Where was that argument made, exacxtly?
As noted above, your own personal experience is with guys who have been convicted of sex crimes. The pertinence of which is underwhelming.
I am not sure you *have *shown that, but it was never in dispute, your bullshit claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
No anger here, and the mirror is never my friend, but I will stick around while you find that cite for me putting forth such a theory.
Gotta go, but I will be checking back in. Good luck!
Re addicts and addictive behavior…don’t people usually minimize the behavior when relating it to anyone, especially authority figures? I thought with alcoholics (and we need the medical expertise of QtM here) that you automatically double whatever amount they admit to. You multiply it by some percentage, anyway. So, if they say they drink 6 beers a day, make that 12 etc.
Why wouldn’t this apply to Haggard? I don’t know much about crystal meth, but I know it’s incredibly addicting. Is it likely he only does it once a month? This is speculation, but the likelihood of it is in question for me. He may well have been “in control” for now and was outed before he spiralled down, but I wonder about his intake and his trips to see Bruce or whoever–once a month sounds to regimented and infrequent for an exercise in self-loathing to me. I am not a psychologist/therapist etc–just seen a whole lot of addicted people in my time as an RN.
I think it’s the official membership card and decoder ring.
When the only thing we know about someone is that he visited a male prostitute, and you conclude from that one fact that he is gay, it seems obvious to me that you are saying that visiting male prostitutes makes you gay. However, you don’t want to actually discuss my point, that being that someone could go to a male prostitute and not be gay, so you resort obfuscatory semantics, angry attacks, and distorting what I said. It’s an unfortunate trend I’ve noticed here in the pit, if you don’t like the point someone is making, focus all the attention anywhere else you can besides the actual point.
No, what’s pertinent is that I know guys that have visited male prostitutes and yet are not at all attracted to men (hence, to me, they’re not gay.) But you don’t want to talk about that point, do you, because it doesn’t match your theory.
And the toaster. It’s not official till you get the toaster.
No, we think that someone who visits the same male prostitute over and over and over for years means you’re gay. I agree in general that behavior isn’t enough to determine orientation; there are plenty of gay people who have had straight sex, some a whole lot of it. But it’s also not totally irrelevant, and there is a point at which the meter tips firmly in the gay direction.
A lot of the problem is this idea of sexuality as rigid and binary, of course. To me, what’s obvious is not that he’s gay, but he’s “bi” to at least some degree. I don’t see why we should reject the evidence of the wife and kids entirely any more than we should reject the evidence of the boyfriend-for-pay.
Shirley, at what point do you feel it is possible to say with confidence that a person is gay? Is it only when they claim to be?
What I’m still not understanding is what does this matter? Yeah, it’s theoretically possible that the man is straight but he just likes to screw men from time to time, but I fail to see why that alters the discussion any. The hypocrisy factor is still there. So is the depravity factor. Those who are predisposed to hating man-on-man action will be disgusted by Haggard’s way of expressing his urges, whether they believe he’s fundamentally straight or gay. So I fail to see why we must entertain the notion that he might be straight.
He also might be an atheist who just pretends to be an evangelical Christian. He also might be transgendered and actually not psychologically a gay male but rather a straight female. Should we entertain these notions, too? Or should we just make things simple and makes a few reasonable assumptions based on his behavior?
In other words, your claim that I have made that argument is unsupported in fact.
You continue to insist that sole fact is the only one deemed relevant, despite copious evidence to the contrary.
No has has contested the point that it is possible to go to a gay prostitute and be straight, yet bale by bale you build that strawman.
Your charge of anger is unsupported.
Please cite the obfuscatory semantics.
And here is a hint. When you are asked to justify a claim such as this "
"You made a foolish argument (all men who go to male prostitutes are gay)"
It helps your case if you can find a specific example of such a claim being made, rather than just stating that it seems obvious to you. Else you find yourself open to a charge of bullshit.
What theory? That Haggard is attracted to men? How is your point pertinent to that? How many of those guys were the head of a religious organization 30 million strong? How many of them campaigned against gay rights? How many of them cruised gay bars looking for converts? How many of them continued to deny their guilt after the verdict was in? What percentage og convicted sex offenders, such as your sample set, regularly lie to their parole officers?
And finally, do you intend to answer any of the other questions I have asked?
Just because someone is gay doesn’t make him a gay expert.
I’m heterosexual so does that qualify me as a heterosexual expert ?
If so, based on the evidence so far I’d say Haggard is heterosexual.
He’s got 5 kids and given his wife’s religion and her support, I don’t think he had to get himself drunk to have penetrating sexual relations.
On the other hand, it appears drugs were required for him to achieve sexual satisfaction with a man. Most likely his wife refused to give blow jobs. Its not hard for me to believe that men are technically better at giving blow jobs than women. Furthermore, you don’t need a full erection before commencing sex orally.
And then of course there are those who are bisexual.
I’d say that when a person is sexually attracted to the same sex, they are gay. For some people, who they are attracted to and who they have sex with are not necessarily the same. It makes more sense to talk about who they are attracted to rather than who they actually screw. For example, if a priest is attracted solely to males, but never has sex with anyone, is he gay? I say yes.
