In 2016... What the hell does "Gay" even mean?

[Boss]

Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?

I don't profess to know what people's motivations are for applying labels... as we see in this thread, a particular poster continues to insist I am "gay or bi" based on something I said. People can have all kinds of different reasons for applying a label to someone else. The question is, why do you think it's acceptable to stereotype people and judge them based on your stereotypes? Why do you think it's okay to believe gossip and hearsay as opposed to direct information intimated to you from the individual directly?

I think this is a really big problem we're having today in society.

 

[Montrovant]

Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?

I don't profess to know what people's motivations are for applying labels... as we see in this thread, a particular poster continues to insist I am "gay or bi" based on something I said. People can have all kinds of different reasons for applying a label to someone else. The question is, why do you think it's acceptable to stereotype people and judge them based on your stereotypes? Why do you think it's okay to believe gossip and hearsay as opposed to direct information intimated to you from the individual directly?

I think this is a really big problem we're having today in society.

Actually, you have professed to know exactly what people's motivations are multiple times. It's what brought about my comment. Here, let me show you :

What you are really saying is, you need this label to apply to people so that you can discriminate against them.

Who said anything about judging? I can say someone is gay without judging them based on it. I can say someone is straight without judging them based on it. You keep making shit up.

It is not necessarily 'gossip' if someone you know tells you that someone else is gay, any more than it is 'gossip' if someone you know tells you someone else is a Baptist, or a mechanic, or originally from Canada. What crazy definition of gossip are you using that anything one person tells you about another person is gossip?

You are still, clearly, going to force any comments into your narrative.

 

[Boss]

Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?

I don't profess to know what people's motivations are for applying labels... as we see in this thread, a particular poster continues to insist I am "gay or bi" based on something I said. People can have all kinds of different reasons for applying a label to someone else. The question is, why do you think it's acceptable to stereotype people and judge them based on your stereotypes? Why do you think it's okay to believe gossip and hearsay as opposed to direct information intimated to you from the individual directly?

I think this is a really big problem we're having today in society.

Actually, you have professed to know exactly what people's motivations are multiple times. It's what brought about my comment. Here, let me show you :

What you are really saying is, you need this label to apply to people so that you can discriminate against them.

Uhm... NO... that is me relaying my take on what you said based on what you said. I have no idea why you feel compelled to stereotype and label people so that you can discriminate against them, that's something only you can know. I have no idea why you think it's perfectly okay to accept hearsay and gossip about someone and make judgments based on that... it's something only you can know.

Who said anything about judging? I can say someone is gay without judging them based on it. I can say someone is straight without judging them based on it. You keep making shit up.

Well, you said that the label is useful to you so that you could know whether or not you should "hit on them" and that means you're basing your decision on a stereotype you've established which is based on hearsay. And you pretty much admitted that you discriminate against female Marines because you've heard they are mostly lesbians. So, yes... you are judging people based on it, whether you admit that's what you're doing or not. Most people don't like to admit they are judging people... that's human nature. And let's be clear, there isn't anything wrong with judging people, it's only when we do this based on stereotypes and hearsay or gossip that it's unfair and wrong.

It is not necessarily 'gossip' if someone you know tells you that someone else is gay, any more than it is 'gossip' if someone you know tells you someone else is a Baptist, or a mechanic, or originally from Canada. What crazy definition of gossip are you using that anything one person tells you about another person is gossip?

You are still, clearly, going to force any comments into your narrative.

But it IS necessarily gossip because that is what defines gossip.
gossip
noun
1. idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.

So... IF someone tells you that someone else is gay... that IS gossip... it's the very definition of gossip. I don't need a special definition, that IS the definition of gossip! And you continue to try and justify judging people and stereotyping them based on gossip. I'm not forcing your comments into anything... you are clearly saying this in no uncertain terms and defending it to the hilt.

 

[Montrovant]

Well... earlier, you defined "gay" as someone who is exclusively sexually attracted to the same gender. Now, you want to include people who might be bisexual... or people who might be asexual and just like to have a good time with whomever. Unless you become intimate with them, there is no way for you to really know what turns them on.... maybe they're "faking it?" Maybe they're still trying to figure out their sexuality? Or maybe what you perceive as a date really wasn't a date? I've "gone out with the boys" to pick up women... if you were my next door neighbor, would you assume I am gay because you saw me dressed up and getting in the car with another guy?

