Charlie

I don't know any teachers who don't look at Wikipedia, if only to make sure students aren't using it inappropriately. I was reading a national graduate school admission exam a few years ago, and became suspicious when one of the writers started making a lot of statements about an abstruse subject that was mentioned in the question but wasn't really germane to answering the question; I quickly checked Wikipedia on that subject, and discovered that he was directly quoting material there--he had somehow got access to the Internet while taking the exam and was simply copying material he knew nothing about. I would hope that any competent professor would be alert to that possibility.

I assume that history professors' warnings are more nuanced than that, and that they warn students not to use Wikipedia as a primary source, nor as a substitute for reading the assigned texts.

No one I knew was described as "dying of AIDS" after the mid-1990s; they all were longterm HIV+ survivors who died of something else, usually cancer, though their immune-compromised status may have contributed to their cause of death. Younger gay men today probably don't know anyone who "died of AIDS."

The serious ones do.

I saw Gruberova's debut as Queen of the Night at the Met in 1977, and later as Zerbinetta. She was very impressive.

And one of the first things Riley did was steal a top recruit who had committed to Notre Dame but will change now to USC. The whole process stinks, and just shows that college football is basically a business in which coaches are paid much more than the students' academic mentors, and the 'student athletes' are interns hoping to get hired for full-time jobs.

I taught an introductory college course on academic research long before Wikipedia existed, and when it came along near the end of my teaching career, I was skeptical and would not allow students to use it as a primary source. However, it became more sophisticated over time, and as long as it is used as a starting point for finding primary sources, it makes sense to use it. For the purposes of a site like this one, it is a natural reference because anyone who is reading this thread can easily access information on the topic under discussion, without having to do in-depth research, and if they want to do more, they can use the links to the primary sources. That said, one needs to remember that the links on Wikipedia are not necessarily the only primary sources worth checking.

Well, it would definitely include Shiva's lingam.

I remember when Matthew Rush was mentioned often on this site.

I subscribed to it for my spouse, because he was an architect. Neither of us cares as much about interior decor.

FWIW: The poster above just joined this site yesterday to make this recommendation, in his only post.

Our first house was an empty Victorian brickyard worker's row house in an urban neighborhood that was just beginning to gentrify when we bought it, exactly 50 years ago. It was 1000 sq ft, two stories, without a working bathroom (the outhouse was still standing in the back yard) or heating system. We renovated it ourselves and created a working 3 piece bathroom out of part of a bedroom. We paid $13,200 for the house, and lived in it comfortably for twelve years, before selling it for what we thought was the fantastic price of $82,000. The house is still the same size as we left it, with only cosmetic changes to the interior. I just discovered that it was sold again two months ago, for $625,000.

I dropped my subscription to AD because there was hardly any architecture in it any longer--it was all interior design.

I am generally happier with a partner, but not in an old-fashioned monogamous relationship. I was an only child, so I am used to the freedom of doing things alone and making decisions for myself, but I still am happier as part of a couple. My partner and I have been together for 53 years, legally married for eight years, and there are advantages and disadvantages to both situations. Everything depends on the personalities of the two people in the relationship. I lived with my first partner for four years (I call it my "trial marriage"), and I broke it off because we had very different ideas about the nature of our partnership. That helped me to understand what I really wanted in a relationship, and I was lucky enough to get it the second time.

Other old opera houses in Europe also have partial view or no view seats. My mother was almost blind when I took her to La Fenice in Venice years ago, so she was perfectly happy to just listen to the performance in a no view seat.

I remember the first time I went to a showing of the quilt at an armory in NYC in the late 1980s. They had thoughtfully put boxes of Kleenex throughout the exhibit, and I needed them when I encountered the names of men I had known but didn't know that they had died. The quilt is much larger now. Thanks for posting this.

Was Rent.men actually in existence in 2007?

"I speak fluently English, As I lived in London past 8 years." Probably understandable conversational English, but neither one is really fluent in written English.

Probably a 70s model, because Jeff Stryker looks pretty young.

Ad is gone already.

One of the best hiring experiences I ever had was with an Israeli couple, who worked together wonderfully as a team. One of the least successful experiences I had was with a couple who worked together only because one of them wanted it that way, and the other one really didn't. Unfortunately, you can't tell which model you are going to get until you are already in the scene.

I always found that the more frequent the hits, the less the effect.

Yum...a threesome in a '48 Studebaker.

My spouse hated sports as a child and still does, but I don't think it was because he was gay; I think it was because he was shorter than his peers (5'5" as an adult) and very near-sighted, so he couldn't compete with them in most sports, and he turned his competitive instincts to academics. His father also was not interested in sports, didn't play anything himself and never encouraged his sons to play. His straight younger brothers, however, both played football in high school, but it was because they were quite large (6 ft and 200 lbs as adults) and had normal eyesight, so they were recruited by their coaches and peers. I was not particularly athletic, partly because I was really skinny as a teen (5'9" and 120 lbs), but I still enjoyed playing street baseball, though I wasn't recruited by anyone for most sports. However, my father was always involved in some kind of sport--bowling, ice-skating, golf--and he regularly took me to pro baseball games, so I enjoyed many sports as a spectator, and discovered the joy of playing tennis myself as an older adult.

My spouse was one of four brothers, the elder two gay and the younger two straight. Their father was a domineering lawyer who expected all of his children to go away to college and get professional degrees--preferably at his own alma mater. The oldest (gay) did go to his father's school and did get a professional degree, and later got another one at an Ivy League university. The second son (gay) went to his father's school for one year, dropped out and went to work, eventually enrolled at a local commuter college, where he majored in his favorite subject, math, got a degree, and in his 30s got a law degree. The third son (straight) was a rebel who went to a different college, left after one year and became a construction worker for the rest of his life. The youngest son (straight) went to a different school, got an engineering degree, later an MBA, and ended up as a V-P at General Motors. They were all smart enough to get into good schools, but followed different paths from that point. Each of the gay brothers ended up with two degrees and successful professional careers, but so did one of the straight brothers. It is hard to see how much difference their sexual orientation made. BTW, all four of them had long, happy marriages, and remained close to one another.