And you’re an authority because? Fuck you. Even if that makes matt a slutty manwhore*, I’d still rather be around him than people like you. How many gay people do YOU know? H’uh? I know a hell of a lot of straights who sleep around. What does that prove-ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, you assboil!
Well, guess what? I’m a heterosexual, and I consider you all three.
Girlfriend, I said I’ve had sex more than 500 times in the last 6 years. Long term relationships can be useful like that. Not surprised you didn’t get it.
Guinastasia , well, I guess anyone who has had the time to post seventeen thousand times on a message board has the credentials to have their opinion matter.
matt_incl…500 sexual experiences with the very same person over the last six years or so…I’d say its time the two of you MARRIED.
Oh, yes… you can do it.
Go to Canada for the most formal and legal rite.
Go to Vermont or somewhere to get the civil union.
Go to an Episcopla church to have God Himself ‘bless’ it.
Of course, assboils shouldn’t speak at all.
TOLERANCE be damned!!!
There are just some folks who should never speak.
Their thinking is just not correct.
matt, I know you were talking to Laurie, but I forgot to put my disclaimer that you’re NOT a slutty manwhore.
Unless you want to be, or something.
Only on a good day, hon. 
Um, he is getting married, you dumb bint. Are you really so fucking stupid?
Wo wo wo… simmer down, babe. :o We haven’t popped the question yet. That’d be the Messrs. evil.
Nope. I’ll prove that at least some gays not only enjoy sex, but do so consensually. If there’s one of us, then your statement from above:
is senseless, since I can show that at least some homosexual sex is indeed consensual and enjoyable. Unless you simply refuse to believe me. But then I can play that game, too, and we can keep saying “Are not!” “Are too!” until our mothers call us home for supper.
Neither can you. On the other hand, if you read the threads, you can get the testimony of quite a few more gays than you already have- you claimed above to know a half-dozen or so. There are more than six gay posters in those threads.
But it’s not a numbers game. It’s a game of admitting that, while some homosexuals may attribute their sexuality to abuse in youth (and I, for one, have never met a gay person who claimed this, though I looked long and hard to see if it was the case for me), others see it as just a part of themselves which was always there. And that some homosexuals claim to never have been subject to sexual or other abuse that might cause what you describe. Homosexuals such as me.
What it is is a game of you admitting that you don’t know everything about homosexuality, and that talking to a few people you know who have been sexually abused is not in any way an authoritative sample of gay people, as a whole. That even if you’ve only met gay people who’ve been abused, there may exist homosexuals who haven’t.
That sexual contact between two men is not necessarily rape.
I conceed that it can be rape, and that if I a child is abused, he may grow into an adult with a lot of issues surrounding his sexuality.
Do you conceed that a child who has not been abused can grow into a young man with no big issues except the crush he’s got on a certain smart, attractive young man of his acquaintance? Or do you deny that I am such a person? I claim to be. You can either assume you know everything about homosexuals, and ignore what this very real young man is telling you right now, or you can dare to think that maybe the world is bigger than your field of view.
I’m gay. I’m not a rapist. I’ve never been sexually or physcially abused by my parents, or anyone else. I’ve had consensual sexual contact with a couple of differnet males, and enjoyed it.
Call me a liar, or admit that you don’t have complete knowledge of homosexuality.
And please retract your statement that homosexual sex can be neither conseuntual nor harmless.
You go on to address another poster:
He didn’t say that. He implied that he’d had sex five hundred times in six years. If he’s got a boyfriend, that could be twice every week with the same guy.
Well, here we are back to talking about the gays you know, who fit the worst stereotypes I’ve heard about how I must be quite nicely.
But, as I’ve shown (and you’ve so far not acknowledged), the gays you know are clearly not representative of all gays, which, if nothing else, I’d like you to understand from this discussion.
