Is it wrong that I prefer the company of straight dudes?

Yeah, I was a bit dismayed myself. And I'm still not sure how a thread about a gay man liking the company of straight men -- ended up receiving negative posts about women.

My thread was never intended to be sexist.

That's why I felt it was important for me to make it perfectly clear that I like and respect women rather a lot. Even though I somehow forgot to mention Patti Smith (another remarkable woman). :sunny:

I hope the sexism will stop. Soon.

For it's not something I am comfortable with. Stereotyping any group is a mistake.

QP

 

Yep, I've heard a lot about "man-hating" lesbians, but I'm starting to realise that there's actually a male equivelant of that, and that there are some gay men who have very low opinions of women. Stereotyping any group is a mistake, and is in my opinion, an example of lazy thinking.

I'm very glad for the statements you've made denouncing sexism and stereotyping, not that I'm surprised by that, of course.

I've known nasty people of both sexes. Neither of the sexes has a monopoly on any positive or negative traits.

 

Your question is a bit strange to me. To ask if it is wrong? Who makes that rule? Do you , man, to hell with what people think. Do they pay your bills? Provide you with food, healthcare, or anything else you need in life? If not, why care what others think? Not wishing anything bad on you, but if you were told you would die tomorrow, would you die at peace with yourself because you were a good person and lived life to the fullest? Or would you be laying there with regrets because you held back doing what you wished to do because someone else thought it was wrong? Live man, live.

 

Brilliantly stated!

There's a really great book about the relationship between Patti Smith and Robert Mapplethorpe. I think the title is: Just Kids.

Anyway, Patti was straight, and Robert was gay.

Yet they remained close friends to the very end. :2thumbsup:

Patti talked to him on the phone (they lived hundreds of miles apart) the night before he died.

And she promised to write a book about their relationship. Which she did.

And what a beautiful book it is.

QP

 

I hear you. :sunny:

And I am doing what I wish to be doing. No regrets.

However, I am almost 50 now, and I was just wondering where all the gay people in my life have gone. Many died. And I miss them big time.

But some are still alive, so I was questioning what caused such a radical change in my life?

My closest friend is gay. But most everybody else I know is straight.

Anyway, that's what got me wondering about why and how it all happened.

Thanks for being so supportive.

QP

 

sure its ok, how else can ya meet men who else might change there mind & give ya a ride, heck id b out there n my phose teasing them just 2 c their reaction but with all seriousness i dont c wat the problem is, if they no & dont mind then it shouldnt matter bout who's wat if ya no wat i mean. good, faithful friends r hard 2 find so having som no matter wat their sexual gender or preference is should b overlooked. im not gay or bi n as far having sex with guys but i am curious so the first part of this reply was just funnin but the second is serious.

 

you people are reading too much into tiny little things. not every negative opinion on a group means the person is being discriminating. everybody is entitled to their opinion, and everyone is entitled to have a negative opinion on someone/thing/things. there are plenty of people i rub completely wrong way, people who don't like me, my actions, etc and they have the right to their negative opinions. and i don't go around yelling fire every time someone expresses negativity in my direction.

just let go and stop overreacting to things. i'm saying this as impersonally as possible.

 

Of course you have your right to have your negative opinions, but your reaction now shows that you have just as much of a problem with others expressing conflicting opinions to your own, as you are claiming that they have over your opinions. Just by making this comment, you are contradicting yourself.

If you air negative opinions of a group of people publically, then you can't really grumble if others decide to comment on that. You are entitled to your views, and to express them openly, but so is everyone else who holds conflicting views.

 

circular reasoning. bare expression of an opinion (i.e. reply to others' POV) doesn't instantly mean the person is reacting from a baseline of defense.

you (and the politically correct QP) however were reading too much into a subjective observational opinion. i find that being too sensitive and adhering to the contemporary 'avoid-negativity' philosophy so many people are sporting. which I just find plain annoying. life contains both the positive and the negative.

 

I've been reading these posts and all I can think of is how hot Kurt cobain is !

 

You claimed in your previous post that you had no problem with others "negative" opinions, or anyone expressing "negativity" in your direction. So whether your reaction was defensive or not, really doesn't matter. By taking exception to views being expressed that were in conflict with your own, you were contradicting yourself when you said you had no problem with others doing that.

But your post was completely negative, there was not even a hint of positivity in it whatsoever. Negativity tends to beget more negativity. In any case, if you post your views on a public messageboard, then they are fair game for criticism, just as much as they are for praise. You have criticised others' posts before, so what makes that any different from what you're taking exception to now? And just because a view is so-called "politically correct" doesn't make it automatically invalid, or of less worth. Just as a view being un-PC doesn't automatically make it correct. That was just a cheap shot.

"Avoiding negativity" has nothing to do with the issue at hand, as I clearly was negative when I gave my opinion on the issue, but the difference was, my view was balanced. An acknowledgement of the positive and negative. Your post was wholly negative.

You were of course fully entitled to express those views, but if others have conflicting views, then they are just as entitled to express them. That really is the top and bottom of it.

 

of course they are game for criticism. i don't claim exception.

that is right. i fully agree.

why're you reacting so strongly to this? you're so beyond 'balanced' reaction that you're trying to force my posts into some predefined category of yours which they are nor have been not.

yes, my first post made mostly negative generalization on women. so what? i'm obviously a guy who thinks for himself, and as such there is little chance an anonymous person over the internet is going to change my views.

