Poll: Can you hate gay culture and not be homophobic?

[tkioz]

Personally I detest what the media calls "gay culture", things like the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gra, not because I have an issue with gay people, I really don't, I never have, my favourite teacher in school was gay, and I only found that out 10 years after he was sacked for being gay (Mr. Penny you rocked!).

No my issue is it's massively over sexualised, and I hate that, not just for homosexuals, but heterosexuals as well, there are things I believe that should be kept private, holding hands, a peck on the cheek, things like that are fine, but if you're sticking a tongue down someone's throat in public while your hands are cupping genitals, I don't care what gender you and your parter are, get a fucking room.

I don't need to see that shit, I don't want to see it, I don't care if your two blokes, a bloke and a woman, or two women, take it somewhere private.

I'm not allowed to unzip my pants and take a leak on the side of the road, nor would I if it wasn't against the law, because IT'S RUDE to those around you. Get some god-damn manners.

Also, I consider people who make a single aspect of their personality, such as sexuality, or more topically given the website we're on gaming, pathetic, get some depth. If the only thing you can say about yourself is your a gamer, or that your gay, you're just sad.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Nope. Why would I?

Why wouldn't you?

A person who isn't black still has a specific race. By not imagining someone as black, you are by default imagining them as something else.

Should people have the self-awareness not to act on information they don't have, maybe. They still will though.

Doesn't matter.

Maybe not, but if you're going to tell me to 'try and do something', forgive me if I take your implication that I haven't already done so literally.

But if you say "I really like old/fat/disabled women", however much it's true, expect a shitstorm of negative words.

Possible. I guess it depends on the context.

If you're looking for something of equivalent social magnitude to sexual orientation though, I'm not seeing it. Simply pointing out that normative heterosexuality is hostile to groups other than gays doesn't lead to any kind of equivalence.

I'll admit, I don't really get what you're trying to say here. I think maybe this has become a MOPE (most oppressed people ever) argument. Nothing ever comes out of those.

And you're welcome to think so. But try and find me some proof. Take a look for magazine articles that condemn weight and then put it against articles that condemn sexuality.

Err.. where's the equivalence in that?

Surely you'd want to look for magazine articles which condemn (or don't condone) the idea of men as objects of beauty and sexuality if you wanted an equivalence there.

The vast majority of heterosexual women are "overweight" by magazine standards. Surely magazines are a pretty poor forum for judging anything except social 'ideals', and we're not talking about the ideal here.

Again, pointing out that normative heterosexuality is an exclusive thing, doesn't mean that everyone benefits or suffers from it equally in a simple binary division. 'Grave robbers' and 'chubby chasers' still benefit socially from their heterosexual identification, if nothing else, going back to actual point here rather than getting caught up in the MOPE, the sense that they can talk about and be open about many aspects of their personal and romantic lives (perhaps excluding one or two elements) without being accused of rubbing their sexuality in other people's faces.

So, being gay means you're "better" than us? Really? I warned you about that knife earlier.

Insecurity is a pretty sharp knife too.. pull it out of yourself for a minute.

Do you think most gay people wanted to be denied any possibility of a normal life? Do you think the abnormally high rates of suicide, addiction and mental illness amongst gay people are marks of superiority and happiness?

If you were to think about my statement instead of getting offended, you would realize that I'm talking about a situation which benefits heterosexuals enormously. A heterosexual is more than capable of realizing they don't want to get married or have children and to live the most counter-expectational and counter-cultural existence imaginable, a homosexual simply has no choice, the conventional roads to happiness are closed off, so people have to make their own or die.

You've never seen it? or it doesn't bother you?

I think I answered this already.

Nothing worth defending is a lot worse than nothing worth attacking. I'd rather be able to defend my loved ones.

I think you've missed my point.

As a bisexual, I don't ever have to defend my own sexuality. I don't have to maintain the impression of being 'exclusive', because I'm not.

If a close male friend of mine were to come out or be outed, I would not have to worry about how the closeness of that friendship might reflect on me. I wouldn't have to worry about reading sexual tension into our past or future interactions because having sexual tension with a man doesn't bother me.

What you don't seem to realize is that many gay people actually had functioning relationships with members of the opposite sex before they came out. It's reasonably common that people occasionally find themselves flexible enough to compromise. It's far more weird to me that so many of you fantasize about sleeping with porn stars and supermodels, and yet despite the fact that life seldom works out that way you continue to claim you can't compromise on this one little thing. Why is that?