I, for one, would be very, very pleased to find someone to love for as long as they live. To become intimate with someone who means something to me, and to share my thoughts and my life with them. You can, again, either assume I’m lying to you, or believe that not all homosexuals are just in it to corrupt the morality of the world and rape as many straight guys as possible.
matt_mcl can tell you how he feels.
Hey, there are people out there with very surprising belief systems and interests. (I continually discover this as I read posts on this board.) I’ve never met gays with such an attitude, but perhaps they exist. Surely, they don’t account for all gays. And since your post is the first I’ve heard of such – no, actually, I’ve heard from religious figures before that all gays are like this, but they claimed to neither be gay nor to associate with gays – , I can only conclude that either they are rare, or they exist in large numbers, just not near me.
No matter what, they’re not ALL gays, since I know at least one (me), and almost surely several more (my gay friends) who aren’t like this.
I can’t help but hear you saying this like an interrogator telling me all of my accomplices have already confessed, to get me to admit my crimes. But, having nothing in common with what you describe, I have nothing to confess.
Since I am a homosexual, growing up in a world where I wasn’t told that such a thing existed until I was twelve or so, and where I’ve been constantly told it’s evil and destructive and an aberration of humanity, I’ve had no other way, really, to learn about it except by trying to analyse my own feelings without being overcome by the guilt and self-hatred that people with such self-assured views as yours told me I was supposed to feel, and by, finally, thankfully, meeting other gay people in real life and here on the boards, who I could see weren’t the monsters I’d been told they would be, and whose existence, along with my own and with a lot of soul-searching of my own, led me to realise that yes, it was okay to be gay, and no, those stereotypes aren’t true (or at least not universally true, as you claim them to be).
I don’t know what to consider you, Laurie. You argue like someone absolutely certain that the conclusions she has reached based on the few homosexuals you know are absolutely, uncompromisably true. You argue like someone who fully expects to be called names, perhaps even hopes to be to ‘prove’ your point right that the name-callers are irrational and guilty of what you accuse them of. You argue like someone who doesn’t realise that you can’t assume that every tree is a maple tree becasue all of the trees in your yard are maples. (In fact,you argue a lot like someone I met who was taking a bible quiz at my school a couple of months ago, and with whom I talked for three hours.) You argue like someone who had an opinion about homosexuality and used what they found in the world to support it, and now refuses to acknowledge evidence that you made an over-generalization.
What I do know is this: You do not understand homosexuality even close to fully. For while you may indeed know homosexuals who are promiscuous, snickering, victims of abuse, there surely – as surely as I can type this – exist homosexuals who are not these things. Homosexuals who are decent, healthy, kind, intelligent people. Homosexuals who want out of live what most people want - a chance to live, a chance to love, a chance to be who they are.
But you reject this out of hand, and give the impression that you came here with yur mind made up. You reject the possiblity that you might learn something from Ask The Gay Guy, and you may even reject my description of who I am. You appear to me to be stubborn. And you are most certainly ignorant. Ignorant of the possiblity that gays can be as I have described them: worthwhile, loving people. Ignorance is no sin; I too am ignorant of many things, and was once ignorant of the real nature of gay people.
But persistence in falsehood, even given clear information to contradict it, is stubborn and insupportable.
I ask you once again: Do you accept that there exist gay people who enjoy consensual, non-harmful sex, and who are gay by nature, and not as a result of past abuse or trauma?
And further, do you retract this statement:
D’oh, my bad, sorry. Guess I just got caught up in the flaming.
The existence of sexuality and a sex drive is also an innate characteristic. :wally
Well, everybody can contribute. What’s remarkable about Guinastasia’s posting history is that, even though it is long, she manages to have been pretty consistenly sensible the whole time, from what I’ve seen. My experience with you, though, has been trying to show you that because all the people in your neighbor’s house are blonde, there’s still a chance that when a redhead tells you redheads exist, that redheads exist, without having been forcibly dye-raped in their youth.
I really hope I haven’t been wasting my time.
