Usage of the word "gay"

Robbie G said:
Are you saying that people over 12 shouldn't use the word in this context?

**** the over-easily offended.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying I haven't heard anyone say it. Could be down a a higher level of education and articulation in the people I talk to, who knows.
 
ic1male said:
This thread is hilarious.

Half the people whining in this thread about men putting their willies up another man's bum would be only too eager to stick it up their wives/girlfriends' bums if they'd be allowed to. Potting the brown is the ultimate aim of any man isn't it?

Besides, gay mates I know are always on about how they pick up "straight" men with wives and kids, who like nothing more than man sex on websites. Guess their missus must have headaches that night, eh? :D
Click to expand...

This may surprise you, but those men, they are quite obviously not straight!

as for putting it up the mrs bum, yes of course, there isnt a great hairy pair of knackers hanging below it nor do you have to fight through a forest to get to it, well, for some women anyway
 
finga said:
This may surprise you, but those men, they are quite obviously not straight!
Click to expand...

LOL.

Well for me, hetero/homo means "attracted to opposite/same gender". It doesn't mean one likes vaginal sex the other likes anal sex. Anybody can like any kind of sex but not be attracted to the same gender.

So I see those gentlemen as liking anal sex and gay websites are probably the easiest way to go about it if their wife won't oblige.
 
i dont think its about the 'kind' of sex, but the object of desire to do it with, like the wanting to put it in the mrs rear end, its because its HER rear end, not just a rear end
 
finga said:
i dont think its about the 'kind' of sex, but the object of desire to do it with, like the wanting to put it in the mrs rear end, its because its HER rear end, not just a rear end
Click to expand...

I accept your view but I'm sure for other men any rear end will do.
 
Energize said:
I'm just saying I haven't heard anyone say it. Could be down a a higher level of education and articulation in the people I talk to, who knows.
Click to expand...

Could be, though I know Oxbridge graduates that say it in this context, so I doubt it. Maybe it's that you hang around with people that think being overly sensitive is something to do with intellectual capacity?
 
ic1male said:
No we were on about married men who like to hook up with guys on the sly.
Click to expand...

Some men just like sex. They may be bi. They may not. They may simply use willing gay/bi men as a substitute for their wife.

It's not as simple as just saying that they must be gay or bi if they have sex with men. You'd have to ask them personally where their desires lie.

Sexuality is not a group of categories with no overlap, it's a spectrum like many things in nature where overlap often occurs.
 
I gotta say, im with billysielu's way of thinking, there may be nothing harmful about being gay, but by natures default it is wrong, as its certainly not right, please note the difference between wrong and harmful, yes its ok to be gay, but it is NOT right, its alright
 
Captain_Slick said:
Some men just like sex. They may be bi. They may not. They may simply use willing gay/bi men as a substitute for their wife.

It's not as simple as just saying that they must be gay or bi if they have sex with men. You'd have to ask them personally where their desires lie.

Sexuality is not a group of categories with no overlap, it's a spectrum like many things in nature where overlap often occurs.
Click to expand...

no mate, if you have sex and like it with men or women, you are bi, its the definition of it! 'straight' men, do NOT have sex with men, end of
 
billysielu said:
The whole point of sex is reproduction, that's what it's for.

If sexuality is linked to genes, there would be no gays, because those genes would never be passed on.
Click to expand...

That assumes that a) Gays don't have children, b) that the genes linked to sexuality are passed on.

It's plausible that the genes exist in the same way the genes that allow for growth, gender, hormones etc are present in all things, simply in different states.

That said, homosexuality is present in animals, as well as humans. And there is an abundance of it. Right or Wrong really depends on your meaning of Right or Wrong.

Regardless, it exists, and it is present in a significant proportion of the human race. To continue a stance of hate and prejudice is illogical.
 
finga said:
I gotta say, im with billysielu's way of thinking, there may be nothing harmful about being gay, but by natures default it is wrong, as its certainly not right, please note the difference between wrong and harmful, yes its ok to be gay, but it is NOT right, its alright
Click to expand...

Semantics really, but you're wrong.

Nature is NOT logical. Nature does NOT make sense. That is the nature of nature.

What if homosexuality really is natures way of preventing overpopulation (As stupid and as unsupported as that theory is)? Would being gay therefore be right/acceptable/logical/whatever?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom