|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 16, 2020 10:58:39 GMT
Fair point, I did wonder that myself. |
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 16, 2020 11:01:02 GMT
That raises another interesting topic. Are there any generalised differences, traits, between gay men and straight men? I'll start the ball rolling. I'd say there are, but not as commonly as there are generalised differences between men and women. A significant percentage of gay men exhibit what we might expect to be traits more associated with women. A keen interest in babies, the arts, fashion, dancing etc. I feel it's often possible to observe the behaviour of a gay man and establish that he's gay in pretty short order. However, this isn't even close to being universal. Some gay men exhibit traits that are indistinguishable from those you might expect from men in general. I’m unclear how you can say “a significant % of gay men exhibit ... traits more associated with women”. Albeit “significant” isn’t quantifiable. You have no idea how many gay men you come across who aren’t camp and thus you don’t consider them to be gay, because your default is that they are straight unless they display observable “gay traits”. So you aren’t really in a position to make even the slightest guesstimate of your notional “Significant percentage”. And of course there are some pretty camp straight men. You can say “some gay men exhibit... etc” which of course is true. But not a very interesting statistic. That's fair. You're in a better position than me to take a guess. Roughly what proportion of gay men are 'camp', could you hazard a more informed guess? |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Sept 16, 2020 11:03:18 GMT
I am not scoring any goals ... I was expressing an opinion in opposition to yours. I state my view, you state yours, anyone interested enough to read or join in will have, or form their own. I responded to Clinton Cool 's o.p. as it was so contradictory to my own ... I assume your response to me was similarly motivated. In the comment you chose to quote I did point out "I don't know". However it is fascinating to see that you Telemachus and Clinton Cool , from your very divergent backgrounds, have come to share similar views on womens behaviour. Perhaps evidence that we all are merely created by our environment. Rog My point was not about the women’s behaviour, it was about the scientific difference of descriptors for individuals vs groups. I merely used groups of women and men as examples. The main difference between my proffered content, and yours, is that mine bears logical analysis whereas (an element of) yours doesn't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 11:07:42 GMT
I do find it interesting however that a single man, self-confessed former travelling football 'hooligan', who trImpets his sexual prowess and conquests on a public forum , should express similar generalised views on women to a gay married man. That raises another interesting topic. Are there any generalised differences, traits, between gay men and straight men? I'll start the ball rolling. I'd say there are, but not as commonly as there are generalised differences between men and women. A significant percentage of gay men exhibit what we might expect to be traits more associated with women. A keen interest in babies, the arts, fashion, dancing etc. I feel it's often possible to observe the behaviour of a gay man and establish that he's gay in pretty short order. However, this isn't even close to being universal. Some gay men exhibit traits that are indistinguishable from those you might expect from men in general. It seems that there are 2 reasonably defined groups of gay men. It's all very interesting, to someone who doesn't unquestionably believe that everyone, wherever they come from in the world, whatever their gender or sexual preferences is exactly the same; just because it's fashionable to say this. Whoa there ... your original post was speaking of men and womens behaviour. I disagreed with your generalization. I did not say men and womens behaviour is exactly the same, whatever their sex or sexual preference. We were not discussing biology, physiology, or anatomy. I suggested people have their own preferences, make choices, express likes or dislikes ... these life styles are not gender based or tied to gender. The flowers on my boat are my choice, but Jane's the gardener ... the flowers in our boat are my choice, Jane isn't bothered ... Jane almost never wears make-up ... she's never wanted children but we both love kids (other peoples) ... I am suggesting that we have arrived at these behavioural choices because of our individual history. Obviously men and women are different ... but so are men and men and women and women. I don't know what these male traits to which you refer are unless you mean standing up to pee or shaving ... but I know women who do both and men that do neither. I have no problem that you disagree ... but it is belittling to suggest I'm just saying these things as a slave to fashion? Rog |
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 16, 2020 11:10:39 GMT
OK. Well, it's a fascinating topic. When I lived in Jakarta I came to a fast conclusion that at least 50% of the men there were gay. I was wrong of course. There were gay men there but they weren't discernible in any way from straight men. To me, at least. Men in Jakarta are often 'camp', but straight as a die. Just shows you how different people can be, when you go to different places.
