The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

The Gay Community Needs To Stop Hating on Femme/Camp/Queeny Gays.....

>>>Not doubting validity. Sounded interesting is all.

Yeah, "No one gets kicked out of a gay bar unless they've done something really really horrible" doesn't sound like you're doubting his story in the slightest. :) But we've had enough side issues in this thread to spin off at least ten more reality shows.

Lex
 
Its almost like goths versus emos, but not quite, because emos have no reason trying to be goths and goths have no reason to try and distance themselves from emos, not being emos themselves.

Or something.
 
>>>If you are doing something outside of the social norm then, you are deviant and will be treated accordingly by society. Again, I don't write the rules.

But, see, they're not "rules". They're how people (in general) are conditioned to respond. People in general fear the unfamiliar, and they don't like having their preconceived notions challenged. I'm well-aware that, when confronted with "the other", it's easier just to put up walls, or be dismissive, or even react hostilely. I recognize that, as human animals, that's the natural reaction. But I also think it's important to move beyond mere instinct. "Fight or flight" might be instinct, but most of us know we can't solve most of our problems by running away or slugging them in the jaw. When somebody "moves into my territory", I don't piss on them. The animalistic internal response may be a given, but the actual physical response isn't, and in fact shouldn't be a given.

>>>in that particular example, the difference in that analogy is one between "performance" and "identity". The guy who paints his stomach for a Bruins game is performing, for one night/event whereas the guys who wear blush and just a touch of lipstick every day (shudder) do so to a point where it becomes integrated into their identity.

First off, I think we know plenty of sports fans who wear the jerseys on more than just game day. It's an aspect that they've made part of their personality. And I don't have any trouble with guys wearing make-up, any more than I have trouble with guys wearing sports jerseys, and for precisely the same reason. It's something they've decided to do, they enjoy it, so go on with your bad self. And yes, if they walked around bellowing "BRUINS!" all day long, they'd be douches. Or, more accurately, complete and utter bores. It means this one aspect of their personality has overwhelmed it. They have nothing to offer but "BRUINS!". And I guess I can picture a gay guy who has nothing to offer but make-up and "acting gay". But the thing is - I've never met one. I've met guys who wear make-up every day, and guys who are very effeminate. But that's never been the end of their personality. I've always found they've had something more to offer than just that. This doesn't mean I've befriended them all, or even liked them all. I've met some where we simply didn't have much common ground, and some who were annoying on a level that went beyond "effeminate". One wouldn't stop hitting on me, for instance, even after being rebuffed, and I find that annoying. But I try to take every person as they come, and accept or reject them based on what I learn about them. Perhaps you turn away the second you see eyeliner or unisex jeans. To me, that's like turning away the second you see the sports jersey.

>>>And by extension (or media focus), this also comes to define the "gay community" as a whole.

There IS a reason for that.

Several decades ago, the only "out" gay guys were the really effeminate ones. Those who could pass for straight did so, and kept their encounters, relationships and sexuality under wraps. But the effeminate guys basically lived out of the closet. Why shouldn't they? If they tried to pass for straight, nobody believed them anyway. So they just said "fuck this noise" (or whatever one said before that phrase came into being) and lived as out homosexuals. And as such, for years, the face of the homosexual population was the effeminate guys.

Which brings us to the present day. If you have a problem with the face of the homosexual population, the problem isn't that "there's too many effeminate gay guys out there". It's that there aren't enough masculine gay guys out there. Or, to semi-quote Harvey Fierstein, if you don't like the look of the parade, don't go bitching at the queens for making it "not look like you". Go get INTO the parade so it DOES look more like you.

I joined the parade about two decades ago. I'd like to think I'm fairly masculine. I've gotten surprised looks, and mild snarky comments tossed my way, but that's it. Are there people out there who might think I'm effeminate, or wear make-up, or dress like a girl because I'm gay? Possibly. Maybe even probably. But who the fuck cares? The issue there isn't that "there are too many femmy gay guys giving us a bad name". It's that some people can be pretty ignorant. I sure as hell am not going to tell the femmy guys to "butch it up" and ditch the makeup so that strangers might not lump me in with them. I'm not interested in playing down to their level of ignorance - I'm more interested in educating them out of it.

