as the porn industry would have us believe. I’d rather be penetrated by a natural part of the anatomy, which brings us rather nicely to caller number two. Go ahead, Rectangle…
As before, it all depends on the woman. I don’t really find men all that attractive, but there have been exceptions, some of whom I have wound up in bed with. I have to say, penises are really fun to play with. Also, I have discovered that I actually like the taste of sperm. Go figure. Anyway, it has to be with the right guy. It’s been a while since I’ve gotten laid, and I know I could have my pick of virtually any guy on campus, but I just haven’t been inspired to do anything drastic yet. That’s how I feel about it, aanyway, I don’t claim to speak for every woman of the Sapphic persuasion on the planet. There are those who find sex with men to be a revolting concept. I used to be one, in fact, but I’ve since found out differently. I hope this answers your question.
Any more questions? I’ll try to answer them faster this time…
Heck is where you go when you don’t believe in Gosh.
Okay, I’ll probably get yelled at for asking, but when it comes to these stereotypes (BTW, I hate making generalizations, but I wanna know what you guys–and gals–think) how many are true?
#1) Are gay men really neater than most people?
#2) Are gay men really that into fashion?
#3) Do you really get a free toaster for every twenty straights that you recruit to your side? (kidding! :))
#4) How many toasters have you each gotten already?
#5) Wouldn’t you rather get a free coffee maker?
#6) Does it drive you nuts when us straight people ask stupid questions? It does? Okay, I’ll stop it, then.
Pffft, not me.
Pffft, not me, although the gay community does seem to be more body-conscious, and therefore more “what makes me look hot” conscious (remember, when you’re talking about gay men, the key word is men, which means double the ego and double the sexual hunger, so double the wanting to look good to get some, which is, of course, stereotyping men as well as gay men, but I see it often enough). And is it just me, or are black men more fashion-conscious than most other straight men? Personally, I think it’s suave…
No, it’s every fifty… hey! How did you find out about that? Damn that Ellen!
I’m sorry, Senator, I don’t recall the answer to that question… {whistles nonchalantly}
Yech, I hate coffee.
There’s no such thing as a stupid question, if it’s meant sincerely. Besides, if I didn’t want to answer questions, would I have started this thread in the first place?
Esprix
It has now passed the Senate judiciary committee, which I believe means it’s one vote and a sig away from passage.
Wasn’t his quote something like “gay marriage makes me uncomfortable, just like everyone else”? Jerk.
Assuming Vermont issues CU certs to out-of-staters (and it looks like they are actively discouraging people from coming to VT just for the certs), the mini-DOMAs will certainly be in their home state’s arsenal when the inevitable lawsuit happens. IMHO each DOMA law is unconstitutional at least to the extent that it bans legal recognition of marriages done out of state, but again, with no similar CU structure in any other state, the easiest course of action for the state would be to “recognize” the existence of the CU but deny any legal benefit or responsibility to the united couple because of that lack of structure.
Otto quoted Vermont statutes ch. 18 sec. 5131 as saying:
In a same-sex union, which one is the bride and which is the groom?
Do you like beer?
Oh aren’t you cute. The language of the CU bill is gender-neutral.
In that case, will any of the existing Vermont marriage statutes apply to the new same-sex union laws at all?
Language in the CU bill requires that any statute which applies to married couples must apply equally to “united” couples. I haven’t read the bill itself; my understanding is it’s a pretty simple document. It creates the CU registry, it mandates equal treatment for united partners and married partners and I think it contains some pointless clause about marriages being between man and woman only. Which raises an interesting (to me) question. What if another state legalized same-sex marriage, called it marriage and everything? Would Vermont recognize it as a “civil union”?
Picking up points as they occur to me:
-
can prostate stimulation by itself cause an ejaculation? - yesohyesohyes!
-
can habitual anal intercourse cause permanent damage to the natural functions? I think perhaps it can - I’ve met people from time to time with various anal disfunctions - including cancer - which they ascribe to the practice. But I must admit that I don’t have any way of knowing whether this was actually so.
-
charm of the theatre? another one that rings true at least to me is the “ride pagliacci” (oh go on, say it - “opera queen”) element and more generally the whole business of masks and pretence, although maybe this has less resonance as it becomes easier to be an out gay.
From a PlanetOut news article about the bill:
Bolding is mine. So, yes, those statues relating to marriage will be amended. Check out the “domestic partners” thread for the whole article.
Esprix
Constitutionality aside, from a legal perspective it seems to me they wouldn’t be obligated to, as CU’s provide the exact same coverage as a marriage would. But an interesting thought…
Esprix
As stated elsewhere in the thread, it is possible by some, but it’s not the majority.
Anal intercourse does not cause cancer. As far as I know, I would say only long-term and continuous habit would cause any ill effects. I have posed the question to Dr. Boyfriend, and will let you know what his thoughts are, as he is a sexual minorities health professional.
I think it’s just because it’s grand and fabulous, myself, but I can’t speak for all theatre queens. Besides, I’m a musician, so I get off on it…
Esprix