Pierce Bush

[Guest zipperzone]

>I'd let GWB's very handsome Latino nephew

>entertain me royally any day or night. :9 Unfortunately, for

>many of us, he was married recently!

 

That doesn't necessarily take him out of the running!

[BigK]

>>I'd let GWB's very handsome Latino nephew

>>entertain me royally any day or night. :9 Unfortunately,

>for

>>many of us, he was married recently!

>

>That doesn't necessarily take him out of the running!

>

 

Maybe the marriage is intended to put him IN the running!?! Inquiring minds want to know.......... }(

[VaHawk]

"Unfortunately, for many of us, he was married recently!"

 

What is unfortunate about a straight man marrying a straight woman??

After all none of us would exist without this scenario.

 

Or did you think, for some reason, he was going to be a straight man plying the gay escort scene, and thus "many of us" have missed the opportunity to hire him?

 

Just my personal feelings, but when I read tripe like this, I find it offensive as it assumes that all gay men are a bunch of nellie queens, acting like prebuscent teenaged girls lusting after some pretty boy rock star. Not to mention that it plays right into all the stereotyped bullshit about gays "recruiting and lusting" after straight men.

[Flower]

>But you are being judgmental

>

>RT

 

Of course I am, and for good reason--saying I wasn't when I so obvioulsy was was so obvioulsy a tongue in cheek remark:+

 

It strikes me that lusting over someone appearing to be prepubescent gets pretty close to if not actually a pedophylic daydream. Now that is judgmental without tongue in cheek!

[VaHawk]

"It strikes me that lusting over someone appearing to be prepubescent gets pretty close to if not actually a pedophylic daydream."

 

I totally agree, as have the other posters, who were so rudely castigated!

 

Pierce Bush, imo, is homely, and in my many years of being gay, most of my compatriots would deem him as nothing more than that, regardless of whatever pc backward spin anyone else wishes to run around the turn table! Have we gotten so hung up on pc correctness? Yes?, then that means we all have to tell the emperor that his new clothing is stunningly beautiful!

 

As such, the only attraction, and salivation, that I read on this post was due to his very juvenile appearance. Sorry, but I agree with Flower, that is borderline, at the minimum, pedophilia!

[Doug69]

>It strikes me that lusting over someone appearing to be

>prepubescent gets pretty close to if not actually a pedophylic

>daydream.

 

As numerous posters here have pointed out many times, a significant portion of the posters here have an intense attraction and lust exclusively for escorts and others who look not just adolescent, but prepubescent. These individuals prattle on endelssly and with religious reverence about these "boys" -- as they revealingly (and accurately) call them -- who invariably look as though they aren't even old enough to shave. The code name they us to discuss the objects of their "peophylic daydreams," as you so aptly put it, is "twinks." If one were writing an SAT exam, an excellent question for the Analogy section would be:

 

Escorts : Prostitutes

Twinks : Young teens who are or appear to be 15 or younger

 

Ironically, the pursuers of these "young"-looking "boys" are often the most morally self-righteous about most things. I wonder if that's because, deep down, they know that there is something (at best) exceedingly creepy and unhealthy for 50 and 60 year-old men to have as the sole objects of their lust kids who look (or who are) young enough to be in the 8th Grade, and who then pay money to these "boys" in order to induce the "boys" to pretend that they enjoy sexual intimacy with men decades and decades older than them. Actually, I don't really wonder about that; I'm quite sure that it's true.

[marc anthony]

>

>Ironically, the pursuers of these "young"-looking "boys" are

>often the most morally self-righteous about most things.

 

 

LOL. You mean to say that it is possible to be MORE morally self righteous than your post?

 

:+

[VaHawk]

"LOL. You mean to say that it is possible to be MORE morally self righteous than your post?"

 

Wow, isn't life wonderful!? Everyone has an opinion, and there are those who agree whole heartedly, and those who vehemently disagree just as whole heartedly with that opinion, and whichever stance your body occupies currently, is what is right for you.

 

IMO, Doug69, echoed to the "T" my own current thoughts. I hardly find his posting "morally self-righteous" as such!, but then again, you may, but imo, you would be wrong in making such an assessment.

[Doug69]

>LOL. You mean to say that it is possible to be MORE morally

>self righteous than your post?

 

Oh, hey, Marc! How are you? So nice to see you again. I haven't seen a post of yours around in here awhile - and I'm delighted that, of the many posts here, you chose my post to respond to.

 

As delighted as I am, I confess to wondering: why did you chose my post in this thread to respond to? Was there something about it that attracted your interest?

[Guest Cumbee]

Attention my friends Flower, VaHawk and Doug69.

 

I don't know if each of you was reacting primarily to MY post when you brought up your respective arguments about "twinks", "chicken" and "lusting after", etc. If you were addressing me , PLEASE REREAD MY POST.

 

No where did I indicate, nor did I intend to indicate, that I was lusting after this kid in any way! If I am being accused of that, I DENY IT!

 

Maybe it was a wrong interpretation on my part. Maybe it was just plain naive of me. I thought that other posters here were going after this very average looking KID, and I agree, all he is to me is an average looking kid, BECAUSE of some POLITICAL DIFFERENCES they had with his family. I don't like to see the kids of anyone, politicians and celebrities included, ridiculed or scorned simply because of their PARENTS.

 

So I foolishly perhaps tried to defend this kid by pointing out that he was no more and no less than an average looking kid to me. Not a beauty perhaps, but not ugly or homely either.

 

How you guys went from that innocently intended post to accusing me of being, or endanger of becoming, one of those vile pedaophiles who gives all gay people such an unjust bad name amongst the straight world is beyond me. Again I request that you reread my post.

 

Maybe I heard political attack dogs barking where none existed. If you accuse me of that, I remain silent in my own defense. But if you are accusing me of being one who lusts after, let alone violates children, I say for the last time, REREAD MY POST.

 

Let us not blindly do onto each other that which we all are so sensative about the straight world unjustly doing onto all of us!

[bigguyinpasadena]

I agree with Jaden,especially since Pierce is has tainted blood....(Churchlady voice)tainted by---Satan?

He is a redhead however....

[Guest pshaw]

http://www.newyorkfirst.com/img/products/edgar.jpg

[FourAces]

> Actually, I

>don't really wonder about that; I'm quite sure that it's

>true.

>

Then why bring it up?

 

I know many people who say stupid things because they like to hear the sound of their own voice. I suppose the noise fills some void in their life, well I know it does.

 

RT