Lex

You don't seem to understand that those really outlandish men, with the feathers, the makeup, women's clothing, finger snapping, who exhibit weird and concocted behavior, are only a tiny subset of the male population. They do not represent gay men. For all we know, most crossdressers are straight. So as I've said before, fem is a personality. It does not define sexuality. That's where some people have issues and that's where you're actually the one who's ignorant.

I'll say it again, gay men like masculinity. That's just the bottom line.

Far as the "rules" that I spoke of, those are societal rules. Whether you think they are right or not, does not matter. That is just the way things are. Good luck, trying to change the attitudes of billions of people on Earth. I think your head is in the clouds, so to speak, but hey, whatevers if you can do it, then more power to you. I just don't see it happening and history shows that I am right.
 
Since when is a distaste, hate?
I believe this is a matter of taste, not necessarily hatred or intolerance, sometimes what works for one doesn't work for the other.
In my case i am a very serious person, but i do appreciate the company of friends who are less serious than me and i enjoy their company, and we like each other, even though i am not as expressive as they are.
That this happened in a NYC pride parade, well it gathers people from all walks of life, it was inappropriate to say this at this particular event, but i wouldn't pay too much attention to it.
 
But there's an abundance of gay men available for "getting off" in this way, so why is there a need for this whole "straight men turning gay" genre? It goes deeper than simply being attracted to men of all sexual orientations.
It's the forbidden fruit, that's all there is to it. Why do straight men love lesbians (the non-butch ones)? Because they know they can't have them.
 
How do they not? What is the purpose of all of these extremes? If one considers that particular demographic to be representative of all gay men, another believes that they don't represent gay men at all. Of course, they represent gay men, just not all of them.

...but gay men don't only like masculinity.

I've already explained everything. You just don't want to accept it. The only thing I can suggest, is to re-read my posts and look up the definitions of "subset"and "masculine."

Also, if "gay men" really don't like masculinity then that makes them bisexual or straight. Hate to break it to you. Most of the crossdressers and fems that I've ever known are straight or bisexual who erroneously associate femininity with homosexuality.
 
What am I not accepting?
Don't patronize me.How did you come to such a conclusion?

You're not accepting because you are a fem and wish to represent all gay men.

The whole purpose of being gay is to enjoy masculinity. That's why C/Ds, fems, and trannies are not representative. If gay men want women, then, we will be with women.
 
You're not accepting because you are a fem and wish to represent all gay men.

The whole purpose of being gay is to enjoy masculinity. That's why C/Ds, fems, and trannies are not representative. If gay men want women, then, we will be with women.

And the award for the most ignorant gay in this thread goes to....
 
>>>You don't seem to understand that those really outlandish men, with the feathers, the makeup, women's clothing, finger snapping, who exhibit weird and concocted behavior, are only a tiny subset of the male population.

I'm well-aware that they're a tiny subset of the male population. But unless I'm reading this wrong, I see you seeing the gay pool as "99.99% masculine guys, and this 0.01% guys who want to act like girls who are giving us a bad name". I see a spectrum, or a continuum. No, most gay guys aren't "outlandish men with the makeup and feathers". But most gay guys aren't uber-masculine, straight-in-every-way-but-liking-dick, either. Those are the two far ends of the continuum, and I think most of us lie somewhere between. And if somebody wants to consider everybody in that group to be like the guy all the way on the end of the spectrum, hey, so be it. That doesn't make him right. And it sure doesn't mean I should get pissed at the girly guy for giving Mr Stereotyper something to paint the entire group as.

>>>They do not represent gay men.

Nor do they claim to. They simply are the easiest gays to spot in a room. Nobody would see him from across the room and wonder if he were gay - they'd just assume it. But they might wonder about me, just because I don't give off as many outward signs.

>>>For all we know, most crossdressers are straight.

I'll let Noxema Jackson give the definitions.

“When a straight man puts on a dress and gets his sexual kicks, he is a transvestite. When a man is a woman trapped in a man’s body and has a little operation, he is a transsexual. And when a gay man has WAY too much fashion sense for one gender, he is a drag queen.”

>>>So as I've said before, fem is a personality. It does not define sexuality. That's where some people have issues and that's where you're actually the one who's ignorant.