I continue to define gay as someone exclusively attracted to the same gender. You claimed there are no indicators that a person is gay other than them telling you so or being intimate with them. I provided an example of that being untrue. I added bisexual because being gay isn't the only possibility for dating someone of the same gender.

As far as 'faking it', well, fuck. Anyone could be faking anything about their beliefs or thoughts. That is not exclusive to sexuality. Someone could be 'faking it' regarding their religion or politics or preference in sports. By that standard, you can never know if someone is gay. Ever.

Sure, it's possible someone might be mistaken about what is a date. As someone known for complaining that other people focus on minutia, you certainly do it a lot! If, over time and multiple dates/partners, a person seems to choose exclusively the same gender for romantic encounters, it's certainly an indication they may be gay. If a man talks about dating other men, having boyfriends, and never does so about women, it's a good indication they may be gay. Obviously the further removed from a person's life you are, the more difficult it is to make these kinds of determinations. Why does it have to be just a neighbor who sees a person getting in the car? You seem, again, to be trying to fit this into your narrative, in this case with gossip.

Well, we just covered how you could be mistaken about "dating" and your other assertion is hearsay or gossip... you're going by what a third party tells you about someone. Then, if that's not bad enough, you go on to justify stereotyping people and applying a label based on your stereotypes. Do you honestly not see anything wrong with that?

I will say it again... the ONLY WAY you can KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to same gender is if they intimate this to you themselves. Otherwise, you are assuming.

Pretty much everyone uses stereotypes. I'm not justifying their use, that they are used is just reality. Beyond that, depending on how they are used or what they are used for, they aren't necessarily bad.

More, I specifically said there are 'less accurate' indicators of a person's sexual preference. I didn't say those should be used exclusively or that anyone should be judged as a person based on such indicators.

The only way to KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to the same gender is to be that person.

But the fact that someone told you that someone else was sexually attracted exclusively to same gender is HEARSAY! GOSSIP! IT'S COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY! What part of this are you failing to comprehend?

Again, I wonder what your definition of gossip is. If I know someone is gay because they have told me, or I am in a homosexual relationship with them, is it automatically gossip to tell that to someone else? Should what someone I trust tells me be automatically dismissed, and is that true only when it comes to sexual orientation?

What the fuck man? Because it IS... that's why! No one knows what turns you on except YOU! Jeesh! You can fucking be married to someone for 50 years and your partner doesn't know what ACTUALLY turns you on! That's something that resides in your own mind. You might not care for anyone to know you get turned on by midgets in drag! That might be information you wish to remain private and not divulge to anyone else.

You cut off my quote before it went on to clarify how sexual desire might not be private.

Your religious beliefs, your political ideology, you have already described as not being private and intimate, yet they are also things that no one else knows except you. You can be married to someone for 50 years and your partner doesn't know what you ACTUALLY believe about god. You can be married to someone for 50 years and your partner doesn't know what you ACTUALLY think about how government should be run. That's something that resides in your own mind.

Your inconsistency, or perhaps it is hypocrisy, on this subject is clear.

But you're STILL missing the point that the information is coming from a third party who is NOT the individual in question and they may have no idea what they're talking about. Maybe they heard it from someone else who heard it from someone else? Can you not comprehend this or something? What the fuck is wrong with you? You can't understand that personal private information is not something you can assume based on what other people tell you?

You keep harping on this third party thing. Do you not trust anyone? If a woman tells me her husband is straight, should I dismiss that because the husband isn't telling me himself? Yes, we can be lied to. Yes, people might be mistaken about things. I'm not making any claims to total accuracy, knowledge beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt. I think we've already pretty much agreed that such a thing is impossible anyway, since a person could always be 'faking it' about their orientation. So what the hell is your point? The only thing I can see is that, for whatever reason, you don't want to admit that your two options for knowing a person are gay are either not the only ways, or that there are really no ways to know another person is gay since you cannot tell what they may be lying about.

And again, do you feel the same way about any other thing a person might think or feel? If my father tells me his wife is a Buddhist, should I ignore that because it's hearsay? She hasn't told me herself, I'm getting it from a third party, so clearly it is unreliable, right?

Was it you who was talking earlier about hitting on a female Marine and after being rejected you found out that "most all of them are lesbians?" How the fuck do you know that? Based on some goddamn stereotype? Is THAT how you judge EVERYONE?

I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about. I've never said anything remotely like that. Are you arguing with me, or just arguing against whatever crap happens to pop into your head?


