I do not believe in sexual orientation.

[Kulindahr]

lol That's funny.

I can just picture Kulindahr (whom I think looks somewhat like Swerve) pounding on some she-male's ass, while [STRIKE]his[/STRIKE] her tits are bouncing.

I can't. . . . .

 

[Esquire0399]

Good friend, what happens in Europe doesn't matter here, does it? The simple fact is that "Kristopher" is an uncommon spelling here.

And that's the whole point, isn't it? Your mother gave you that spelling to give you a more unique identity, just as someone I know spelt her daughter's name "Pehtyn", and someone else named her daughter "Tanisha."

(BTW, those odd spellings and odd names handicap a person in the work place. Oh, I mentioned that already.)

Tanisha is an odd name? Really? That statement is itself odd considering I've met at least five in the past year and work with two every day. Hmm... I guess I just live in the Tanisha capital of the world then.

 

[KennyD]

I certainly agree with you and Dr. Kinsey. I've always said that we are all sexual being , being sexual with those that we are sexually attracted to as we go down life's highways / paths ...

I definitely don't believe that we need ANY labels to define who we are ...

 

[Kulindahr]

@ Johann: I believe that about names. There are exceptions; when I was teaching swimming, for example, several of us were fascinated by unique names, and quite unintentionally gave more attention to students with such. But I've witnessed the bit with applications, when working as head honcho at the swimming pool at a large apartment complex, names the manager couldn't pronounce on sight got moved to the bottom of the stack.

Though as to that name -- Esquire, there's a Tanisha right here in redneck land... with a twin sister named Tanitha. And an older sister named Tabitha.
God help the kid if they have a son....

 

[Kulindahr]

^Kulindahr:

And Esquire!!

I found the article online!

It turned out that my memory for the specific names was wrong, but my memory for the details of the study was quite accurate.

To wit:

http://www.slate.com/id/2116449/

Except in the California study it turned out that the name wasn't making a noticeable difference in life outcome.

So maybe accepting the label "gay" doesn't make any noticeable difference in life outcome.... ?

 

[burnoutstar]

A man who exclusively dates males is GAY.

There is no other way around it. To reject the label is to reject the reality of who you are. It's internalized homophobia.

Actually, the problem with this statement is that it ignores the fact that sexuality is composed of sexual thoughts and sexual behavior. A man who exclusively dates males exhibits homosexual behavior. However, his sexual thoughts may be otherwise. In this case, he probably exhibits homosexual thoughts as well, but the point is that sexuality cannot be determined solely by behavior.

 

[andy12]

^ Do you mean that historically or hypothetically? Or is there a modern example?

Homosexuality as a word was invented in 1869. Greeks and Romans, while they had their hangups, were much more tolerant and yet they didn't have a word for homosexuality. This demeaning genitalia-based labeling system is just a byproduct of the obsessed Victorian era.

 

[andy12]

Closeted self-hate seems to manifest itself by rejecting "labels", nowadays.

Or maybe he doesn't identify with gay because it's associated with traits that he's not, while "bisexual" is the closest word to describe what he is (albeit it's yet another crappy label)?

A man who exclusively dates males is GAY.

There is no other way around it. To reject the label is to reject the reality of who you are. It's internalized homophobia.

What if he doesn't like gay men for the same reason he doesn't like women? Gay is a bit more than who you're fucking.

 

[Kulindahr]

^Kulindahr, you didn't notice the fact that they contradicted themselves.

At the end of the paper, they flatly assert that the name alone had no effect on their lives.

But earlier in the same paper, they report that the researchers found that the "black names" got a significantly lower response rate on the job apps.

One thing not readily noticeable is that the on-line article was an abstract. The actual article in the book is quite a bit more in-depth.

Not quite: they said that names had no effect on success, i.e. outcomes. That doesn't mean it wasn't an impediment along the way.

It's kind of like being short and playing basketball: short people get turned down up front more often, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll be no good (e.g. when I was in high school, our team's best jumper was the shortest guy on the team).

 

[Kulindahr]

Yes, I'm sure the 'labels' are a big reason why people dislike homosexuals.

They're a part: if you don't have a separate name for it, you don't regard it as different.

 

[KrisHawkXXX]

A man who exclusively dates males is GAY.

There is no other way around it. To reject the label is to reject the reality of who you are. It's internalized homophobia.

OMG that is such a black and white statement. Nobody was talking about switching to a different label because they have issues confronting their sexual identity. We were talking about labels in terms of how they fail to FULLY grasp one's true unique character. I have nothing against someone who is "gay" "bi" Str8" black, white jewish short, tall, old, young, christian, muslim, etc.

This wasn't a topic about internalized homophobia. That's a WHOLE different ball game then what this topic is about. If you want to talk about internalized homophobia, it's due to societies pressure on making everyone the same and striking fear into those who are different. I think internalized homophobia is a serious issue and those with such an issue need to be loved and showed they they should always be who they are.

But THAT is not what this topic is about. If you want to start a separate thread, I'd be more then happy to discuss it.

For example, in politics a liberal that is not happy with the democratic party may classify themselves as independent, or may not agree with politics on an overall basis. Just because a liberal doesn't support the democratic party (and hoping its not the republican party) that DOESN'T mean they aren't liberal because they happen to reject the policies of one party.

 

[KrisHawkXXX]

But yet they assert that it is low income households who name those names, because the mothers in those low-income households had those kinds of names themselves.

I think this part of it is subject to a lot of interpretation. Their conclusions do not necessarily match yours or mine.