 

[Luciella]

Yet what annoys me the most about gay culture is that whatever opinion i have its disregarded as narrow minded or homophobe.

I mean, arent the gays that say that themselves as that? narrow minded? I mean they expect us to accept them by-default but they cant accept the rest of the ppl who have a different but not discriminative opinion.

Did it occur to you that the reason people keep disregarding your opinions as narrow minded and homophobic is because they are?

Where there's smoke, there's fire, guy. I don't know really know you, but after reading your little spiel I'm 99.9% convinced you're a pretty hardcore homophobe. You can be what you want to be, but you should probably work on being honest with yourself about it.

Well it does seem u do not even read and just judged by default. If u have read u could tell my gender is not of a man but im a woman. But yeah sure u read whatever was convinient for you to highlight and quote and so flame.

If i was a hardcore homophobe as u regard, i woundt even befriend with gay guys and talk about guys with them(one in fact is one of my closest friends) nor care for their well being.
If i really was a hardcore homophobe i would go to the so called antigay groups and march infront of the council.
In general i dont like the idea of gay culture, but i treat them as people and as friends. The same way i treat ppl that does drugs, i dont like the idea but i treat them like ppl, and its an example dont go all the way telling me its not the same, i know its not but again its an example of another thing i dont quite like.


Whatever happened to the freedom of speech?
It seems the real narrow minded ppl is ppl like yourself, that cant accept opinions that dont go to the fully liking something or fully accepting something.

Sorry if im not a brainless zombie that accepts w/e hollywoodstar/predicator says.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Well it does seem u do not even read and just judged by default. If u have read u could tell my gender is not of a man but im a woman. But yeah sure u read whatever was convinient for you to highlight and quote and so flame.

If i was a hardcore homophobe as u regard, i woundt even befriend with gay guys and talk about guys with them(one in fact is one of my closest friends) nor care for their well being.
If i really was a hardcore homophobe i would go to the so called antigay groups and march infront of the council.
In general i dont like the idea of gay culture, but i treat them as people and as friends. The same way i treat ppl that does drugs, i dont like the idea but i treat them like ppl, and its an example dont go all the way telling me its not the same, i know its not but again its an example of another thing i dont quite like.

Whatever happened to the freedom of speech?
It seems the real narrow minded ppl is ppl like yourself, that cant accept opinions that dont go to the fully liking something or fully accepting something.

Sorry if im not a brainless zombie that accepts w/e hollywoodstar/predicator says.

By default? How would one "judge by default"? I don't think you're using "default" correctly in this context. I'm telling you how you come across when you express yourself. I'm not sure why the blame for that is on me. If I said homophobic things, I'm sure I would come across as a homophobe, too. It's not about who you are. It's about how you come off.

If you're going to ramble about "Dressed up Gays? NO THANK YOU!" and "Trans? The very notion disgusts me!" you're going to come off as homophobic. If you feel that these sentiments do NOT express how you feel, then you need to work on expressing yourself.

And really, this is not a freedom of speech issue. No one is preventing you from airing your opinions. Freedom of speech does not = freedom from consequence. I really can't understand why people continually fail to understand this.

 

[Mau95]

That depends: are you scared of gays? Phobia means fear, after all.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

I purposely draw a line between "gay" and "camp". There is a big gap between being gay and being camp. Most people consider the "gay culture" to be the camp people, because they're the most aggressive about their sexuality. But it's not.

^^ This is a gay couple.

^^ This is a camp man. Probably the best example there is that people know about.

Hating camp guys for the way they portray themselves is not homophobic. You don't hate them because they're gay, you hate them for being swaggering pricks that make such a big deal about the fact they like to stick it to other men, or be stuck by other men.

Christ, I'm gay and I fucking hate camp dudes. I know I'm kind of obvious about my sexuality, but only online because if I'm not I keep getting called a woman. But again, there's the distinction between letting people know your sexuality, and driving rainbow floats down the fucking street in pink hotpants waving rainbow flags and grinding against each other.

Anybody is perfectly within their rights to hate those people. As long as that hate doesn't carry over into hating gay people in general, you are not homophobic.

 

[Luciella]

Well it does seem u do not even read and just judged by default. If u have read u could tell my gender is not of a man but im a woman. But yeah sure u read whatever was convinient for you to highlight and quote and so flame.