We've gone over the fact that one person can never be truly certain about what another person thinks or feels. Strangely, you only seem to apply that to sexual orientation, and you do it inconsistently. This in a thread which you start by asking what it means to be gay, where you don't want to discuss what it means to be gay.

 

[Montrovant]

Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?

I don't profess to know what people's motivations are for applying labels... as we see in this thread, a particular poster continues to insist I am "gay or bi" based on something I said. People can have all kinds of different reasons for applying a label to someone else. The question is, why do you think it's acceptable to stereotype people and judge them based on your stereotypes? Why do you think it's okay to believe gossip and hearsay as opposed to direct information intimated to you from the individual directly?

I think this is a really big problem we're having today in society.

Actually, you have professed to know exactly what people's motivations are multiple times. It's what brought about my comment. Here, let me show you :

What you are really saying is, you need this label to apply to people so that you can discriminate against them.

Uhm... NO... that is me relaying my take on what you said based on what you said. I have no idea why you feel compelled to stereotype and label people so that you can discriminate against them, that's something only you can know. I have no idea why you think it's perfectly okay to accept hearsay and gossip about someone and make judgments based on that... it's something only you can know.

Who said anything about judging? I can say someone is gay without judging them based on it. I can say someone is straight without judging them based on it. You keep making shit up.

Well, you said that the label is useful to you so that you could know whether or not you should "hit on them" and that means you're basing your decision on a stereotype you've established which is based on hearsay. And you pretty much admitted that you discriminate against female Marines because you've heard they are mostly lesbians. So, yes... you are judging people based on it, whether you admit that's what you're doing or not. Most people don't like to admit they are judging people... that's human nature. And let's be clear, there isn't anything wrong with judging people, it's only when we do this based on stereotypes and hearsay or gossip that it's unfair and wrong.

It is not necessarily 'gossip' if someone you know tells you that someone else is gay, any more than it is 'gossip' if someone you know tells you someone else is a Baptist, or a mechanic, or originally from Canada. What crazy definition of gossip are you using that anything one person tells you about another person is gossip?

You are still, clearly, going to force any comments into your narrative.

But it IS necessarily gossip because that is what defines gossip.
gossip
noun
1. idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.

So... IF someone tells you that someone else is gay... that IS gossip... it's the very definition of gossip. I don't need a special definition, that IS the definition of gossip! And you continue to try and justify judging people and stereotyping them based on gossip. I'm not forcing your comments into anything... you are clearly saying this in no uncertain terms and defending it to the hilt.

And now you are just a lying ass. Well, since you feel compelled to attribute arguments to me which I clearly have not made

Uhm... NO... that is me relaying my take on what you said based on what you said. I have no idea why you feel compelled to stereotype and label people so that you can discriminate against them, that's something only you can know. I have no idea why you think it's perfectly okay to accept hearsay and gossip about someone and make judgments based on that... it's something only you can know.

Here you are again, doing exactly what I said. You say I feel compelled to stereotype and label people to discriminate against them. That is professing your belief about why I use labels. I have not said that, you decided it is true based on your own insanity.

Well, you said that the label is useful to you so that you could know whether or not you should "hit on them" and that means you're basing your decision on a stereotype you've established which is based on hearsay. And you pretty much admitted that you discriminate against female Marines because you've heard they are mostly lesbians. So, yes... you are judging people based on it, whether you admit that's what you're doing or not. Most people don't like to admit they are judging people... that's human nature. And let's be clear, there isn't anything wrong with judging people, it's only when we do this based on stereotypes and hearsay or gossip that it's unfair and wrong.

No, I gave hitting on someone as an example of the usefulness of knowing someone is gay or straight.

I've also never said a thing about female marines being lesbians, you lying sack of shit.

But it IS necessarily gossip because that is what defines gossip.
gossip
noun
1. idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.

So... IF someone tells you that someone else is gay... that IS gossip... it's the very definition of gossip. I don't need a special definition, that IS the definition of gossip! And you continue to try and justify judging people and stereotyping them based on gossip. I'm not forcing your comments into anything... you are clearly saying this in no uncertain terms and defending it to the hilt.

Ah. So you would consider anyone telling you anything about another person to be gossip. I hate to break it to you, but that is not the definition most people use for the word. We're not talking about a rumor, it doesn't have to be a salacious discussion.

Since you clearly feel compelled to lie about what I've said and argue with that, I'll leave you to it. You don't need me to argue against shit you make up.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"In 2016... What the hell does "Gay" even mean?"

Wrong question.

Correct question: why in 2016 are many on the right still making the non-issue of being gay an 'issue.'