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Sept 16, 2020 11:11:44 GMT
I’m unclear how you can say “a significant % of gay men exhibit ... traits more associated with women”. Albeit “significant” isn’t quantifiable. You have no idea how many gay men you come across who aren’t camp and thus you don’t consider them to be gay, because your default is that they are straight unless they display observable “gay traits”. So you aren’t really in a position to make even the slightest guesstimate of your notional “Significant percentage”. And of course there are some pretty camp straight men. You can say “some gay men exhibit... etc” which of course is true. But not a very interesting statistic. That's fair. You're in a better position than me to take a guess. Roughly what proportion of gay men are 'camp', could you hazard a more informed guess? Jeff always tells me that my gaydar is hopeless, which it is! So I wouldn’t really like to hazard a guess, but I’d say a very small proportion. Just look at the gay participants on here. How many of them are camp? The whole camp effeminate thing is in decline I think. I was of course brought to public attention by people like Kenneth Williams , Larry Grayson etc etc which is why people still equate that with gayness. Gay men are more likely to be into leather, bondage, flagellation, fisting and all sorts of things that you would not be man enough to take. And there are a lot of pups too these days. You should attend a gay pride sometime. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 11:11:56 GMT
But science wasn't mentioned in the op Telemachus ... you introduce the element (see what I did there?) Rog |
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 16, 2020 11:15:53 GMT
I do find it interesting however that a single man, self-confessed former travelling football 'hooligan', who trImpets his sexual prowess and conquests on a public forum , should express similar generalised views on women to a gay married man. That raises another interesting topic. Are there any generalised differences, traits, between gay men and straight men? I'll start the ball rolling. I'd say there are, but not as commonly as there are generalised differences between men and women. A significant percentage of gay men exhibit what we might expect to be traits more associated with women. A keen interest in babies, the arts, fashion, dancing etc. I feel it's often possible to observe the behaviour of a gay man and establish that he's gay in pretty short order. However, this isn't even close to being universal. Some gay men exhibit traits that are indistinguishable from those you might expect from men in general. It seems that there are 2 reasonably defined groups of gay men. It's all very interesting, to someone who doesn't unquestionably believe that everyone, wherever they come from in the world, whatever their gender or sexual preferences is exactly the same; just because it's fashionable to say this. Whoa there ... your original post was speaking of men and womens behaviour. I disagreed with your generalization. I did not say men and womens behaviour is exactly the same, whatever their sex or sexual preference. We were not discussing biology, physiology, or anatomy. I suggested people have their own preferences, make choices, express likes or dislikes ... these life styles are not gender based or tied to gender. The flowers on my boat are my choice, but Jane's the gardener ... the flowers in our boat are my choice, Jane isn't bothered ... Jane almost never wears make-up ... she's never wanted children but we both love kids (other peoples) ... I am suggesting that we have arrived at these behavioural choices because of our individual history. Obviously men and women are different ... but so are men and men and women and women. I don't know what these male traits to which you refer are unless you mean standing up to pee or shaving ... but I know women who do both and men that do neither. I have no problem that you disagree ... but it is belittling to suggest I'm just saying these things as a slave to fashion? Rog Well you should count yourself as being fortunate that you don't see huge differences in behaviour, motivations and instincts, preferences and even core morality between different groups of human beings. You can therefore slip into the modern fashion of pretence that everyone is the same. You're not pretending though, you really believe it. I can't knock that. |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Sept 16, 2020 11:16:40 GMT
But science wasn't mentioned in the op Telemachus ... you introduce the element (see what I did there?) Rog Science means knowledge, fact etc. When discussing these sorts of issues I prefer to form an argument based on science rather than on random thoughts that aren’t consistent with themselves. But each to their own, there is no bar on posting irrational inconsistent and meaningless stuff on here. |
|
|
|
Post by Trina on Sept 16, 2020 11:17:06 GMT
Only after the menopause... Not always... Found menopause to be a bit of a non event really....no hot flushes .... No beard for me either,but a female I worked with began to get rather bristly ! |
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 16, 2020 11:18:37 GMT
That's fair. You're in a better position than me to take a guess. Roughly what proportion of gay men are 'camp', could you hazard a more informed guess? Jeff always tells me that my gaydar is hopeless, which it is! So I wouldn’t really like to hazard a guess, but I’d say a very small proportion. Just look at the gay participants on here. How many of them are camp? The whole camp effeminate thing is in decline I think. I was of course brought to public attention by people like Kenneth Williams , Larry Grayson etc etc which is why people still equate that with gayness. Gay men are more likely to be into leather, bondage, flagellation, fisting and all sorts of things that you would not be man enough to take. And there are a lot of pups too these days. You should attend a gay pride sometime. I'm not keen on fisting. Maybe I'm a bit of a wimp, my hands are too big, or both, but I found what was similar to one of those horribly over strong handshakes most uncomfortable. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 11:21:29 GMT
I like flageoletion.
This is where you hit yourself with a handful of freshly picked beans.
Very good for the sole.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 11:31:30 GMT
But science wasn't mentioned in the op Telemachus ... you introduce the element (see what I did there?) Rog Science means knowledge, fact etc. When discussing these sorts of issues I prefer to form an argument based on science rather than on random thoughts that aren’t consistent with themselves. But each to their own, there is no bar on posting irrational inconsistent and meaningless stuff on here. Behaviours are unexpectedly interesting don't you think ? The gay man is adversarial, and competitive and has to not only argue, but attempt to belittle opposing views. The straight man is sanguine and accepting of opposing views. Nothing to do with gender ... just behaviours. Rog |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 11:33:19 GMT
No that's just Telemachus. You can blame it on his mother who thinks the sun shines out of... Upbringing is important in life. |
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 16, 2020 11:37:46 GMT
I like flageoletion. This is where you hit yourself with a handful of freshly picked beans. Very good for the sole. Foxy does that in the sauna in Finland. Flagellation isn't limited to gay people. Actually I suspect it's just as popular amongst those of a 'straight' persuasion. The gay community does have some interesting ideas though, ideas that seem not to exist elsewhere. Take the 'glory hole'. I really get that. I'm not sure I could exhibit the trust required to actually do it though. 'Cruising' is a brilliant idea. I mean, 2 people, single, fancy a bit of company for a short while and then get on with their lives. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. I find the likes of 'brown showers' a little distasteful but if 2 people want to do this, why not? Anyway, again, this activity isn't limited to the gay community, I suspect. The only disturbing thing I came across when I worked and was friendly with a bunch of gay guys was the view that some within the gay community held on HIV. I was shocked to find that having HIV is sometimes seen as a badge of honour, that some people couldn't consider themselves to be truly within the community unless they were infected themselves. And that some deliberately sought to become infected in order to be 'complete'. That shocked me, I'm not easily shocked. |
|