If i was a hardcore homophobe as u regard, i woundt even befriend with gay guys and talk about guys with them(one in fact is one of my closest friends) nor care for their well being.
If i really was a hardcore homophobe i would go to the so called antigay groups and march infront of the council.
In general i dont like the idea of gay culture, but i treat them as people and as friends. The same way i treat ppl that does drugs, i dont like the idea but i treat them like ppl, and its an example dont go all the way telling me its not the same, i know its not but again its an example of another thing i dont quite like.

Whatever happened to the freedom of speech?
It seems the real narrow minded ppl is ppl like yourself, that cant accept opinions that dont go to the fully liking something or fully accepting something.

Sorry if im not a brainless zombie that accepts w/e hollywoodstar/predicator says.

By default? How would one "judge by default"? I don't think you're using "default" correctly in this context. I'm telling you how you come across when you express yourself. I'm not sure why the blame for that is on me. If I said homophobic things, I'm sure I would come across as a homophobe, too. It's not about who you are. It's about how you come off.

If you're going to ramble about "Dressed up Gays? NO THANK YOU!" and "Trans? The very notion disgusts me!" you're going to come off as homophobic. If you feel that these sentiments do NOT express how you feel, then you need to work on expressing yourself.

And really, this is not a freedom of speech issue. No one is preventing you from airing your opinions. Freedom of speech does not = freedom from consequence. I really can't understand why people continually fail to understand this.

Yes BY DEFAULT.
You my friend see life as black and white.While i consider it having many shades of gray.

If i was like you, i would say you are gay and why not transexual. Just because u seem to support the idea and -by default- ur that.

Lets put it in an example u can understand:
Say you got a girlfriend that its a twilight fan. And drags u to watch every single movie each year. And u dont quite like said movie, be for the over drama, the complete stupid situations or the bad acting, but u like the cg of the wolves and the battles.

And u say that to your GF, and she simply tells u your a twilight hater!!!!!
And you try to explain with all your patience that no ur not, you dont like some mayor aspects of it but it does have some interesting scenes and its salvageable.

Yet ur still regarded as a hater no matter what you say.

I really hope the example opened ur mind.

 

[somonels]

Flaunters yes. The rest I don't care about, except lesbians, I love lesbians, but not dykes.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Yes BY DEFAULT.
You my friend see life as black and white.While i consider it having many shades of gray.

If i was like you, i would say you are gay and why not transexual. Just because u seem to support the idea and -by default- ur that.

Lets put it in an example u can understand:
Say you got a girlfriend that its a twilight fan. And drags u to watch every single movie each year. And u dont quite like said movie, be for the over drama, the complete stupid situations or the bad acting, but u like the cg of the wolves and the battles.

And u say that to your GF, and she simply tells u your a twilight hater!!!!!
And you try to explain with all your patience that no ur not, you dont like some mayor aspects of it but it does have some interesting scenes and its salvageable.

Yet ur still regarded as a hater no matter what you say.

I really hope the example opened ur mind.

Maybe this will help: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/default

Can you tell me which definition of "Default" you're applying to this situation?

Also, can you explain to me what it is exactly about me saying "When you say X, you give the impression of Y" indicates that I "see the world in shades of Black and White"?

Let me put it in an example that YOU can understand.

If I said "The very idea of Twilight disgusts me", would it not be a fair assumption that I am a "Twilight hater"? (Which, for the record, I am. It's terrible!)

I'm afraid I don't really understand why you're flailing about so much trying to debate this. Apparently you hate it when gay people dress a certain way, act a certain way, or generally annoy you with their gayness, and you find transsexuals "disgusting". If someone asked me if I was a racist, and I said "No, of course not! I have many black friends, it's just INDIANS I find disgusting!", could I therefore claim that I'm NOT a racist?

I suppose it's easier to shoot the messenger then do a little self-reflection though, so keep on firing away.

 

[Luciella]

Yes BY DEFAULT.
You my friend see life as black and white.While i consider it having many shades of gray.

If i was like you, i would say you are gay and why not transexual. Just because u seem to support the idea and -by default- ur that.

Lets put it in an example u can understand:
Say you got a girlfriend that its a twilight fan. And drags u to watch every single movie each year. And u dont quite like said movie, be for the over drama, the complete stupid situations or the bad acting, but u like the cg of the wolves and the battles.

And u say that to your GF, and she simply tells u your a twilight hater!!!!!
And you try to explain with all your patience that no ur not, you dont like some mayor aspects of it but it does have some interesting scenes and its salvageable.