At any rate, I think it more prudent for women to give names that are more likely to be an enhancement to their baby's success, not an impediment to it. Do you agree that this is fair to say?

My mother's name is Celina, and its not an unheard of name. As for a European name, you state one is odd for having the spelling of one that is European. If you think certain names like Tanisha are odd, I find that a racist statement. Sorry but the world is filled with unique differences and every parent that names their child is not going to live to appease simple minded people like you because you can't handle diversity amongst society.

The United States was filled with different tribes at one point and I'm sure some Native Americans would have thought of you as strange for your own cultural upbringing.

Your arrogance is quite offensive to those of different nationalities and racial backgrounds. If a "black" name gets negative responses from employers, we have a social problem at hand and that is a topic for racism in the states. I'm sorry people that have racial fears or discomfort because someone else is of a different culture or dialect is fucked in the head.
How did we go from sexual development to disabled women giving "odd" names on their kids' birth certificates? Start another thread or stay on topic please following this site's rules. I don't hijack your threads.

 

[ShihTzuTylenol]

In the words of the immortal Kurt Cobain, "...what else can I say? Everyone is gay."

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

In the words of the immortal Kurt Cobain, "...what else can I say? Everyone is gay."

yeah dat is a true

but maybe cultures taday need 20000 years undo all their shoelaces ta figure ya no need shoelaces



no bum one so



Nipples

mouth? oooh repeat



< hands feet

Feet hands

knee pads

if on wheels no forget road bumps

 

[Esquire0399]

@ Johann: I'm quite familiar with the kind of study you're referring to. Such truths about naming and success in the workplace are actually the basis for my real name being what it is. My parents named me Sean Holman Humphrey entirely on purpose so I certainly understand the point you're making. In fact I've received surprised looks from people when they matched my name with my face so I do get it.

I was only surprised to see you refer to a name such as Tanisha as "odd". Sure, it is uncommon relative to the American population as a whole, but I don't think that necessarily makes it odd, only uncommon. I'm just not sure you'd run across too many people who have never heard that, or similar, name, regardless of region. Perhaps I'm only saying that there are better words to describe Tanisha than odd. I would also like to point out that I did meet two white women name Tanisha (of varying spelling) while in undergrad, and observed a third on television. Anyway, not important, just wanted to throw that in there.

As for my username, since you inquired, during high school my family was perceived as wealthy. For whatever reason some of my friends equated the term Esquire to wealth so they started to call me Esquire as a nickname. This was later extended to Nigel Esquire, which eventually became my alter ego. To this day I'm still called this by old friends so it made sense that I use it as my username.

Thanks for explaining yourself. I totally get where you're coming from.

 

[belamyi]

As for my username, since you inquired, during high school my family was perceived as wealthy. For whatever reason some of my friends equated the term Esquire to wealth so they started to call me Esquire as a nickname.

Maybe because that name is related to the British gentry and to law practice, and it's a glossy, ecofiendly magazine priced at nearly $10 the issue, tagged "for men who mean business".

 

[Semirhage666]

Just because YOU aren't disgusted by vagina doesn't mean other people aren't allowed to be.

If you like vagina so much, then go lick your mother's period pussy until you get clownface, dickbag.

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

Ummmm...no.

The man you describe isn't even rejecting labels. He's merely replacing one label with another in an effort to make himself more presentable who fools that aren't really his friends. I don't think that represents what the OP is getting at here.

I'm very proud of who I am, open about the fact that I like guys. I simply hate labels because they generally lead to people misunderstanding myself or my preferences. Which is why I'd rather people know me for me rather than filter me in a box.

nah da person in it rejecting usin playin swappins etc roll ya butt ans flip ta next

ans fit in with OP thing even it limtied ta da sex thang what red herrin anyway

 

[KrisHawkXXX]

Johann I'm sorry and I know you aren't racist. But many people that would classify Tanisha as a ODD name have underlining racial issues. I remember alot of your constructive contributions in the political section that I liked. I know you aren't one of those cooky gop peeps.

 

[KrisHawkXXX]

Just because YOU aren't disgusted by vagina doesn't mean other people aren't allowed to be.

If you like vagina so much, then go lick your mother's period pussy until you get clownface, dickbag.

I'm sorry I offended you.

But I firmly believe these is a sense of a child-mentality and immaturity that someone is grossed out by a part of the human anatomy and makes a dramatic scene. Doctors and nurses don't act like that regardless of their sexual orientation.

Girls can see each other's naked bodies when changing and they don't act all dramatic if they are heterosexual. I know many girls with that sense of maturity. Hell I know many girls that are flamboyant more then the most flamboyant homosexuals, and they can act decent with some class. But because someone who is flamboyant has the role switched of being a male physically (not assuming gender identity) that doesn't make sense that they should act differently.

Perhaps they wish to feel accepted by society because they have been oppressed which is reasonable. Maybe those public reactions are a way of indirectly reminding people they are gay? If someone is showing you a porn with something you don't like, I can understand feeling uncomfortable. Whatever their reason is, I have been attracted to flamboyant males, and they don't scream seeing a vagina covering their eyes as if someone chewed up their food and stuck their tongue out.

Most people that act like that I noticed are raised in American society, as we are a sexually repressive society. If you are someone that isn't obsessed with sex all the time and are focused on your personality traits other then you being gay, you wouldn't react in such a way. A vagina and a penis should see no different then an arm, hand, or foot to someone with enough maturity to understand biology. Hell, I have a foot fetish but I don't scoff seeing the feet of those I am not attracted to when going to the beach.