Usage of the word "gay"

Tefal · 31 Oct 2010 at 11:04

Freefaller said:
Right so which of you boys wants some gorilla time?

*desperately tries to remember the "how to escape gorilla attack" special from the discovery channel*

exhashdotdot · 31 Oct 2010 at 11:05

phaggy?

Energize · 31 Oct 2010 at 17:25

Tefal said:
Why use a half dozen words when one syllable will do?

You use one word in place of another. :confused:

ic1male · 31 Oct 2010 at 17:40

I don't see what's wrong with 'crap' myself.

ic1male · 1 Nov 2010 at 09:53

Stephen Fry brought a smile to my face -

The Observer quoted content from an interview given by Fry in this month's Attitude magazine, where he suggested that men "find it difficult to believe that women are as interested in sex as they are".

"For good reason," Fry told the gay monthly. "If women liked sex as much as men, there would be straight cruising areas in the way there are gay cruising areas.

"Women would go and hang around in churchyards thinking, 'God, I've got to get my ***king rocks off', or they'd go to Hampstead Heath and meet strangers to shag behind a bush. It doesn't happen. Why? Because the only women you can have sex with like that wish to be paid for it."

He continued: "I feel sorry for straight men. The only reason women will have sex with them is that sex is the price they are willing to pay for a relationship with a man, which is what they want.

"Of course, a lot of women will deny this and say, 'Oh no, but I love sex, I love it!'. But do they go around having it the way that gay men do?"

Fully star out swearing.

Fr0dders · 1 Nov 2010 at 10:31

excellent argument by steven fry.

krooton · 1 Nov 2010 at 10:34

billysielu said:
The whole point of sex is reproduction, that's what it's for.

Incorrect. The whole point of sex is for pleasure, nature just handily made it so that a guy getting that pleasure in a girl would result in a baby.

From a procreating standpoint, gay sex is no different for anal with a woman, getting a blowjob or having a ****.

Are people unfortunate enough to be infertile also wrong like gay people?

Fr0dders · 1 Nov 2010 at 10:39

krooton said:
Incorrect. The whole point of sex is for pleasure, nature just handily made it so that a guy getting that pleasure in a girl would result in a baby.

From a procreating standpoint, gay sex is no different for anal with a woman, getting a blowjob or having a ****.

Are people unfortunate enough to be infertile also wrong like gay people?

surely the opposite is true

it was born out of a need to keep the human race alive, the fact it was enjoyable came as a bonus ?

Cosimo · 1 Nov 2010 at 10:49

MrLOL said:
surely the opposite is true

it was born out of a need to keep the human race alive, the fact it was enjoyable came as a bonus ?

Yup, caveman humped for survival then came the pleasure aspect.

AGD · 1 Nov 2010 at 10:50

There are lots of evolutionary arguments that can be made to suggest that sex (either straight or gay) is not purely for reproduction. E.g. one argument says that gay relationships could create a more stable society between the males in the group, hence that society would work together more and survive better than those where the males didn't work together and fought each other. Just one argument...

The point is this: it is difficult to argue either way based on "natural" or "evolution" based reasoning.

Amnesia · 1 Nov 2010 at 10:53

simulatorman said:
Yup, cave man humped for survival then came the pleasure aspect.

why would you need to hump a caveman to survive ?

Cosimo · 1 Nov 2010 at 10:57

Amnesia said:
why would you need to hump a caveman to survive ?

Can't you work it out?

Amnesia · 1 Nov 2010 at 11:01

Kazz · 1 Nov 2010 at 11:06

Hmm, thread is more "derp" than "gay".

citizen0100 · 1 Nov 2010 at 11:23

A friend of mine was doing work experience for a solicitors and was asked to do some photocopying but the photocopier decided to break, so he told his manager "the photo copier is being gay" to which his boss (who is gay) lectured him about calling the photocopier a homosexual.

krooton · 1 Nov 2010 at 11:25

simulatorman said:
Yup, caveman humped for survival then came the pleasure aspect.

I disagree, cavemen didn't hump with the intention of having a baby, they humped because of the urge and pleasure involved.

Nature made us wanting to get our rocks off, not wanting to have kids.

This is even more apparent in modern day life as we can choose to sex it up without having kids, and most people do.

RetiredGreyFox · 1 Nov 2010 at 18:05

krooton said:
Incorrect. The whole point of sex is for pleasure,

Don't think so.
In 100% of the Animal Kingdom sex is about passing your genes on but us humans found we enjoyed it without making babies.
Dogs and monkeys also masturbate for pleasure but in a pack it will be for babies.

G-MAN2004 · 1 Nov 2010 at 18:10

Way too much gay in this thread.

finga · 1 Nov 2010 at 18:28

krooton said:
I disagree, cavemen didn't hump with the intention of having a baby, they humped because of the urge and pleasure involved.

Nature made us wanting to get our rocks off, not wanting to have kids.

This is even more apparent in modern day life as we can choose to sex it up without having kids, and most people do.

nature made it so we got immense pleasure from sex so we would do it and reproduce, therefore the point of sex is to reproduce, nature is more intelligent than us it seems

deusexlumina · 1 Nov 2010 at 18:28

Yet another PC thread. If people want to express their opinion by using the word "gay" then that's their business. The word is used so much now it's not even in that context anyway.