Yet ur still regarded as a hater no matter what you say.

I really hope the example opened ur mind.

Maybe this will help: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/default

Can you tell me which definition of "Default" you're applying to this situation?

Also, can you explain to me what it is exactly about me saying "When you say X, you give the impression of Y" indicates that I "see the world in shades of Black and White"?

Let me put it in an example that YOU can understand.

If I said "The very idea of Twilight disgusts me", would it not be a fair assumption that I am a "Twilight hater"? (Which, for the record, I am. It's terrible!)

I'm afraid I don't really understand why you're flailing about so much trying to debate this. Apparently you hate it when gay people dress a certain way, act a certain way, or generally annoy you with their gayness, and you find transsexuals "disgusting". If someone asked me if I was a racist, and I said "No, of course not! I have many black friends, it's just INDIANS I find disgusting!", could I therefore claim that I'm NOT a racist?

I suppose it's easier to shoot the messenger then do a little self-reflection though, so keep on firing away.

Sigh, yes it seems u didnt understood not even a bit of it.

Lets put it in a yet more simple way:
My way of thinking its almost the same as the one that started the thread.

There easy, u got it?
Yes? awsome.
No? sigh.

Have a nice day.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Nope. Why would I?

Why wouldn't you?

Because it's totally irrelevant to the question. I don't give Bob any specific race because it's not implied.

Same as I don't give people a sexuality unless it's implied.

But if you say "I really like old/fat/disabled women", however much it's true, expect a shitstorm of negative words.

Possible. I guess it depends on the context.

But you've tried it. So you know. Unless you haven't, In which case...It doesn't matter.

Seriously, you're running around your own point swinging that damn knife like your life depends on it now.

If you're looking for something of equivalent social magnitude to sexual orientation though, I'm not seeing it.

There's none so blind than those who will not see.

I'll admit, I don't really get what you're trying to say here.

But you're still saying I'm wrong. Do you see why I warned you before about that knife you're holding? Everything is a target.

I think maybe this has become a MOPE (most oppressed people ever) argument. Nothing ever comes out of those.

It wasn't. It isn't. We're not discussing relative groups of people.

And you're welcome to think so. But try and find me some proof. Take a look for magazine articles that condemn weight and then put it against articles that condemn sexuality.

Err.. where's the equivalence in that?

Both condemn behaviour that is normal by labelling it undesirable?

Surely you'd want to look for magazine articles which condemn (or don't condone) the idea of men as objects of beauty and sexuality if you wanted an equivalence there.

No, because men have never been the subject of beauty and sexuality in that form. And you'd also be focussing purely on part of the problem rather than the whole. Again, you're focussing on "the right to be gay" rather than "the right to be."

The vast majority of heterosexual women are "overweight" by magazine standards. Surely magazines are a pretty poor forum for judging anything except social 'ideals', and we're not talking about the ideal here.

Yes we are. The ideal partner. Which is taken to be your opposing gender. And the person who is allegedly going to make you happy. This is the ideal. That is why being LBGT changes that aspect and causes confusion. Because no ideal exists for a LBGT because it's not based on centuries of evolved ideals.

So, being gay means you're "better" than us? Really? I warned you about that knife earlier.

Insecurity is a pretty sharp knife too.. pull it out of yourself for a minute.

Swish-swish-swish, anyone who disagrees must be hiding something.

Being non-heterosexual means you're never going to have a perfect facsimile of a normal life, but that also means being free to choose. There is no standard to aspire to.

Do you think most gay people wanted to be denied any possibility of a normal life? Do you think the abnormally high rates of suicide, addiction and mental illness amongst gay people are marks of superiority and happiness?

I've no idea. Do you think the abnormally high suicide rates of young heterosexual men are marks of superiority and happiness?
Or the abnormal rise in young heterosexual women being involved in drunken violence?

If you were to think about my statement instead of getting offended,

Swish swish swish. I'm not offended. I'm not even stating my sexuality.

you would realize that I'm talking about a situation which benefits heterosexuals enormously.

the conventional roads to happiness

Swish swish swish.

As a bisexual, I don't ever have to defend my own sexuality.

Swish swish swish

What you don't seem to realize

Swish swish swish

so many of you fantasize about sleeping with porn stars and supermodels

Swish swish swish

Let me stop you there. You don't know a thing about what I know, what I care about and what my sexuality is - but you've spent a good half page attacking what you think I mean when you admit not understanding what I'm talking about.