I don't recall saying that being effeminate defined sexuality. There are plenty of non-effeminate gay guys out there. But the two aren't completely separate, either. I don't think anybody would argue the fact that gay men are more likely to be effeminate than straight men. Not that ALL gay men are effeminate, or that NO straight men are. Just there's a higher incidence. And I further don't believe this is because gay men "feel like acting like girls". It's simply in their nature.

>>>I'll say it again, gay men like masculinity. That's just the bottom line.

It's also incorrect. If that were accurate, effeminate guys would never get laid. The fact is - MANY gay men like masculinity. But there's plenty more that don't give a rat's ass about it.

>>>Far as the "rules" that I spoke of, those are societal rules. Whether you think they are right or not, does not matter. That is just the way things are. Good luck, trying to change the attitudes of billions of people on Earth. I think your head is in the clouds, so to speak, but hey, whatevers if you can do it, then more power to you. I just don't see it happening and history shows that I am right.

Sure. That's why the world at large looks at homosexuality precisely the same way now as they did sixty years back. No change there. :)

Lex
 
LOL, are you kidding? DC is dominated by queeny gays.

There's only one gay sports bar in all of D.C. and even it is teeming with the femmes.

Anyway, I echo the "Not This Shit Again" response.

Exactly! I live in the Annapolis area.
 
My boyfriend and I are both a bit more effeminate and he some more masculine qualities too. We don't ever get rude remarks about us while in D.C. (we live in Annapolis) and we see a lot of effeminate gays in the area.
 
OK there are a few who are overtly this and overtly that.

But for the rest of us…well… I can't take this thread too seriously because all these characteristics are intangible and unmeasurable… they change according to the moment and are perceived differently in context.

There must be other more important things to worry about!
 
I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit here. I personally, don't hate on ANYONE, but it's been my experience that the aforementioned queens, are among the most hateful out there...

Seriously, some of those bitches are fierce!!!
 
We have 7 states.

The state known as 'South Australia' decriminalised some homosexual acts in 1972 due to a murky gay-bashing murder and a closet-queen Premier.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2002/s552142.htm.

A few other states followed after that.

The oldest and most populous state is known as 'New South Wales' (its capital is Sydney. It decriminalised homosexual acts in 1984 after lobbying behind closed doors and a few years of street rallies. There were a number of 'Stonewall-type' street riots over instances of police raids of gay saunas and bars during the 1980s.
Sorry for my inattention, Kallipolis. I think it was 1975 that SA decriminalized homosexuality, with the ACT coming along the following year. Otherwise, further to those quick notes from Pat Grimshaw: Western Australia decriminalized homosexual acts in 1990, I think without checking my notes. Up until then we could still get up to five years hard labour, and the WA Police force kept 'secret' files on men they suspected of being gay. Even after the decriminalization, cops here have remained frequently completely open with their disdain and as recently as five and a half years ago, two police officers (one female) harassed me for making out with my lover. They were more aggressive with him and tried to tell me they would charge me with impeding an investigation if I didn't back away from him while they demanded his details and tried to make him feel very, very uncomfortable. I gave them my details (very long name pronounced traditionally to make it impossible to write down) and took theirs and called my mate who's a lawyer and told them he wanted to speak with them at the first opportunity. They backed down, but ruined our kissing...:(

Tasmania was the last Australian state to decriminalize homosexuality after a nine year long very nasty and aggressive debate. Senator Dr. Bob Brown is our long serving National Greens leader who is openly gay, and it is not without great and inspirational leadership from him in this arena that progress was finally made in 1997! Tasmania now has the most progressive laws in the land regarding homosexuality. Research 'Rodney Croome,' too.

1967 was really only of interest to those researching law reform in Australia because that was the year that Australians finally voted in a National referendum to allow Aboriginal peoples the right to participate as citizens with full rights equal to those of everyone else in this wide, brown, backwards land of ours. Yes, gay indigenous folk got to lose some of their rights instantaneously of course, but now they were real people.

