Well, as small as the chance is of me growing up (VANISHINGLY small chance of that as my wife could tell you), there is more of a chance there than of you somehow becoming a thoughtful and coherent poster…
-XT
Hey fuck you with a rooto-rooter pal.
Yeah. Why does anyone engage with gonzomax? Complete waste of time.
Starving Artist? Solid defense of an argument? Are we talking about the same person?
Relative to gonzomax? Absolutely.
It was very, very clearly a joke.
??
It. was. a. joke.
Clue # 1 I’m from Michigan, too.
To be fair, those two sentences of gonzo’s were coherent. As for thoughtful, hey one step at a time.
I think the standard for solid here is just, “takes more effort to debunk than clicking his link and finding out it’s totally unrelated/contradicts him/porn”.
This forum is the one that allows posters to reveal themselves. Petty snipping and childish remarks are allowed here. The little children taking pot shots are throwing light on who they are. It is petty . Do you kiddies thinking more highly of yourselves after such ignorant remarks? I feel sorry for you. I quit crap like that when I was a teen. People who revel in this stuff are so small. Little tiny people.
God, that’s so faggy.
gonzomax, you and I disagree pretty frequently (at least about sports), but leaving that aside- do you have any idea why people are upset at what you wrote?
Because they’re fags?
Okay, all else being equal, that IS why the OP (me) is upset. 
Very succint, Cervaise!
Thank you for seeing the difference. I can be incoherent with my posts at times, (even though I guarantee I spend more time trying to make them ‘readable’ than most posters here spend), but that doesn’t make me ignorant on all fronts.
I honestly don’t think he does. And I despair at making him understand. The fact that he, the man who chooses his vocabulary based on what middle-schoolers are saying, just posted a paragraph calling everyone criticizing him childish, pretty much demonstrates that his narcissism filter is drowning everyone else out.
And yet you admit to using a derogatory term because it’s in vogue with young people…and you aren’t grown up enough to simply admit you said something stupid and apologize for it.
As for the rest…it’s too bad you didn’t quit tossing around potentially hurtful remarks such as those displayed by the OP when you ‘quit crap like that when’ you were a teen. Teens say hurtful and derogatory things because they are full of hormones and are pretty stupid and clueless…adults (which presumably you are) should know better. Unless they are simply incapable of learning, as you have repeatedly shown yourself to be.
On the point of feeling sorry for me and/or the rest of the board, my feeling is you should save that for yourself.
-XT
And I very, very clearly allowed for that possibility.
If you look at the dogs . Then see the term I used. You would see where the connection is. It says absolutely nothing about gays. But since the dog hair treatment can be described in those terms, it makes it clear that there is an understanding that a segment of the gays has an identifiable style . Some non gays also like the style. TV shows are built around this concept of style that gays are identified with. Non gays are taught style and dress from gays. That would imply that there is a clearly identifiable “gay style”. I see the dogs cuts as belonging to that subset of the gay culture.
I have zero prejudice toward gays. People are people. Sexual orientation is nobodies business.
Everybody understands the connection: you said the dog haircuts look effeminate and silly and described that as “faggy.” It’s also not hard to understand why gay posters object to being associated with that, however.
I have no idea if the owners of the dogs in those pictures were gay or straight. You apparently felt you did, and further, you didn’t say gay, you used a term regarded as offensive.
Your choice of words and the stereotype you showed says different.
It’s. The. Words.
There may be a clearly identifiable “gay style” (though that’s a hill I refuse to die on in this thread). But to use the words “faggy” and “fagified” to describe it denotes an entire universe of complete non-understanding of what it is to be gay in our society. I’ve connected those words with the equivalent words about other groups multiple times in this thread. And you’ve shrugged that equivalence off. You don’t get to do that. Sorry.