AmericanSaxeCoburgGothic
Happy to be here! Goal is to post the most exclamation points.
Never on reddit. Never on Twitter.
User ID: 1919
I think the memetic baggage for the word gay is gone. The language and understanding from our playground days has evolved. Gay is now synonymous with homosexual. The phrase its not gay for a guy to have sex with dudes isn't coherent with the way the word is currently used. I have never seen it used with the caveat just meaning bottoms.
Real gay are not attracted to traps is a ridiculous statement. I contend some gays are only attracted to traps because they are men, if they are women the attraction goes away.
Here I think your thinking hinges on your definition of real 'gay', which seems to be you wanting to group people of certain attributes rather than partakers of actions, or people who hold attractions. This is I think dishonest gate-gatekeeping. If gay is synonymous with homosexual, which I think it is, then you defining it with subjectivity is at odds with how the rest of society uses the word.
But your statement "whatever makes me hard is a woman", your friend was still a woman before you knew she was; your attraction didn't change her sex (noun). Her actual sex is a non-trivial attribute, from you statement 'I discovered he was girl and totally had the hots for her' your knowledge/attraction doesn't determine her sex but builds off her actual sex as you form your opinions of her.
Bona fide BDSM nuns is extremely dishonest wording. BDSM cos-players/performers dressed in a parody of nun attire is almost certainly what is there.
This is the John Mearheimer offensive- realism theory of gender. Just as that theory can describe Ukraine / Russia but fail to describe relations between Switzerland / Germany, your understanding I assume rejects all equal partnerships between two people? I do not think this is a useful way of thinking on relations between people.
You are correct that without sex determination, then the definition of gay is meaningless. But my point is that attraction to a same-sex for some is non-trivial. I think there is a word that describes this same-sex attraction: gay.
When I was younger, gay was the word kids used for everything lame. I remember listening to NPR (Moth radio?) where a woman gave a story where her father came out as gay and she and her mother then become advocates for gay marriage, and the storyteller said she never used the word derogatorily. I think signaling political correctness as a child? To me bullshit. It didn't pass the sniff test for me.
But as I've grown up, the word gay isn't used for lame anymore and just is a synonym for homosexual. In my teenage years the word gay seemed to be trending away from the youth slang for uncool, for political correctness purposes.
I think this is the crux of the argument, my definition is activity and attraction based. And for record, since you mentioned sin, having a same sex attractions is not a sin to most people. My definition was quickly written, and I'd throw in consent, and full knowledge as caveats as well.
I think you're using the word to describe people fitting what your definition of gay is. I don't know what attributes you consider in your definition.
I'll expand, can you talk gay? Or dress gay? Sure that sort of description only has meaning because societal connotations and associations with people following the definition as gay. You can talk/dress gay without being gay. You can be gay without talking/dressing gay. Try changing the word and its doesn't make sense to use the attributes as gate-keeping mechanisms. Example: Can you talk/dress American without being American? Can you be American without talking/dressing American?
I've never mentioned chromosomes. Imposed by the state? You're thinking boils down to me to be the motherfuckers and the motherfucked, don't bother getting male and female involved.
My only point is that only the sex (noun) of the person you have sex (verb) with can determine whether one is gay. The word gay I, and I think most other people, define as synonymous with homosexual. Maybe you and others are getting on baggage with word gay, to me its neutral.
You're assuming a lot here. Do you have any sources from this century? Wikipedia has gay is synonymous with homosexual.
I think you've thrown out the baby with the bathwater. If my uncle had wheel's he'd be a bike. People who have homosexual sex can be defined as gay. I think its silly to needlessly add qualifiers. It is LGBT* except guys who top dudes with implants?
So your argument is basically if they have implants its not 'gay'?
Are you serious? Heterosexual sex can lead to pregnancy. And if there is no shame, why not call dudes who penetrate dudes also gay? Why the gatekeeping on the word gay? The year is 2025, I'm providing a definition for gay, I do not understand what relevance your descriptions of ancient Roman pedastry have here.
Tomboys are still girls.
I think we can define what a woman is. Do we define the correct human physiology by the edge cases?
I fail to see what relevance a definition of 'shame' is to my definition of 'gay'.
You do see where the folks penetrating fellows can also be called gay?
People who have sex (verb) with people who are are the same sex (noun). Also throw in people with same-sex attraction.
That is not obvious to me. Are you confounding social cues with orientation or behavior? Do you consider the men who act with ladyboys not gay because they are 'straight-acting'?
That link has it behind a paywall, but relying on surveys is never strong evidence in my opinion. If arousal pattern is just attraction to the female form, I have no doubt GAMPs will say they're not-homosexual.
To take a different approach if you're really into dudes, find them totally interesting, fascinating, say you have a non-trivial oriented preference. Finding out a person you thought was a dude, actually isn't, means you lose interest regardless of their appearance.
Can't tell if you're joking or serious, but hard disagree. It's just homosexuality with better costumes. I think the particular modus you are describing is the method of grabbing 'feminine' status/power to avoid a low status position. I honestly read it the same way as those fitness videos where the now muscular bro lambasts their previous scrawny self.
Every two to three weeks.
Can we avoid the headline hyperbole endemic to other forums?
China has nuclear weapons, so describing something as choosing the 'nuclear option' for them seems more appropriate for something involving thermonuclear devices or policy. If the news is so monumental, I think instead state what it entails and let it stand on its own.
If you really think this is economic Armageddon, how have you reacted? How you divested from all non-Chinese investments and strongly advised your family to do the same? Have you bought real-estate in Shenzhen?
I thought the Sun Also Rises made much more sense after college than highschool. When you meet people who live their lives without hope, or goals, or responsibilities.
- Prev
- Next

Please correct me where I'm wrong in summarizing your beliefs:
In usages such as gay marriage, gay rights; a gay pride festival, men who top men are expected/allowed to be included in this grouping.
However in most other usages, the word gay is so infused with the negative connotations of being a bottom, that its known you can't call a man who tops men gay.
So if I'm following your reasoning, a man who tops men could be in a gay marriage, but it would incorrect to call him gay? And you believe, this is common-knowledge obvious, per your flair, that really doesn't need to rely on evidence to be stated as fact.
More options
Context Copy link