I’m glad to see you’ve come around, and are now willing to be so helpful to matt. I think he already knew about these, though. Glad to see you’re keeping yourself informed on the promising progress of equality for gays in the world. A G7 country, a major Christian denomination… boy, it seems like people are really starting to realise that gays aren’t all mentally defective gang-rapist hellspawn.
Now, here’s where we disagree. Everybody has a right to say thier peace. In fact, if they take the time to do so – especially after thinking things through – it can be very helpful to everyone. Ideas get shared, ignorance is fought. No one’s told you to shut up, though they did tell you your ideas are foolish, and that you might just be for stubbornly holding to insistance that since you’ve never seen a lion, only housecats make up genus Felis.
Well, someone who assumes that since all the muslims on the news are terrorists, islam is a terrorist creed is surely making some logical errors in their thinking. In fact, I’d say that they’re thinking is incorrect.
Of course, if they have the sense to see their error when it’s pointed out to them, and adapt to the world as they learn more about it, then no harm done.
If they keep assuming that all people with hair are blonde, even when a redhead tells them that’s not true, if Sept 11th 2001 was proof enough for them of the terrorist chapters of the Koran, then yeah, their thinking is wrong, and they’re not contributing much to the discussion but demonstrably false opinions, are they?
Why do you :wally me? That’s exactly what I said in my post. The sexuality isn’t the problem because it’s innate. The problem is the expression. Now, after getting some help from the kind volunteers at the literacy program of your local library, read through my posts again.
UnuMondo
I still think you’re a putz. Homosexuality is a category of human sexuality.
It’s like chocolate ice cream and strawberry ice cream. They’re different, but they’re both ice cream. Homosexuality and heterosexuality are both expressions of human sexuality (there is more than just one kind, you know).
Homosexuals don’t just have gay thoughts, they have a gay sensibility and sexuality; they are attracted to the same sex in every sense of the word. To deny gays gay sex is to deny them the possibility of having satisfying sex, period. That is what makes “seperating the sinner from the sin” monstrous and disingenuous.
I wouldn’t get too heated up. After all, Unu has yet to tell us why it is that homosexual sex is harmful or shameful; nor has Laurie demonstrated how it is that homosexual sex is non-consensual.
I’m pretty sure Laurie doesn’t actually know a single, solitary gay man. The odds that she actually managed to come into contact with six of the worst stereotypes of gays that one can manage to come up with, and only those six, are much smaller than the odds that she’s lying through her teeth.
What are they compared to the odds that she’s right about gays, and all the gays on this board are making their stories up? Or the odds that she unwittingly knows plenty of closeted gays who are afraid to tell her?
I’ve figured it out!
Laurie and **UnuMondo **are both acquaintances of this guy Hamish used to know, who accused every man he ever had sex with (and there were plenty) of raping him.
He must be the only authentic representative of homosexuality and gay people everywhere! And here we thought he was just an asshole.
Well I guess, once again, that the incredibly statistical ‘anomaly’ of the homosexuals I have had discourse with are the ‘kinds’ of homosexuals which are in the minority.
The homosexuals YOU have concourse with are:
DECENT
HEALTHY
KIND, and
INTELLIGENT …while…
the half dozen I have spoken with, know and ‘claim’ (of course) to know hundreds of others, are, ALTERNATIVELY :
INDECENT
UN-HEALTHY **UN-KIND, ** …annndddddd…
(taaa daaa) UN - INTELLLIGGEEEENT!!!
A couple of them are my relatives.
One a lesbian. One a homosexual.
Both intensely politically active.
You must be freakin’ NUTZ to ascribe homophobia to all people who think sex with the same gender is strange and unnatural and wrong.
Through my homosexual relatives I have the privilege of knowing the histories (as a conglomerate) of many, many homosexuals.
ASSBOIL (according to GUINISTASTIA) …tough darts.
According to my lesbian friends…they think male homosexuals are too strident, have “…too much testosterone…” think females are ‘lesser’ sexual beings…and, therefore, lesser altogether…
Even in the world of male and female homosexuals who fight against the heterosexual ‘norm’ - males and females have very, VERY great ‘issues’ with one another.
TREMMIE –
Many people condemn not homosexuals but homosexual acts. This may seem artificial to you, but it is an important distinction to them. So it is only true that condemning homosexual sex is condemning homosexuals if all you are is the sex you have.
MATTMCL –
I agree with this 100%. My point – and my only point – is that so long as they are not using it as a weapon, this one belief – without more – does not a homophobe make. Or, if it does, no one has been able to explain to me why.
OTTO, being black or handicapped is a condition beyond the control of the person – as for that matter is being gay. None of them are condemned by the people I’m talking about, who consider gay sex (a voluntary action) to be immoral. So these remain bad examples. Christianity would be a better one if you similarly concentrated on a voluntary action and judged the morality of it. Like, say, declaring that it is your belief that telling people they are damned to hell is immoral. Which, y’know, go ahead. And, again, once the belief is translated into an attitude or action that produces negative effects, it certainly is worth your attack and scorn, if only for self-defense. Using this moral belief to insist on depriving gay people of equal rights would obviously be a good example of that.
ELFJE, see above re: distinguishing between gay people and gay sex. Most Christian denominations (non-lunatic fringes) that refuse to admit the morality of gay sex nevertheless affirm the worth of gay people. Is there a disconnect there? Sure. But that’s the general party line.
BIANARYDRONE –
Their preference, sure. But acting on that preference is the thing that many people still consider wrong – and that is a distinction they draw. It seems to me to be unavailing for either side to insist that the other side must agree with them – “you gay people must believe that gay sex is immoral;” “you religious people holding this belief must beling that gay sex is not immoral.” I certainly see that gay people do not cast the issue in terms of morality – as why should they? But there appears to be very few willing to admit (at least around here) that some people do see this issue in terms of morality; that they have the right to do so; and that they are not necessarily raging homophobes if that’s all you know about them.
Well, I have no quarrel with this, except to the extent that I think (as I have said before) that gay people have neither the numbers, money, or clout to force a social sea change – to “take” it, as you put it. And until they have the ability to do that, the attitude “anyone who thinks gay sex is wrong is a priori a homophobe who should be disdained” strikes me as counter-productive, to say the least. But this is not my cause, so if that’s how gay people think they can best work for equality and respect, okay.
LAURIE –
This is so true. Of course, you are Exhibit A for why this is true, so endeavor to keep your yap shut. Though I admire your skill in typing with your head so far up your ass.
And let me tell you how unamused I am to be doing my best to make what is IMO a reasonable and rational point – and a very limited point – only to have some ignorant knuckledragging fucktard such as yourself weigh in on what some would – WRONGLY! – assert is “my” side. Believe me when I tell you, that I stand firmly with MATT, ESPRIX, GOBEAR, MR VISIBLE, UNA, and every other intelligent gay person on these Boards in condemning and deriding you and yours. Because I’d sure as hell rather be gay and smart and decent, than straight and stupid and mean. God forbid – God forbid – I have anything in common with you.
Anyway, I think – hope – my point has been made. Though in case it hasn’t, I will make it for the very last time. This is what I am saying and this is all I am saying: If people hold the belief that gay sex is immoral, but they are in every other way people of good will who do not hold a hostile or contemptuous attitude about gay people, and who do not in any way treat them differently or unequally, or attempt in any was to discriminate against them, then it is wrong (and counterproductive) to label them all as homophobes or evil.
That’s all I’m saying. Best wishes to everyone who has participated in this discussion with good will and respect. 
Every Jewish person I know, all 6 of them, are Communists, use the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a handbook for world domination, eat Christian babies at Seder, and bathe in the blood of martyred ministers and priests.
But I’m not anti-Semitic…