Why is F2F seen as socially acceptable but M2M is seen as evil?
08-11-2012, 06:09 AM
Over the years I have discovered that lesbians are seen by most of the word to be more socially acceptable, if not completely natural, as if 2 women getting it on is just the most natural thing on earth. But just the thought of 2 men together makes people just foam at the mouth in disgust. Arguments get started over it, men have even died over it.
When ever a heated debate gets started about gay rights, marriage amendment or even the word homosexual is used, it seems that the only thing going through everyones mind is the image of it being 2 men. It is quite rare that when a debate gets going over gays, someone will mention women. 99 times out of 100 it is always men.
In a recent post on Facebook, I read a comment about gays. The man just keep referring to "the gay man", he never once mention anything about women. I felt compelled to comment on the subject, asking him right out; Are men the only gender than can be gay, what about women?
This was his reply, I have cut & paste his actual response because I did not want to sum it up, I felt you all needed to read what a straight black, self proclaimed minister felt about lesbians and gays.
" To respond to your other question about “Only men being gayâ€Â, I think it best to really analyze the nature of that question. Shane, have you ever wondered why that late on Friday night, at the conclusion of eating pizza and other barely healthy delicacies, as you sit in your pajamas, remote in hand and slumber approaching, you flip to Cinemax and see two scantily clad young ladies, coddling and caressing, tempting and touching each other to some mediocre soundtrack and foolish script, and you find yourself not basking in disgust, but more overcome by a quiet fascination? This is a sensation that we would not experience if the two young ladies in question were gentlemen. Shane, do you know why we as a society find the lesbian, as an institution as somewhere between playfully innocuous and only marginally offensive? Is it because she sits somewhere between our fantasy and fascination, or is it perhaps that outside of a few instances of role playing and the emulation of machismo, that she and her “partner†if you will, are not really DOING anything? In contrast, the gay man as an entity, carries the very definition of not only penetrating our minds and seemingly peaceful agenda of non intrusive campaigning, but he represents a full fledged occupancy, a forced occupancy no less of the very core of our perceptions of what should and should not be. Make no mistake Shane, if the lesbian, again, not on a couple by couple basis, but as an institution, is playfully benign, then the gay man is very much incurably malignant…at least so far as the way he promotes and presents himself to us. There are lessons in these observations for us Shane, but many of us refuse to attend class. We see fit more to roam the halls, instituting a permanent recess for whatever frail chances we have at better understanding the world around us. The lesbian sits in our culture, and on the cusp of our social structure, whimsically in between our own covert fantasies of mutated polygamy and unapologetic voyeurism, and a reality that is constantly reminding us that because she is woman, she will always have a place with us, even is she comes to us unclean, and not alone. In many ways her place in folklore is like that of the mermaid, the unicorn, the valkyrie, or so many other beautiful magical creatures elusive to us in reality, but fully attainable through allowing our fantasies to run amuck in a manner that we can taste, feel and touch. It is this fairytale-esque perception of her that has permanently granted her a place in the heart of man that is immovable. But Shane, the gay man, as an institution, has little value to ANYONE, but to the gay man. His agenda, his plight, his very musk is fashioned to facilitate one thing and one thing alone…that being his survival, under conditions where his survival is both a necessity and an improbability. So Shane, when I address “the gay man†as an institution during my seminars, it is not due to some willful exclusion of lesbians within the pantheon of our socio-cultural challenges; but born more of simply a matter of addressing the head of the household as opposed to an un-taxable constituency of occupants within that domicile. I hope this has been helpful"
When ever a heated debate gets started about gay rights, marriage amendment or even the word homosexual is used, it seems that the only thing going through everyones mind is the image of it being 2 men. It is quite rare that when a debate gets going over gays, someone will mention women. 99 times out of 100 it is always men.
In a recent post on Facebook, I read a comment about gays. The man just keep referring to "the gay man", he never once mention anything about women. I felt compelled to comment on the subject, asking him right out; Are men the only gender than can be gay, what about women?
This was his reply, I have cut & paste his actual response because I did not want to sum it up, I felt you all needed to read what a straight black, self proclaimed minister felt about lesbians and gays.
" To respond to your other question about “Only men being gayâ€Â, I think it best to really analyze the nature of that question. Shane, have you ever wondered why that late on Friday night, at the conclusion of eating pizza and other barely healthy delicacies, as you sit in your pajamas, remote in hand and slumber approaching, you flip to Cinemax and see two scantily clad young ladies, coddling and caressing, tempting and touching each other to some mediocre soundtrack and foolish script, and you find yourself not basking in disgust, but more overcome by a quiet fascination? This is a sensation that we would not experience if the two young ladies in question were gentlemen. Shane, do you know why we as a society find the lesbian, as an institution as somewhere between playfully innocuous and only marginally offensive? Is it because she sits somewhere between our fantasy and fascination, or is it perhaps that outside of a few instances of role playing and the emulation of machismo, that she and her “partner†if you will, are not really DOING anything? In contrast, the gay man as an entity, carries the very definition of not only penetrating our minds and seemingly peaceful agenda of non intrusive campaigning, but he represents a full fledged occupancy, a forced occupancy no less of the very core of our perceptions of what should and should not be. Make no mistake Shane, if the lesbian, again, not on a couple by couple basis, but as an institution, is playfully benign, then the gay man is very much incurably malignant…at least so far as the way he promotes and presents himself to us. There are lessons in these observations for us Shane, but many of us refuse to attend class. We see fit more to roam the halls, instituting a permanent recess for whatever frail chances we have at better understanding the world around us. The lesbian sits in our culture, and on the cusp of our social structure, whimsically in between our own covert fantasies of mutated polygamy and unapologetic voyeurism, and a reality that is constantly reminding us that because she is woman, she will always have a place with us, even is she comes to us unclean, and not alone. In many ways her place in folklore is like that of the mermaid, the unicorn, the valkyrie, or so many other beautiful magical creatures elusive to us in reality, but fully attainable through allowing our fantasies to run amuck in a manner that we can taste, feel and touch. It is this fairytale-esque perception of her that has permanently granted her a place in the heart of man that is immovable. But Shane, the gay man, as an institution, has little value to ANYONE, but to the gay man. His agenda, his plight, his very musk is fashioned to facilitate one thing and one thing alone…that being his survival, under conditions where his survival is both a necessity and an improbability. So Shane, when I address “the gay man†as an institution during my seminars, it is not due to some willful exclusion of lesbians within the pantheon of our socio-cultural challenges; but born more of simply a matter of addressing the head of the household as opposed to an un-taxable constituency of occupants within that domicile. I hope this has been helpful"
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
Pisces
