Pandemic 2.0?

dowie

dowie

dowie

Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,917
Jokester said:
Though not as strange as some of the health reports now referring to gay men as men who identify as men who have sex with men.
Click to expand...

Technically they should really have said "males who have sex with males" if they're trying to be ultra-inclusive, but yeah it was a very clunky choice of words to avoid just saying gay & bisexual men.

(edit spelling)
 
Last edited:

arknor

arknor

arknor

Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
45,327
CaptainRAVE said:
His comment, not yours.

It’s like saying HIV is homophobic because historically it was more prevalent in gay men.
Click to expand...
no it's like saying everyone who gets HIV is gay so if you contract it then your gay.
then being worried about contracting HIV incase people then think your gay rather than what it does to your body/immune system.

now we can't let people know it's spread mostly in the gay communities incase we get it
 

|Thomas|

|Thomas|

|Thomas|

Associate
Joined
11 Jan 2003
Posts
844
Location
Loughborough
Jokester said:
Though not as strange as some of the health reports now referring to gay men as men who identify as men who have sex with men.
Click to expand...
Rightly or wrongly MSM has been the acronym used in the medical profession covering gay and bisexual men for as long as I've been out (~10 years), it's certainly not a new term.

You would be surprised as well how many guys identify as "straight" but are happy to be sucked off by a guy, as if that doesn't count as being gay or bi. The stigma and denial is strong I guess.
 
Last edited:

Angilion

Angilion

Angilion

Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,004
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Berry Merjinik said:
Without having to go and google it myself, Why is Blue for boys and Pink for girls?
Click to expand...

Because that's the current fashion in some parts of the world. Nothing more than that. No meaning at all. Purely arbitrary. Pink used to be a masculine colour in the same parts of the world. Then it changed, as fashion does. Fashion has to keep changing so fashion businesses can keep making huge profit margins from their marks.
 

Angilion

Angilion

Angilion

Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,004
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Berry Merjinik said:
Current fashion? I could go back to the early 1900's and it would be the same.
I'm not saying you are wrong as you rarely are, but which countries had pink for males?
Click to expand...

UK and USA, for starters. Also France. Probably other places too. Same goes for stockings, high heels, lacy frilly decorative bits, etc. Dresses have often been ungendered. e.g. the universal item of clothing in ancient Rome was a dress, the tunica. Togas are far more famous, but they were formal wear and generally not worn because they were wildly impractical and very uncomfortable in hotter weather. But there was a gendered aspect to dresses in ancient Rome - how long they were. Above the knee was masculine, below the knee was feminine. Because that was the current fashion at that time.

Check out paintings of king Louis the 14th of France, for example. Formal portraits, showing his manliness and prestige, the very image of potent manliness as befitted a king in those days. In high heels, tights and acres of frilly frippery.

The more you look at history, the more you realise how much of gender is just arbitrary nonsense.
 

Dis86

Dis86

Dis86

Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
32,931
Location
Northern England
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom