Gay men and women ..................?

Strange title, but this is what I mean:
I have the impression that many gay men are interested in women in their own way. They seems to love beautiful women with stylish clothes. They also seems to be very interested in making fashion for women, and most gays have women as “gay icons”.

I’m not sure, but maybe gay men deep inside are interested in women after all.
Maybe they had a very (too) romantic view on women when they where kids or something.

I also have the impression that many hetrosexual couples have problems with their relations because they have to romantic view about being lovers etc.

I would like the hear some other views on this ?

:wink:Please try to keep my other post outside this post

Orion wrote:

So do many heterosexual women, judging from the covers of Vogue and Cosmopolitan.

Tracer

:slight_smile:

Orion said:

And you know this because you’ve done a poll to see what most gays think, right? Or because of the extensive time you’ve spent with gay men?

I do? Wow…you know me better than I know myself Orion. </sarcasm>

Well… Great oafs from little icons grow.

I keep clicking on the gay icons, but “Explorer” opens when I do. Should I take this as a sign?

It’s ignore and hyjack time, folks!

Considering the recent shake-ups in major league baseball, who do you think has a chance at greatness? Personally, using only logic and reason, I think that my Cubbies are going AllTheWay!!

Yesterday on my way home from dinner, I saw a sign stapled to a utility pole that said:

“Gently Loved Children’s Sale”

The gently loved children are having a sale? Someone’s selling gently loved children? What?

Yes. :smiley:

Esprix


Ask the Gay Guy!

HAAAAAAAAAAA!!! <snort . . . giggle . . .twitch>

OK, Slythe, you just keep on believing that, pal . . . :smiley:

-andros-

Phouka:

“Gently Loved” is a euphemism for “used”. They were selling old kids’ stuff. I think I’m going to start using that when I pass 40. "I’m not old–I’m just ‘gently loved.’

Ah, come on. If UFOs and all-powerful gods are possible, couldn’t a World Series winning Cubs be possible?

Some things are beyond omnipotence, Slythe. :stuck_out_tongue:

Dex wrote:

I thought the plural of oaf was “oaves”.

cher3:

So they’re selling “used” children?

I was going to use quantum physics to prove that it was possible for the Cubs to come out on top this year(hell, it’s used for every other silly notion!), but I just recieved a restraining order from Stephen Hawkings. He says it’s one thing to use it to explain u.f.o’s, but I was going WAY over the line! :slight_smile:

That reminds me of a commercial for a “Race for Children” or something like that. I couldn’t help getting a mental image of a bunch of people chasing down helpless children.

Speaking of “gently loved children”, who could forget this McDonald’s commercial in which they annonced that they were going to donate some proceeds to a children’s charity:

(To the tune of Old McDonald Had a Farm)

Go to McDonalds and buy large fries
Yum yum yum yum yum
And twenty-five cents goes to help some kids
Yum yum yum yum yum!