Where have the dicks gone?

[Rick Munroe]

>but don't suggest i'm a

>homophobe because i n many many like me refuse 2 b cloned and

>objectified.

 

My reasoning had more to do with your constant use of the pejorative "faggy." And, I hate to tell you, but dressing just like "many many like me" is a clone look. :+

[Guest zipperzone]

>nope don't buy it...(2 b a man ,comfortable n your

>skin,secure in being gay,u must let your dick n ass hang

>out)

 

You really don't get it. Nobody said you have to let you dick and ass hang out to be a man. Them's your words. The point I tried to make is that just because some of us enjoy looking at the ones who do wear tight clothing does not make us a perv.

 

>i have been n a relationship with the same guy since i was 14

>(monogamous although i have slipped a few times).

 

And what does this have to do with the subject at hand?

 

>i post using my real name...not a tag but the name everyone n

>my life knows me by...taylor... it is my middle name,my first

>name is joplin,i never liked it and nobody ever uses it.

 

Congratulations! But how does that affect whether we are "Pervs" or not?

 

>my problem with tight clothing and the reallllllll faggy

>looking bikini swim suits is...i don't want 2 b anyones

>fantasy,

 

You probably don't have much to fear in that department.

 

>and 4 someone 2 say that i'm afraid 2 b a man because

>i don't wear faggy looking clothes is disingenuous on the part

>of the poster.

 

Who the hell said that - you really should brush up on your reading skills.

 

>and chicks that dress like u describe r slutty looking,n want

>breeders 2 shing on them,but n my experiance chicks that i

>know r turned off by the dog n heat act.

 

I never alluded to them as being slutty, that's totally your spin on things. And furthermore it has nothing to do with what I said. My comment was that you probably think men who ogle provocativly dressed women are also pervs given the flawed logic you expressed. And by the way - women have been showing cleavage since the time clothes were invented. If the chicks you know are tured off by that style of dress, you must hang out with a rather prudish bunch.

 

Actually - that just put it all into perspective for me. You are a prude. Cool............

 

>people need 2 learn 2 respect other peoples space ,hell u

>can't go n2 a gay club without being hit on no matter what u r

>wearing,n when u let them know u r not interested...u become

>the asshole...

 

It's when you're NOT hit on, you have to worry.

[taylorky]

no, not many many dressing like me...but many many like me refuse 2 b cloned n objectified;)

[Guest RandyRon]

>"Where have the dicks gone"???

>

>Can't say where they are at the moment, but I hear on good

>authority, that they will all be in NYC for the Republican

>National Convention!

 

 

Maybe a lot of little dicks but some really big pricks.

[Rick Munroe]

>Maybe a lot of little dicks but some really big pricks.

 

And more than a few pussies. :+

[Rick Munroe]

If you're all wearing similar "baggy clothes,wave riders,n loose long tees," then you are already cloned. :7

[Guest zipperzone]

>>Maybe a lot of little dicks but some really big pricks.

>

>And more than a few pussies. :+

 

Holy crap - I din't know Taylor was planning on attending!

[VaHawk]

>My reasoning had more to do with your constant use of the

>pejorative "faggy."

 

I have to admit that I felt the same way, as if "faggy" was being used in a pejorative manner. I also don't comprehend what constitutes "faggy clothing", as I've known lots of gays in my lifetime, and I was totally unaware that there was a ONE style of clothing that all gays wear, unless it was the Nazi "pink triangle patches" that immediately identified us all.

 

I think fashion should be an individual choice, but most people of a generation tend to dress like their peers. Right now baggy clothing is in for young people, and to criticize that because it isn't providing older queers with the opportunity to ogle the "goods" of the young gays, could very well engender feelings by those young gay men, that they are being objectified. I believe that is all that taylorky was trying to say.

 

I have to admit that I didn't appreciate his comments about "gay leather queens" or "faggy" clothing. I find such observations, lacking in detente, but I sincerely doubt that taylorky is "homophobic", but rather just young. Let's also face the fact, that if one is young and attractive, many guys in the clubs, feel it is their right to grab and feel, and that does indeed make one feel like some kind of object rather than a person. I know that is how I often felt when I was taylor's age and experienced the same shit!

 

As much as taylorky, has posted here and been as honest in his feelings as he has been, it is really ludicrous to brand him a "homophobe".

[Rick Munroe]

>As much as taylorky, has posted here and been as honest in his

>feelings as he has been, it is really ludicrous to brand him a

>"homophobe".