 

for the record, that actually isn't true. go read it again. i specifically used the term 'bell curve' and described the perceived negative qualities as applying to the upper half portion of it. unless you're unaware of what the bell curve means.

 

Then you should have just taken that on the chin, rather than reacting in the way you did.

I merely aired my opinion on the matter, there was nothing particularly "strong" about my reaction. And I said my view on the issue itself was balanced, not that my reation was. Not that there was anything that could be described as OTT about my reaction anyway.

I wasn't trying to change your views, I was expressing my own views on the issue. Something which you have claimed you have no problem with other people doing. I didn't even address you directly, so I have no idea what gave you the impression I was trying to change your views. But it's certainly the wrong impression whatever, I was not trying to do that.

You are entitled to your views just as much as I am entitled to mine. And I will defend your right to express those views to the hilt, even when I disagree with them. All I was doing was expressing my own views on the matter, nothing more to it than that.

No, I am perfectly aware of what bell curve means, thank you. lol Your post was an overwhelmingly negative generalisation of women, something which you have just admitted is the case. The overall tone of the post was not really diluted much by the "bell curve" comment.

I have agreed with a lot of your posts in my time here, and I'd just like to state now that this little disagreement in no way alters how I view you generally. Okay, you may be an anonymous person on the internet, but I still respect your views, even though I may not always agree with them.

 

Totally true. One of the most insightful posts on this thread (IMO). :sunny:

QP

 

Actually, I'm really not 100% politically correct. I've always been a Democrat. Plus I've always been more drawn to the left than the right. But in these current crazy political times -- I often find myself disappointed by what the Democrats are doing.

It just seems (to me) that too many folks value money more than human beings.

Yet some of the coolest people I have ever known are either desperately poor and/or homeless.

I basically try to keep a safe distance from folks that think they are superior to other people.

We all are equal and deserve to be treated with respect. :sunny:

QP

 

LOL. Yeah, I always thought so. But Kurt didn't see himself as other people did/do. That's why he wore so many layers of clothes: He was self-conscious about being so thin.

QP

 

'I shouldn't have reacted the way I did?' please show me how the hell did I react, 'cause I have no idea what you're talking about here. I was expressing an opinion. and then you proceed to say about yourself that you were merely airing an opinion. one can draw a conclusion from that that you're saying you're allowed to 'air' your opinions but I am not. which is high on the hypocritical score. I was stating an opinion that you guys should let stuff go sometimes and not overdo it. how in the effing hell is that a reaction? it was my honest point of view. as a matter of fact I don't even know which post of mine you are referring to when you say 'rather than reacting the way you did'.

and, theoretically speaking, had it even been a reaction, you do not have a right to tell another person that they can or cannot react or how they should react. or do you want to claim that you own such a right to prescribe another human being their emotions? huh?

you are completely misinterpreting the way I have said things. something that in itself is understandable given we are communicating over the internet and you are lacking input on the information on my body language. but the fact that you keep insisting you are interpreting the way I said things is right even though you don't have the complete picture, that is exactly what I am having a problem with here right now.

now you say 'overwhelmingly' negative. previously you said it was completely negative without a trace of positivity in it whatsoever. I already agreed it was mostly negative.

well, you went way out of your way to state that you didn't intend to create a thread where people express negative views on women. that is a knowledge inherent to creation of any thread anywhere. thread author never has control over what others say on his thread. everybody knows this. the fact that you felt the need to make it abundantly clear is sucking up and making sure every idiot gets it that you're on the politically correct side. which we got it, loud and clear.

 

Wrong. I only mentioned it because Invisible Soul (someone I value as a friend) was dismayed (as was I) by some of the quite caustic remarks about women that were said on my thread. She never mentioned any names. Nor did I. So why did you suddenly become so defensive, and start leaving a series of increasingly hostile posts?

QP

 

Not reacting to it would have been letting it go without taking exception to the comments made. And you're twisting my words now. I've said more than once in the last few posts, that you are entitled to air your opinion. But I also said that publically voicing an opinion (especially such an overtly negative one about a specific group of people), means it's likely to come under scrutiny, be that positive or negative, something which you yourself readily acknowledged.

I can disagree with your opinions, and express that openly and publically, but still acknowledge that you have every right to express those opinons even if I don't agree with them. Saying I don't agree with your views is not the same as saying I don't think you have the right to air those views. So where's the hypocrisy? You have every right to air those views, I've said it more than once already, but I'll say it again, seeing as it didn't seem to penetrate the previous times I said it.

You were the one who claimed not to have reactions to others negative points of view, and that is the only reason I mentioned that. I never once claimed to have the right to tell you how you should or shouldn't react, and if you'd actually read my responses properly, you would know that I actually stated the complete opposite of that, more than once. I only highlighted your reaction because you were contradicting yourself.

And this is by far a more sensitive, disproportionate, and irrational response than was espoused by either me, or QP in the first place. Why the hostility?

Well, the huge amount of negativity pretty much negated the tiny drop of positivity that was in it. So it's pretty much semantics to get into a debate about that. I had made that comment before you agreed it was mostly negative anyway. In any case, overwhelmingly negative, or completely negative, the response would have been the same. Though I do acknowledge that I was wrong to use the word "completely" in regards to that.