A lot of people who identify as gay have, for various reasons having nothing to do with sexual attraction, had sex with members of the opposite sex. Nobody seems to have much of a problem acknowledging that the person is in fact gay, regardless of how much straight sex they may have had. Turn that assertion the other way though, and state that people that identify as straight have, for various reasons having nothing to do with sexual attraction, had sex with members of the same sex, and suggest that maybe that person isn’t gay, and people lose their minds, as evidenced in this thread. Maybe it has something to do with heterosexual sex being viewed as the “norm,” and homosexual sex being viewed as “deviant.” It’s a lot easier to accept that someone with “deviant” attractions would cross over to the “normal” side for whatever reason.
You claimed that Haggard is gay. The only possible piece of evidence upon which you could possibly have based that assumption is the fact that he visited a male prostitute. Anybody giving an honest reading to your posts would assume that you are stating that he is gay because he went to a male prostitute. There is absolutely no other way to take it. Now you are crowing because you never actually said the exact words that I said you said (there’s your cite for obfuscatory semantics.) Congratulations. You’ve managed to completely change the focus off of your bullshit theory and onto the fact that I paraphrased you.
Your theory that he is gay. I have shown that your sole piece of evidence for this assertion is not necessarily evidence that he is gay.
None of this is pertinent to the discussion. Although I will note that their sexual histories were all backup up by polygraph examinations.
What I gather from this thread is that this crystal meth stuff makes you wanna fuck guys but you are really straight when you’re straight. Thus you’re not gay.
Got it? Neither did I. But just in case I’ll stick to scotch and the occasional doobie.
It’s a very good reason, though, not just whatever. Heterosexuality is in fact the “norm”, and so there’s considerable impetus to pick it up, go with the flow, try to pass. There is no such impetus in the case of a free man seeking out gay sex. What is his motivation if not…gay sex? There’s a huge risk to himself, presumably a ton of guilt involved due to his faith – many barriers that don’t exist for gay people who have straight sex. The only possible argument is that he’s addicted to sex, or compulsive. He may in fact be mentally ill, but it seems a stretch. Like face says, he may be many things, but the most likely is queer.
Gay people who get married to the opposite sex before coming out are not rare, and neither are straight people who have gay experiences but remain straight. But truly-straight people who visit other cities for several years to pay for secret gay sex with the same person are very rare.
You suck one lousy dick and everyone thinks you’re gay…
In other words, you’re talking completely out your ass. We know that Haggard has had sex with precisely one man in the last three years. We have no evidence that he’s slept with other men. We have no evidence that he’s a sexual addict. For that matter, we have no evidence that he’s really an Al Qaeda spy, planted to discredit decadent American religious institutions. Because we have no evidence of any of these claims, it’s pretty silly to assert them as legitimate possibilities. You don’t have any evidence for your claim that he’s straight and a sex addict. For that matter, what evidence we do have, actually contradicts the idea that he’s a sex addict, as sex addicts do not patronize the same prostitute over and over for three years. In fact, his behavior argues pretty strongly against the sort of lack of control you ascribe to sex addicts.
Yes, we’ve all been reading it. That’s how we’ve been able to point out the gaping holes in your reasoning. Any time you feel like addressing these holes, feel free to jump right in.
And God knows, nobody ever lies to their probation officer. Or lies about their sex lives, for that matter. So anything a criminal tells his probation officer about his sex life clearly must be the unvarnished truth.
Now me, I’m not a probation officer, so I don’t have your naturally trusting demeanor. A guy tells me that he’s straight, but that he can’t stop having sex with men… well, I gotta question the accuracy of his self-diagnosis.
No, the evidence we have is that he consistently visited the same male prostitute over the course of three years. Behavior which you have already said is not consistent with sexual addiction. We also have no evidence that he’s engaged in any other behavior that one would expect to find in a sexual addict. But hey, don’t let our actual arguments get in your way. You keep posting about all the sex addicts you work with. Maybe someday, it’ll actually be relevant.
Allow me to borrow a page from Contrapuntal:
Show me where I claimed that he’s straight and a sex addict. You can’t show it to me, can you? Therefore everything you say is bullshit and double bullshit.
Really, you have a remarkable ability to miss the point. Either that or you’re alternating between trying to make my point for me and arguing against me. You know some things he has been doing on 36 out of the last 1,095 days. You know nothing else (except maybe that he has had sex with his wife, I’m not sure of the ages of his children.). Based on that, you have made a determination that he is gay. I say you do not have enough information to make that call. That is all. I never claimed he was straight, regardless of your attempts to say I have.
The only holes here are the ones I pointed out in your reasoning. I really haven’t reasoned anything. You reasoning was that he is gay because he had sex with a male prostitute. I pointed out that having sex with a male prostitute does not necessarily make you gay. That is all I said. You are the one with the flawed reasoning, not me.
Cite? I will accept any personal information you have from discussing the topic with sex addicts as an acceptable cite, since I have put forward similar conversations I have had as a cite for my side.
Well, it took me hours and hours of Googling, but I finally found my cite:
But I can fully understand if you don’t accept the source as authoritative.
Someday, we just won’t care. No one will care if you’re straight as an arrow or queer as a blue horse. It will be more important to your self-identity that you are a Vikings fan rather than a vile, mouth breathing Cowboys fan. As it should be. As it will be. We will make it so. Teach your children well, and they will show you miracles.
Oh, for fuck’s sake. So in your little world, the fact that they visit more than one prostitute means that they can’t possibly have visited the same one over and over as well? They have to choose, either one prostitute for the rest of their lives, or they can visit each prostitute exactly one time?