|
MagicM
|
 |
« on: July 05, 2009, 08:06:38 am » |
|
|
“Beauties in vain their pretty eyes may roll; charms strike the sight, but merit wins the soul.” Alexander Pope
|
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2009, 08:16:14 am » |
|
oh yeah, this is being talked about over on BM too....with all the prerequisite, "all gay men are poseurs...either you are a femme or 'butch acting'" you can't just be yourself if you're gay apparently. |
|
|
|
|
|
JudgeHolden
Guest
|
|
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2009, 11:58:02 am » |
|
This article held no surprises for me, nothing that aint been already beat to death in the various masculinity threads already. Im not going to look at the responses on BM as I coulod most likely write them myself, and assign the usual characters to them. I notice this is the LOGO channel website so, no surprise, the writer ends the article with an admonishment that femmy guys shouldnt have to butch it up, fly those rainbow colors etc., though I would add, dont get your feathers in a fire though if those "STR8 Acting" dudes you lust after dont want to f*** you.
Cant begin to numerate all the times that certain guys around here in addition to myself made the distinction that though we did not fault guys who really DO seem to be wired up that way for acting girlie, and would defend to the death their right to camp it up (OK, maybe not to the DEATH but throw a punch or 2), we DID NOT WISH TO HAVE SEX WITH THEM. Something that got echoed on page 3, right at the top, but got drowned out in the righteous anger to follow.
I hold to the conclusion I drew a long time ago, these are 2 twains that will never meet. Maybe there are genetic differences, who knows, but when Im in a room with these guys, I feel like a different species.
|
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
|
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2009, 12:04:23 pm » |
|
This article held no surprises for me, nothing that aint been already beat to death in the various masculinity threads already. Im not going to look at the responses on BM as I coulod most likely write them myself, and assign the usual characters to them. I notice this is the LOGO channel website so, no surprise, the writer ends the article with an admonishment that femmy guys shouldnt have to butch it up, fly those rainbow colors etc., though I would add, dont get your feathers in a fire though if those "STR8 Acting" dudes you lust after dont want to f*** you.
Cant begin to numerate all the times that certain guys around here in addition to myself made the distinction that though we did not fault guys who really DO seem to be wired up that way for acting girlie, and would defend to the death their right to camp it up (OK, maybe not to the DEATH but throw a punch or 2), we DID NOT WISH TO HAVE SEX WITH THEM. Something that got echoed on page 3, right at the top, but got drowned out in the righteous anger to follow.
I hold to the conclusion I drew a long time ago, these are 2 twains that will never meet. Maybe there are genetic differences, who knows, but when Im in a room with these guys, I feel like a different species.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo
|
|
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2009, 12:12:21 pm » |
|
I was SHOCKED to see this article in TDS over at DCF!!! So much so that I just posted the following to the TDS Response thread:
I do not understand how the article "Why Can’t You Just Butch Up?" made it to TDS. I thought this topic of discussion was prohibited here at DCF back in October 2007 when the thread "Masculine & gay--mutually exclusive?" was shut down for the following reasons:
A reminder: The ''masculinity thread'' was closed precisely to end the argument that had come to a dead end many months ago, with no one convinced that they should convert to the opinion held by anyone else. No new point had been raised for a very long time. No one has any sort of universal Truth that everyone should convert to. Humans do not create universal Truths. One or more people were so incensed that their own opinion was not recognised as incontrovertible fact that they were sarcastically insulting others. It was time for that particular line of argument to cease. It still is that time. It will not be reintroduced to poison any other thread, nor to continue to generate bitterness and anger. I believe that the entire forum staff from Dave on through is in agreement about this, having gone on record in our discussions of it. Please desist from restarting this line of argument. and ~ basically, the thread had pros and cons:
Pro: some interesting debate
Con: it frequently got extremely heated and divisive and often offensive and destructive in a lot of different ways.
after a year and a half, it was mostly repetition. the pro side of the equation had diminished to very little. the con side was ever higher. so it did not seem wise to keep it.
we have been discussing that situation for a very long time--god, at least a year. (we being mods, other administrators, and countless members who have weighed in for and agaisnt closing it.) for most of that time, meli and i were for keeping it, because our philosophy is generally to ere on the side of keeping discussion and accepting the pain. but as the pros got smaller and the cons bigger, and the discussion had been given more and more time to play itself out, we decided enough was enough.
i think we need to make space for all sorts of discussions, even ones that can get ugly. but discussing them forever i don't necessarily agree with. a year and a half is a long time for a discussion. i think this one had run its course, and the downside was far greater than the up.
