pellaz Wrote:I thought about this in terms of the reverse. You could be attracted to an individual because he is more feminine and represents a more traditional arrangement.
Oh that's true, and actually how I would like to end up one day.
Sitting on my guy's lap with Sora[my turtle] admiring us from the spare room I will have for her[she's gonna be my baby forever, even when she outlives me
mile: ] and perhaps listening to some Bach or Vivaldi[or I might play it, either or].
I'm the type that mates for life, so I want a partner and not a "fill-in".
But sadly, most gay guys don't view relationships this way [no offense to my fellow queers] and then go even further to both limit themselves and discriminate against feminine gays, because they aren't "guy-like", meaning they aren't looking for no-strings-attached sex [although some do].
I think it's anti-progessive for that reason.
If a "masculine" gay guy doesn't want a feminine guy as his partner/hook-up, then that's fine, but why do you have to discriminate and alienate? It doesn't make sense to do so, especially within your own community, people who are going through exactly what you are, most times even more so.
I've been hurt[never physically] alot in regards to my femininity and I feel like "straight acting" gays get off easier, because they can blend in, not because they necessarily want to, but because they can and it frustrates me, because they are almost always the one's discriminating against people like me. And I'm not even a stereotype.
Oh gosh, I almost went into a rant...
But it's true. I look at whether or not I can find a match for me. I don't discriminate because a guy is too "manly" or too queeny, but rather accept or decline based on aspects of our personalities and how well they mesh, if they do.
So yes Pellaz, I believe some guys look for the traditional arrangement, but from what I've seen and read, it seems that those guys are in the minority. Including myself appearantly.