How about you put away that knife and talk to the "breeders" like they're other human beings that are not put on this Earth purely to condemn homosexuals.

Because I'm pretty sure that most of us don't really mind who you go out with, as long as you don't keep bringing out that damn knife.

That's the part of the gay culture that upsets us the most. The unspoken threat that by living our lives not joyously acknowledging every tryst, that we're somehow equivalent to those who gaybash.

That's offensive. That's why a lot of gay people tend to stay away from gay culture; because it's a choice/need, not a dogma.

 

[Gorilla Gunk]

I'm gay and absolutely despise gay culture to the point where I'm almost ashamed to be gay.

Seriously, fuck the Logo channel, fuck Dan Savage and "It Get's Better," fuck GLAAD, and most importantly, fuck the Pride Parade.

 

[Agayek]

Do you hate all parades or just gay pride parades? I've seen the same senitment echoed a lot in this thread. Having a parade or saying "hey I'm gay", is not meant to be a direct insult or threat, so why in the name of Baby Jesus does it bother you so much?

If said parade blocks traffic and turns what should be a 10 minute drive into an hour-plus affair, yes I do indeed hate it.

Beyond that, it bothers me for the same reasons someone running up and telling me they're straight would bother me. It's a statement of pride for being born, not for any achievement or choice of their own. Everyone is born with a sexual orientation, it is not something to be proud of no matter what said orientation is. It makes absolutely no difference in the quality of your character, which is really the only factor that matters.

Cant people do things that make themselves happy and be who they are or want to be without you getting your panties in a bunch over it? If they were actually hurting anyone on purpose, then I could see why this would be a problem.

I really don't give a shit about people being gay, it has no bearing on me whatsoever. The problem I have is when they go out of their way to make statements about it. It's completely fucking irrelevant; stop making a fuss about it.

Have you seen the kinds of crazy outfits and other fucked up sh*t that goes on at Comic-con or other various game and role-playing conventions? Does that bother you? Have you seen "Carnival" celebrations that take place in various Latin and South American Countries? What about Marti Gras and Spring Break in the US, does the hijinks that take place at these events make your blood boil?

I've never been in the area of a comic-con or whatever, but if it blocked traffic for multiple hours I would very much be bothered by it.

For the sake of clarity, I don't give a shit what people wear or how they behave. What I care about is the underlying premise of "gay pride" and whatnot, specifically that being gay is something to be proud of. It's not, just like being straight is not worth being proud of. It's a sexual orientation most likely decided by some kind of chemical reaction in the brain. No one has any control over it and there is no choice involved. By virtue of that alone it's not something to take pride in.

It does seem like you are singling out homosexuals or homosexuals who if they only participated in these other "extravagant" events would be ok, but as soon as they have their own parade or wear an attention generating outfit you have a problem.

I'm not singling out anyone. I'd be just as annoyed by a "Straight Pride Parade" or whatever the fuck else you want to replace it with. Being proud to be gay is literally equivalent to being proud to be blonde. It makes no fucking sense and really needs to stop.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I'm not singling out anyone. I'd be just as annoyed by a "Straight Pride Parade" or whatever the fuck else you want to replace it with. Being proud to be gay is literally equivalent to being proud to be blonde. It makes no fucking sense and really needs to stop.

If Blondes had to put up with being insulted, terrorized, shunned, beaten, and killed for "being Blonde" they may need to put a little more effort into feeling pride. "Gay Shame" is a problem, so "Gay Pride" is an attempt at a solution. Removed from all context, yes, it makes very little sense. In a world where gays were NOT treated like lepers (or worse) by a significant portion of the population, you're absolutely right, it would make no sense whatsoever. We do not, however, live in that world.

 

[GryffinDarkBreed]

I'd say yes. People can get really annoying when they constantly shove their lifestyle in your face. Like the vegetarian that takes every single opportunity to tell someone that they're a vegetarian. It's like "good for you...do you want a cookie or something?"

No, because cookies require eggs and milk in the recipe

 

[StarsintheBlood]

As an aesexual, I can't understand the need to make sexual preference effect how one behaves. But still, if a guy wants to be cheery and colorful or talk about clothes, let him. Hell, those guys can be fun to be around sometimes. Don't judge someone on their mannerisms unless they are actually being rude.

I guess my main point is this: if a guy wants to skip down the street, there's no reason for you to be personally offended. I won't ask someone to change who they are by saying something like "Act less gay and flamboyant" if that's who they are and they're not hurting anyone. But I CAN say "Act less obnoxious" when they start attacking my outfit's color scheme. Don't judge someone on their mannerisms so much as how they treat other people.