 

[Boss]

I continue to define gay as someone exclusively attracted to the same gender.

Except that you keep arguing that you can define someone as gay based on what someone else tells you, or based on presumptions you make regarding their actions. The only way you can KNOW what someone is exclusively attracted to is if that person tells you. You go on to reel off a bunch of crap about things that might imply someone could be gay... that's not them telling you... that's YOU making an assumption and then labeling them accordingly.

Again, I wonder what your definition of gossip is.

I posted the definition from dictionary.com.
gossip: idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.

Your religious beliefs, your political ideology, you have already described as not being private and intimate, yet they are also things that no one else knows except you.

Religious and political views might be private. However, if you are expressing them openly to others, it is not private or personal. Same with your sexuality... if you are openly telling everyone you are gay... that is self-labeling and not what I am talking about here. You keep trying to draw some correlation and there isn't any.

You keep harping on this third party thing. Do you not trust anyone?

It's not about trusting. Gossip is third party information of a personal nature about someone else. I'm sorry if you don't get that... it's what gossip IS.

The only way to KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to the same gender is to be that person.

Yay... you finally got my point! So why do you feel compelled to label someone based on anything else? Why do you believe that is perfectly okay and acceptable? Why do you keep arguing with me about it? Are you just trying to be as obtuse as possible or disagreeable to the point you can't be objective? Why not just say... Boss, you make a good point... we shouldn't judge people based on gossip and stereotypes when it comes to sexuality... or anything else, really, but especially something intimate and personal like sexual desire? If you did that, I'd have a lot of fucking respect for you... but you totally refuse.

 

[Boss]

"In 2016... What the hell does "Gay" even mean?"

Wrong question.

Correct question: why in 2016 are many on the right still making the non-issue of being gay an 'issue.'

Sorry, that's not the thread OP... start your own thread if you want to rant about the right.

 

[Montrovant]

I continue to define gay as someone exclusively attracted to the same gender.

Except that you keep arguing that you can define someone as gay based on what someone else tells you, or based on presumptions you make regarding their actions. The only way you can KNOW what someone is exclusively attracted to is if that person tells you. You go on to reel off a bunch of crap about things that might imply someone could be gay... that's not them telling you... that's YOU making an assumption and then labeling them accordingly.

Again, I wonder what your definition of gossip is.

I posted the definition from dictionary.com.
gossip: idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.

Your religious beliefs, your political ideology, you have already described as not being private and intimate, yet they are also things that no one else knows except you.

Religious and political views might be private. However, if you are expressing them openly to others, it is not private or personal. Same with your sexuality... if you are openly telling everyone you are gay... that is self-labeling and not what I am talking about here. You keep trying to draw some correlation and there isn't any.

You keep harping on this third party thing. Do you not trust anyone?

It's not about trusting. Gossip is third party information of a personal nature about someone else. I'm sorry if you don't get that... it's what gossip IS.

The only way to KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to the same gender is to be that person.

Yay... you finally got my point! So why do you feel compelled to label someone based on anything else? Why do you believe that is perfectly okay and acceptable? Why do you keep arguing with me about it? Are you just trying to be as obtuse as possible or disagreeable to the point you can't be objective? Why not just say... Boss, you make a good point... we shouldn't judge people based on gossip and stereotypes when it comes to sexuality... or anything else, really, but especially something intimate and personal like sexual desire? If you did that, I'd have a lot of fucking respect for you... but you totally refuse.

Why don't I just say you make a good point? Because you dance around your point and don't simply state it, and then the point you make is worthless for conversation. No one can truly know anything about another person's thoughts and beliefs. We can only assume or guess or conclude based on available information. Fine, how does that help the conversation about what does gay mean?

I notice you didn't even mention the fact that you twice lied about me and attributed things I did not say to me in an attempt to make a point. Why didn't you just say, "Sorry, I was wrong"? I'm going to assume it's because you are a dishonest dick....of course I can't know that for sure, you might be faking.

I'll unwatch the thread now.

 

[Boss]

Why don't I just say you make a good point? Because you dance around your point and don't simply state it, and then the point you make is worthless for conversation. No one can truly know anything about another person's thoughts and beliefs. We can only assume or guess or conclude based on available information. Fine, how does that help the conversation about what does gay mean?

I notice you didn't even mention the fact that you twice lied about me and attributed things I did not say to me in an attempt to make a point. Why didn't you just say, "Sorry, I was wrong"? I'm going to assume it's because you are a dishonest dick....of course I can't know that for sure, you might be faking.