Does this article's appearance on TDS mean that the topic is now allowed to be discussed?? [/color] |
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
|
« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2009, 12:21:11 pm » |
|
I was SHOCKED to see this article in TDS over at DCF!!! So much so that I just posted the following to the TDS Response thread:
I do not understand how the article "Why Can’t You Just Butch Up?" made it to TDS. I thought this topic of discussion was prohibited here at DCF back in October 2007 when the thread "Masculine & gay--mutually exclusive?" was shut down for the following reasons:
and
Does this article's appearance on TDS mean that the topic is now allowed to be discussed??
maybe they feel they have now rid themselves of the pesky wrong thinking conservatives, Milo...they dont WANT a discussion..they want a group hug and reassurance that they are right and everyone agrees with them. They want to hang onto their 'victim' status. |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo
|
|
« Reply #6 on: July 05, 2009, 12:21:37 pm » |
|
Here's the response to my question: No, Milo. Sorry. We just made a mistake and forgot how inflammatory this topic was. The topic is still NOT to be discussed on this Forum.
My apologies.
- Lydia
|
|
|
|
|
|
JudgeHolden
Guest
|
|
« Reply #7 on: July 05, 2009, 12:25:44 pm » |
|
Dont go making trouble now  . Though at this point they might agree to it just to get the patient off life support, aint been to DCF in God knows how long. |
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
|
« Reply #8 on: July 05, 2009, 12:30:04 pm » |
|
durn you ruined their fun!
there is a reason why that site - 365Gay - has an ad for "Bruno" on all their pages..along with a contest for a chance to 'live like Bruno'!! that is what they WANT to promote..that kind of marginalized existence..
watching the trailer you realize how homophobia is NOT as rampant as they would lead you to believe...
they HAVE to push WAY past the boundaries to get a reaction..and even then the reaction is not near what they claim for much smaller displays..
for example, "Bruno" meets a friend in the airport...wearing panties and high heels...he gets a few looks (but then so would anyone dressed bizarrely and inappropriately) but no one says anything...then he proceeds to be very loud and obnoxious and start causing a scene...and STILL people just look at them and mumble a bit...
a gay couple dressed like everyone else greeting and hugging...what would have been the reaction? nothing beyond MAYBE a look from someone...no one ran up and assaulted 'Bruno' and his friend...
really all it proves is there ISN"T widespread homophobia cause if there were, "Bruno" wouldn't have had to be such a caraicature
the gay party depends so much on that 'victim' status for everything they can't handle any dissent..
|
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
|
« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2009, 12:34:20 pm » |
|
Dont go making trouble now . Though at this point they might agree to it just to get the patient off life support, aint been to DCF in God knows how long. I think like BM, they dont' care....they have their little group and now they sit around and look at one another. a discussion board NEEDS two sides...that is what people don't understand...we need it here but they won't come here because they know they won't have the moderators to defend them when their arguments all fall apart. They do not have the courage of their convictions. they want to stay in their protected little coccoon and ditto one another.. |
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
Here's the response to my question:
Milo you crack me up with your responses to this kind of stuff...you can put so much...meaning...into a little response... "ok" maybe it is just me cause I know the background but that just kills me.... what I get from 'ok'...is: "then shut the f*** up cause I am not gonna quit calling you on it..." |
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
I love how Marge dismisses your objection to the use of the word "butch"...apparently only THEY get to decide what is an insulting term. political correctness....  hypocrites more like it... (and her tag ..."a shining example of Democratic womanhood"...gooooood grief...how insecure can a woman be? that is so sad. I really didn't think of her as being so unsure of herself. she has my pity there...) |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo
|
When I got home from rehearsal tonight, I checked DCF. The article had been removed from TDS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
injest
|
When I got home from rehearsal tonight, I checked DCF. The article had been removed from TDS.
you go Milo!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo
|
My intent was not to have them pull the article, but rather I was hoping that the prohibition of the topic had been lifted so that we could explore it some on more with that audience. I know, I know, "Milo, we did that already." Well yes, we did. But I can imagine that in the almost 2 years since the topic was banned, there have been newcomers to DCF that would benefit from hearing what we have to say about the whole thing. Besides, my understanding of the topic has certainly grown since then as a result of the activity at Bettermost.
I find that no matter where I go online, I discover a handful of guys who fall on my side of the gay/androphile equator. DCF was no exception. And I know from the PMs I was getting back in the day that there are more there than those of us that defected to BM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