 

I disagree. It's known that many if not most homophobes are gay. Like taylor, I have been out since I was a teenager, and I've been in the same committed relationship since I was a teenager, but unlike taylor, I have never once in my entire life referred to anyone else as a 'fag' or a 'queen' or used the adjectival forms of those words. I think there can be many levels, variations and forms of homophobia. Just because he is out does not mean he cannot hate other gay people. I would also say that a black man who hates "niggers" is being racist.

[VaHawk]

>I disagree. It's known that many if not most homophobes are

>gay.

 

But in turn, don't these homophobes that you cite, usually live a heterosexual life style, denying their true selves? I can't say that, at least personally, that I have ever met someone who was openly gay and also a homophobe.

 

>I have never once in my entire life referred to anyone else as a 'fag' or a 'queen' or used the adjectival forms of those words.

 

Well, imo, that makes you the exception to the rule. In my lifetime I have known many, many gays who use the terms "queens" and "fag" and "faggots", in not only references to others, but also in reference to themselves.

 

>I think there can be many levels, variations and forms of homophobia. Just because he is out does not mean he cannot hate other gay people. I would also say that a black man who hates "niggers" is being racist.

 

I'll concede your point here, but with the caveat, that it isn't other gay people that such people hate, but that they hate themselves for being gay and having themselves identifed with the more outre gay personas that is all that is shown in the media.

[taylorky]

>I think fashion should be an individual choice, but most

>people of a generation tend to dress like their peers. Right

>now baggy clothing is in for young people, and to criticize

>that because it isn't providing older queers with the

>opportunity to ogle the "goods" of the young gays, could very

>well engender feelings by those young gay men, that they are

>being objectified. I believe that is all that taylorky was

>trying to say.

>

>I have to admit that I didn't appreciate his comments about

>"gay leather queens" or "faggy" clothing. I find such

>observations, lacking in detente, but I sincerely doubt that

>taylorky is "homophobic", but rather just young. Let's also

>face the fact, that if one is young and attractive, many guys

>in the clubs, feel it is their right to grab and feel, and

>that does indeed make one feel like some kind of object rather

>than a person. I know that is how I often felt when I was

>taylor's age and experienced the same shit!

>

 

>

>

>

>

thanks hawk,you pretty much got it...even though others didn't.

and the use of the word faggy (just a word folks) was mostly retaliatory,but again you understood that...even though others couldn't.

[Guest zipperzone]

>thanks hawk,you pretty much got it...even though others

>didn't.

>and the use of the word faggy (just a word folks) was mostly

>retaliatory,but again you understood that...even though others

>couldn't.

 

Strange how posts can morph into something totally different from the original comment. We are now fixated on Taylor's use of the word faggy, when the original point of my post was to object to the way he flings the word "PERV" around. He described those of us who enjoy looking at guys in revealing clothing as pervs. I suspect that would include a hugh majority of members to this board, yet almost no one with the exception of Rick (and even in his case, not directly) has called him on it.

 

Interesting to hear that what I assume to be the above stated majority doesn't seem to object to being called a perv. What will he call us next? And will we let him get away with it without calling him on it? Probably...... we're SO infatuated by youth in baggies.

[Rick Munroe]

>and the use of the word faggy (just a word folks)

 

With that logic, every word is "just a word folks" and no word has any meaning, and communication loses all purpose, and the pen is no longer mightier than the sword, and we might as well all be apes.

 

>was mostly retaliatory

 

What was it about my original post that you felt merited "retaliation"? It was a post bemoaning the latest style of clothing. Nobody was attacking you or your masculinity when you decided to post that "tight pants,bikini swim trunks,etc: etc: is faggy looking." Or are you retaliating against society for forcing you to wear baggy, womanly clothes so that nobody will hit on you in bars?

[taylorky]

LOL...womanly clothes...guess it's n the eye of...........

 

2 me womanly clothing would b bikini swimsuits that look like panties and tight hip hugger jeans.

 

again i believe we all have a right 2 b free of unsolicited advances,and not b expected 2 dress 4 someone elses sexual fantasy.

 

u think my style is "womanly"...i think some peoples style is "faggy".

 

but at any rate thanks 2 hawk n u 4 responding...it's been fun...although i am surprised no 1 else responded.

 

[Rick Munroe]

>2 me womanly clothing would b bikini swimsuits that look like

>panties and tight hip hugger jeans.

 

And to me, the bikini swimsuits show off a man's cock and balls, which are far from womanly, while the loose knee-length swimsuits you prefer look like ladie's skirts. And women look silly in hip-hugger jeans because they usually create weird pockets of fat because they don't follow the lines of a woman's body. Low-rise jeans are actually made for the male form.

[taylorky]

yea,yea,yea...whatever...u think my taste sucks,i think ur taste sucks.

 

you think ur right i know ;>) i'm right,bottom line who really gives a shit.

