01-12-2012, 09:10 PM
Your argument is basically that gay men who don't have anal sex are sick in the head. Can you not see the problem with this line of reasoning?
The sexual experiences of people are not universal, to say so would imply that there is no sexual difference between gay and straight men. Why is gay male sexuality somehow allowed to be different from straight male sexuality, but a difference of sexuality within the larger category of gay male sexuality is somehow a sign of something "psychological" (which is merely a patronizing euphemism for fucked in the head).
Let's break down the rhetoric here, Bob. Your inability to imagine people's ability to have intimate relationships without something you find necessary has no bearing on the reality of it. You're literally trying to tell people that they are fucked up if they don't like doing something, how is that any different than someone telling you you're fucked up for wanting to have sex with men?
What does it matter that anal sex or prostate stimulation can be enjoyable? Sticking an erect penis into a vagina is mostly enjoyable too, does that mean there's a problem with you for not having sex with women?
God damn it people, these are the exact same arguments used to put down gay people in general, and we're going to go and throw them at people in our own community. While we're at it let's have another thread where we try to marginalize camp men and transvestites, we haven't had a good fascist rant about that in a while.
Edit: Also, I'm not saying being gay is not about sex. Freedom of sexual expression is essential to the gay experience, we can not really divorce romantic love from a sexual desire or expression. However, abstinence is a form of sexual expression, it's an act of sexual behaviour, and the deserves the same legitimacy of any other expression between consenting people.
The sexual experiences of people are not universal, to say so would imply that there is no sexual difference between gay and straight men. Why is gay male sexuality somehow allowed to be different from straight male sexuality, but a difference of sexuality within the larger category of gay male sexuality is somehow a sign of something "psychological" (which is merely a patronizing euphemism for fucked in the head).
Let's break down the rhetoric here, Bob. Your inability to imagine people's ability to have intimate relationships without something you find necessary has no bearing on the reality of it. You're literally trying to tell people that they are fucked up if they don't like doing something, how is that any different than someone telling you you're fucked up for wanting to have sex with men?
What does it matter that anal sex or prostate stimulation can be enjoyable? Sticking an erect penis into a vagina is mostly enjoyable too, does that mean there's a problem with you for not having sex with women?
God damn it people, these are the exact same arguments used to put down gay people in general, and we're going to go and throw them at people in our own community. While we're at it let's have another thread where we try to marginalize camp men and transvestites, we haven't had a good fascist rant about that in a while.
Edit: Also, I'm not saying being gay is not about sex. Freedom of sexual expression is essential to the gay experience, we can not really divorce romantic love from a sexual desire or expression. However, abstinence is a form of sexual expression, it's an act of sexual behaviour, and the deserves the same legitimacy of any other expression between consenting people.
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
