OK, so he wanted designers to start making sexier outfits for women? Man, Pat was a woman full of patience.
Having meme-ninjaed you both by 12 hours, I’ll take the hit today.
OK, so he wanted designers to start making sexier outfits for women? Man, Pat was a woman full of patience.
Having meme-ninjaed you both by 12 hours, I’ll take the hit today.
Found it, it is titled Nixon by Nixon, it is playing on HBO in Canada, attached is a New York Times article on the documentary.
Y’know, he does have a point that fashions for women should be designed by people who have an appreciation for female beauty, at least if the women in question are intending to look sexy (which of course won’t always be the case).
And gay men somehow can’t have an appreciation for female beauty or what makes a woman look sexy?
You don’t think straight men have a better feel for female attractiveness? I think gay men are in fashion so they can be around women in a non-threatening way.
I don’t know how to begin responding to this. It would be helpful if you stated what you think as a positive statement rather than as a negative question.
I suspect your premises are flawed. I have seen enough interaction between gay men and women to know that it is quite common for gay men to have a very keen interest in the female body and their ideas of attractiveness or sexiness.
I don’t even understand what this means. Outside the fashion industry, women find gay men threatening?
Only because their Magical Orbs of Power are useless against them.
Not sure if I can parse this, but MAYBE, he means that straight men can tolerate gay men around “their” women in the context of the fashion industry, because, in that context, the gay men are not threatening.
Or maybe he means that, in the context of the fashion industry, gay men do not feel threatened by being around women.
Or maybe none of the above, and the intended meaning of the statement is so convoluted that I’ll never unravel it in a million years.
This could be just the break the Romney campaign has been waiting for.
My second statement is gibberish, sorry. I have minimal experience hanging out with gay men, even less with fag hags.
Kayla-Your 1st guess is what I was driving at.
I can’t say I really “hang out with gay men.” They’re just part of society now, or, rather, in some places they have become so. I don’t think know a whole lot of gay men, but I guess I don’t know what “a lot” is these days.
In my experience, many gay men (to the extent that they’re exclusively gay), are quite interested in women’s bodies and how they look and how they present themselves, and what makes them sexy—and they can be quite appreciative of things like breasts and butts.
It doesn’t seem like they need to want to have sex with a woman to be able to have opinions about them, and to me, anyway, their opinions don’t seem to be qualitatively differentiated from my opinions any more than my opinions are different from the opinions of other straight men.
Some gay men seem entirely uninterested in women’s bodies. Those are the ones that also seem uninterested in fashion.
“Fag hag” is a somewhat outdated concept and one that is rather a stereotype to begin with.
YAAAAYYYYY! Go ME!
By the way, JFTR, I’m not Kayla, I’m the dad. Kayla’s dad.
I wonder if Rysdad has to keep explaining this kind of thing.
OK, this isn’t what I would have expected, though I suppose I might be wrong. I’m interested in feminine attributes because I’m attracted to them, and considerably less interested in masculine attributes because I’m not attracted to them, and I had assumed that gay men would share the same pattern of being interested in what they’re attracted to.