I'll unwatch the thread now.

I don't dance around my point, the conversation has never been about "what gay means." It's called a literary device known as a "rhetorical question" which is more of a statement argued in the accompanying editorial. So when you get into the OP you see that what I am talking about is why do we feel compelled to attach this particular label when we have a generation or more of young Americans who don't really 'identify' with labels on who they are. Sexuality is becoming a 'whatever' kind of thing... we are progressing as a society... so why have this label 'gay' at all? What purpose does it actually serve in modern times?

Demonstrated in the thread, are assorted "opinions" on what "gay" is useful for. We see it can be used as a weapon to attack people who have a different perspective... We see it can be used to spread gossip and as a source of discrimination. These seem to be terribly unuseful things. It can be used to promote special rights or awareness of inequity but again, our young people simply are less and less aware of it or concerned with it. As a 'social' issue, it's kind of becoming dead. Even more the reason not to cling to tradition because our grandfathers did.

It's like the N-word... now there was a label for the ages... it worked out very useful for many people who could denigrate and attack, discriminate against and oppress. It was convenient as hell. Now... black folks probably used the word back then like they use it now, but we got rid of it because it was offensive and prejudiced. It created more unuseful things than beneficial ones. We realized that it's not right to label people and discriminate based on our stereotypes... or at least, some us did, I'd like to think.

 

[Asclepias]

Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?

I don't profess to know what people's motivations are for applying labels... as we see in this thread, a particular poster continues to insist I am "gay or bi" based on something I said. People can have all kinds of different reasons for applying a label to someone else. The question is, why do you think it's acceptable to stereotype people and judge them based on your stereotypes? Why do you think it's okay to believe gossip and hearsay as opposed to direct information intimated to you from the individual directly?

I think this is a really big problem we're having today in society.

I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.

 

[Boss]

I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.

I find them to be sexually attractive, I am not sexually attracted to them. That has been explained to you countless times but you insist I am gay or bi. The definition some have given for gay is sexually attracted to same gender. I'm not sexually attracted to them, so how am I gay? It doesn't insult me but you obviously think it is a way to insult me. As I told Monty, I don't know what your motives are, maybe it's to make you feel more secure in your own masculinity? Or perhaps it's your homophobic bigotry shining through?

In any event, I think it is a great illustrative example of how useless the label has become.

 

[Alex.]

I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.

I find them to be sexually attractive, I am not sexually attracted to them. That has been explained to you countless times but you insist I am gay or bi. The definition some have given for gay is sexually attracted to same gender. I'm not sexually attracted to them, so how am I gay? It doesn't insult me but you obviously think it is a way to insult me. As I told Monty, I don't know what your motives are, maybe it's to make you feel more secure in your own masculinity? Or perhaps it's your homophobic bigotry shining through?

In any event, I think it is a great illustrative example of how useless the label has become.

Can you qualify this statement?

I find them to be sexually attractive,

 

[Boss]

Can you qualify this statement?

Just what it says. I can look at a person, male or female, and recognize qualities or attributes that make them sexually appealing to others. Finding someone sexually attractive doesn't necessarily mean you are sexually attracted. Earlier, I presented two very good prime examples, one male and one female... Halle Berry and Channing Tatum. I recognize they are both very sexually attractive people but I am not sexually attracted to them. I can see why other people might be. I don't think that makes me gay or bi, but a certain poster here believes it does.

 

[Asclepias]

I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.

I find them to be sexually attractive, I am not sexually attracted to them. That has been explained to you countless times but you insist I am gay or bi. The definition some have given for gay is sexually attracted to same gender. I'm not sexually attracted to them, so how am I gay? It doesn't insult me but you obviously think it is a way to insult me. As I told Monty, I don't know what your motives are, maybe it's to make you feel more secure in your own masculinity? Or perhaps it's your homophobic bigotry shining through?

In any event, I think it is a great illustrative example of how useless the label has become.

You cant find them sexually attractive unless youre sexually attracted. Thats like saying the top of your car is hot before you even touch it to find out. How are you able to tell they are sexually attractive if you are not attracted? Of course you are gay or bi if you are a man and find men sexually attractive and of course you are sexually attracted. Its the same exact thing if not for the tense.

 

[Asclepias]

Can you qualify this statement?