 

soooooo bye.;-)

[Rick Munroe]

>yea,yea,yea...whatever...u think my taste sucks,i think ur

>taste sucks.

 

Actually, I don't know you or your taste so I would never say that. But I will say that, in my observation, your generation doesn't really have taste; it's more a desire to be seen with the right brand name emblazened across their bodies or on their heads. Personal style seems to be a thing of the past. As for my "taste," it emcompasses a lot more than tight pants and bikinis so how do you know my taste "sucks"? Actually, if you're talking about music, I bet most people would say my taste "sucks" but I prefer to call it eclectic.

[Guest TorontoJared]

I agree that it is quite odd that so many people my age wear such large jeans that hide some of their best physical assets. Also, they are so hard to move about in. Actually a friend and I switched pants one day while having this conversation. He wears the large, huge jeans with the crotch at the knees and I wear nicely fitted jeans that, while not skin-tight, are a fit that is both good looking while being comfortable. His jeans were impossible! They're so hard to walk in without taking small steps! They're so big it was like wearing a dress. I don't see why one would choose that as a style to wear.

 

Another thing that I don't understand about this style is why many people wear their pants so one can see their boxers. I could understand this if they by chance had expensive boxers or underwear but usually they are just cotton boxers.

 

I know that the people who wear that type of pants think of themselves as looking stylish and good I don't understand it either and I am one of their contemporaries. I think that we'll have to agree to disagree on style though. It is a personal thing and while one may not think that a particular style makes sense, looks good, or is comfortable to wear, inreality it is a good way to experiment with one's appearance for just like changing hair styles or hair colour, it is non-permanent.

[taylorky]

> I agree that it is quite odd that so many people my age

.

>

> I know that the people who wear that type of pants think

>of themselves as looking stylish and good

*

*

*

no no bud don't presume "the people" that wear baggys all think alike.

i couldn't give a rats fuck about style...i like comfort,and more importantly, i don't ever give a thought to what is somebodys idea of "stylish and good".<<drives jeff nuts>>

 

and why would u think it's ok 2 show boxers only if they r pricey...wouldn't u agree that's just a little shallow,n my opinion those that by clothes because somebodys name is plastered all over them r...well i'll save that 4 another time.

 

and i have 2 add that the crotch on my pants is never around my ankles knees,or anywhere south of where it should b,so i have no trouble walking or running.

 

[Rick Munroe]

>I think that

>we'll have to agree to disagree on style though. It is a

>personal thing

 

I think personal style was killed by the advent of cable TV and in particular, MTV. Before videos dictated how a young person should dress, there were many more different "types" and more experimentation with different styles, without regard for brand name logos. Now, every boy seems to want to dress like Eminem and every girl like Britney. I'm not seeing individuality.

 

What did your friend say when he tried on your pants that fit?

[Rick Munroe]

>i couldn't give a rats fuck about style...i like comfort,and

>more importantly, i don't ever give a thought to what is

>somebodys idea of "stylish and good".

 

I don't buy that, because you specifically choose to wear what you call "baggies" and "boardshorts"...if comfort were all you cared about, you would just put on anything loose and comfy like a caftan or good ol' sweats. You are choosing to dress in a specific style which is very popular among members of your generation.

 

>and why would u think it's ok 2 show boxers only if they r

>pricey...wouldn't u agree that's just a little shallow,

 

Have to agree with you there; I thought the same thing when I read that.

 

>and i have 2 add that the crotch on my pants is never around

>my ankles knees,or anywhere south of where it should b,so i

>have no trouble walking or running.

 

Good boy. You get points for that (seriously). And yes, "Rick points" count.

[taylorky]

where u a bubbe in a prior life??? or are u one now,assigned deep cover ...posing as a escort.

[Rick Munroe]

>where u a bubbe in a prior life???

 

I have no idea what that means. :o

[+ deej]

>"Whenever I feel afraid, I whistle a happy tune!"

 

"I have confidence in confidence alone!" (Sorry, was watching Sound of Music last night.)

 

Oh, don't get me started on showtune references. :9

[Guest TorontoJared]

He said that he thought that he wasn't used to wearing something tight and that he was self concious and didn't like feeling so exposed and not having as much material on. He also commented that he didn't like the feeling of the support that the pants gave his package. He said that he enjoyed having his "swing free". I guess to each his own. There is a lot of talk about respecting diversity on this site. I guess one can also apply that to clothes. If everyone dressed the same things wouldn't be as interresting. I discussed this with a friend of mine and thought you might find her comment comical "It's not important what clothes a person wears, it's important with what happens once the clothes are off." It made me smile anyway.