 

[kinggamecat]

Yes I think you can hate the culture and not be homophobic as long as you don't hate the people who enjoy it, hell ya can be gay and hate the lifestyle, the lifestyle's a choice, but I feel Homosexuality occurs in nature, not genetic, but it's just something that's there.

 

[kinggamecat]

Nope. Why would I?

Why wouldn't you?

Because it's totally irrelevant to the question. I don't give Bob any specific race because it's not implied.

Same as I don't give people a sexuality unless it's implied.

But if you say "I really like old/fat/disabled women", however much it's true, expect a shitstorm of negative words.

Possible. I guess it depends on the context.

But you've tried it. So you know. Unless you haven't, In which case...It doesn't matter.

Seriously, you're running around your own point swinging that damn knife like your life depends on it now.

If you're looking for something of equivalent social magnitude to sexual orientation though, I'm not seeing it.

There's none so blind than those who will not see.

I'll admit, I don't really get what you're trying to say here.

But you're still saying I'm wrong. Do you see why I warned you before about that knife you're holding? Everything is a target.

I think maybe this has become a MOPE (most oppressed people ever) argument. Nothing ever comes out of those.

It wasn't. It isn't. We're not discussing relative groups of people.

And you're welcome to think so. But try and find me some proof. Take a look for magazine articles that condemn weight and then put it against articles that condemn sexuality.

Err.. where's the equivalence in that?

Both condemn behaviour that is normal by labelling it undesirable?

Surely you'd want to look for magazine articles which condemn (or don't condone) the idea of men as objects of beauty and sexuality if you wanted an equivalence there.

No, because men have never been the subject of beauty and sexuality in that form. And you'd also be focussing purely on part of the problem rather than the whole. Again, you're focussing on "the right to be gay" rather than "the right to be."

The vast majority of heterosexual women are "overweight" by magazine standards. Surely magazines are a pretty poor forum for judging anything except social 'ideals', and we're not talking about the ideal here.

Yes we are. The ideal partner. Which is taken to be your opposing gender. And the person who is allegedly going to make you happy. This is the ideal. That is why being LBGT changes that aspect and causes confusion. Because no ideal exists for a LBGT because it's not based on centuries of evolved ideals.

So, being gay means you're "better" than us? Really? I warned you about that knife earlier.

Insecurity is a pretty sharp knife too.. pull it out of yourself for a minute.

Swish-swish-swish, anyone who disagrees must be hiding something.

Being non-heterosexual means you're never going to have a perfect facsimile of a normal life, but that also means being free to choose. There is no standard to aspire to.

Do you think most gay people wanted to be denied any possibility of a normal life? Do you think the abnormally high rates of suicide, addiction and mental illness amongst gay people are marks of superiority and happiness?

I've no idea. Do you think the abnormally high suicide rates of young heterosexual men are marks of superiority and happiness?
Or the abnormal rise in young heterosexual women being involved in drunken violence?

If you were to think about my statement instead of getting offended,

Swish swish swish. I'm not offended. I'm not even stating my sexuality.

you would realize that I'm talking about a situation which benefits heterosexuals enormously.

the conventional roads to happiness

Swish swish swish.

As a bisexual, I don't ever have to defend my own sexuality.

Swish swish swish

What you don't seem to realize

Swish swish swish

so many of you fantasize about sleeping with porn stars and supermodels

Swish swish swish

Let me stop you there. You don't know a thing about what I know, what I care about and what my sexuality is - but you've spent a good half page attacking what you think I mean when you admit not understanding what I'm talking about.

How about you put away that knife and talk to the "breeders" like they're other human beings that are not put on this Earth purely to condemn homosexuals.

Because I'm pretty sure that most of us don't really mind who you go out with, as long as you don't keep bringing out that damn knife.

That's the part of the gay culture that upsets us the most. The unspoken threat that by living our lives not joyously acknowledging every tryst, that we're somehow equivalent to those who gaybash.

That's offensive. That's why a lot of gay people tend to stay away from gay culture; because it's a choice/need, not a dogma.

I agree with you bro, I'm straight but I support homosexuality, if a homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, lesbien etc. hates straight people then their just as bad as homophobes, hate is hate, everybody's different. The person who's saying all these nasty things about heterosexuals is now no better than a homophobe.