Just what it says. I can look at a person, male or female, and recognize qualities or attributes that make them sexually appealing to others. Finding someone sexually attractive doesn't necessarily mean you are sexually attracted. Earlier, I presented two very good prime examples, one male and one female... Halle Berry and Channing Tatum. I recognize they are both very sexually attractive people but I am not sexually attracted to them. I can see why other people might be. I don't think that makes me gay or bi, but a certain poster here believes it does.

Finding another man sexually attractive is not the same as guessing or recognizing a woman may find that same man sexually attractive. Finding another male sexually attractive is what gay or bi men do. You have already been provided the definition.

 

[Boss]

I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.

I find them to be sexually attractive, I am not sexually attracted to them. That has been explained to you countless times but you insist I am gay or bi. The definition some have given for gay is sexually attracted to same gender. I'm not sexually attracted to them, so how am I gay? It doesn't insult me but you obviously think it is a way to insult me. As I told Monty, I don't know what your motives are, maybe it's to make you feel more secure in your own masculinity? Or perhaps it's your homophobic bigotry shining through?

In any event, I think it is a great illustrative example of how useless the label has become.

You cant find them sexually attractive unless youre sexually attracted. Thats like saying the top of your car is hot before you even touch it to find out. How are you able to tell they are sexually attractive if you are not attracted? Of course you are gay or bi if you are a man and find men sexually attractive and of course you are sexually attracted. Its the same exact thing if not for the tense.

Well, sorry... YES you CAN! It's like saying "that food looks delicious" even if you're not hungry or you're on a diet and can't eat it. I am able to tell because I recognize sexually attractive characteristics. That does not make me gay or bi, that's just your homophobic bigotry shining through.

Most everyone who is sexually attractive knows how to make themselves that way or enhance that aspect... they don't just fall out of bed looking sexy as fuck by accident. Now, maybe YOU do? I don't know... you don't seem to think you're aware of how to make yourself sexually appealing to women. But there is an entire industry.. fashion, cosmetics, fitness, grooming and hygiene... all thriving on people who are trying to make themselves more sexually appealing to someone. It's a natural thing... we see it in every creature of nature... it's the basis for all reproduction.

So, it seems perfectly logical to me, if you are going to try and attract a mate, you need to have some kind of idea of what turns them on sexually. Maybe YOU don't but I think you're in the overwhelming minority there bro. And I don't think knowing those things makes you gay or bi. It just makes you normal and natural. Denying that you know these things or pretending there is something "gay or bi" about knowing them, is a sign of homophobic bigotry. You're probably the kind of guy who would never be caught dead wearing a pink shirt because you would be too afraid people might think you are gay. You should really try opening your mind more and join us in the 21st century.

 

[Boss]

Finding another man sexually attractive is not the same as guessing or recognizing a woman may find that same man sexually attractive. Finding another male sexually attractive is what gay or bi men do. You have already been provided the definition.

Nope... Finding someone sexually attractive is not the same thing as being sexually attracted. Gay or bi men are sexually attracted. Heterosexual males can find another male sexually attractive without having sexual desires for that male. I don't know how else that can be stated. If we couldn't do this, we'd never be able to attract a female mate because we wouldn't have any idea of how we needed to look or be.

 

[Boss]

Thats like saying the top of your car is hot before you even touch it to find out.

That's a terrible analogy. You can't look at something and tell the temperature of it. There are no visual characteristics... unless you see the little heat ripples... then you might presume it's too hot to touch. Now... just because I can look at a male and recognize visual characteristics which are associated with what women find sexually appealing, doesn't mean that I am sexually stimulated. If I looked at a picture of Channing Tatum and said, "I bet he is really good in bed!" That would be a little weird... that might indicate I am gay or bi. I don't know Channing Tatum, I have no desire to engage in sex with Channing Tatum, so I have no idea whether he would or wouldn't be good in bed. Lots of very sexually attractive people are terrible in the sack... that's just a fact of life. Many of them aren't but lots are. Sexual attractiveness doesn't always equate to "good in bed."

I had an ex-girlfriend who told me she could tell I was good in bed when she first saw me. For the life of me, I don't know what she meant... I have looked myself over and I can't really see anything that denotes I am good in bed... I'm sexy as fuck... I dress to the nines... I enhance aspects of my sexual attractiveness to appeal... but I don't see what makes me look like I am good in bed. I AM good in bed... but I have no idea what makes me LOOK that way. Maybe she meant that my (obvious) sexual attractiveness just appealed to her in a way she found very sexually stimulating? I don't know. In any event, I can't look at another male and determine if they are good in bed... I can't even tell with women most of the time. lol