It wasn't until the end of the 70's ('78) in Sydney that DRAG QUEENS and other openly gay activists had had a gut full, and inspired by success in the USA nine years earlier decided that enough was enough and they showed the perverted, corrupted pigs calling themselves police officers in NSW that the time had come for equity with the straight population. Many people were hospitalised and imprisoned, but that violent night was the first march that went on to become the Sydney Gay (and later, '..and Lesbian') Mardi Gras - which is now just a fun parade more about partying and keeping it cool with the dominant straights, he said kindly - hhhmmmm, I don't know why I have so few straight friends...:confused:;) The news broadcasts were full of fear and disgust for gays, I remember, and when the first couple of Mardi Gras marches were reported in subsequent years, the dislike for gay people remained clear and apparent. It took a while for the straights to realize the amount of MONEY pouring into their own coffers but then all was forgiven and okay. Now the 'parade' is about tourism and, as I said, partying.

Nothing wrong with either, but lest we forget the DRAG QUEENS and openly gay and self-sacrificing queers who began the liberation of all GBLT's in Oz, please let's hold a dear place in our hearts for all those who came before and opened a pathway for us to better enjoy our lives. Just a couple of months ago, I took a sickie. I sat on the sofa with my little pussy cat and turned on the news on Ten (normally I only watch the various SBS or ABC stations, but I wanted to avoid thinking), only to see a news anchor 'interview' a rep from the New SGLMG. It was embarrassing to see the anchor try to humiliate and chastise the interviewee, even bringing up his personal feelings back when he was in the news room in '78! Needless to say, I wrote a really sharp fax off.

THere is much more than what I've touched on here, and clearly I haven't made the important personal and human connections, but this gives some indication of the newness of decriminalization of homosexuality in Oz, and the bearing that those seen in varying degrees as effeminate have had on advancing our liberation. THere are many laws that are still on our books here to discriminate against gay men, left there for the occasional remaining pig to pull out to harass gay men, eg. If my straight neighbours want to have sex in their front room and the drapes are opened but the sheer curtains pulled, and I can see it, there's nothing for the police to do because the bonkers have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their own home with the curtains across - I needn't look. If my neighbours complain about me and a male lover doing the same (obviously in my own home - not in theirs!;)), the police can arrest me and mine for public indecency and I can go to jail. A male teacher in WA has to be very careful of showing any support for male students for fear he be branded a peadophile. No school teacher can actively show any support for homosexuality in WA public schools for fear of being accused of 'promoting homosexuality' in the public school system - that would be illegal. Guys under 21 yo in WA cannot have sexual relations with anyone more than one year in either direction difference in age: minimum age is 16. If you are 20 and your bf is 16, you are a paedophile, permanently on public records and on websites; if you are a straight man and your gf is 16 - that's okay. 19 and you'd still have to answer the case in court and show that you had reason to believe your beloved bf lied to you and that it was all his fault, thereby ruining his reputation instead. REMEMBER: AGE OF MAJORITY IN AUSTRALIA IS 18!!! I'm rambling far too far.

But just before I go, I want to revisit the fact that numerous attempts, many successful, have been made in Supreme Courts in Australia, most significantly in South Australia - long time home of Dunstan, the gay Premier of SA who over-saw the decriminalisation of homosexuality in that state before the others! - of using the defence of 'homosexual panic' in murder cases. This is where defendants claim that they murdered a gay man or men because of an immediate perceived threat to their person by the perceived as gay man/men, and that such a reaction was reasonable and necessary to defend his heterosexuality.
 
I'm a member of the Sydney Gay Pride History Group which has a thorough chronology
http://www.pridehistorygroup.org.au/

…but lest we forget the DRAG QUEENS and openly gay and self-sacrificing queers who began the liberation of all GBLT's in Oz…

Sam, I'm worried that you're pushing this myth because most of the History Group who were there in the 1970s disagree with it. They say the most active—certainly those who started the Sydney Mardi Gras— were Marxist Uni student activists.
 
Okay, I mis-wrote: I'm not intending to promote a mythology that puts the students out of the picture - they were extremely active in pushing for gay rights of expression throughout the seventies and eighties. They began to really bring gay rights of participation in broad society to the fore of the news reports and thus into the office lunchroom conversations and dinner table or lounge room debates. They didn't begin the riots as uni. students per se, and I guess my point was not clear enough that I was trying to draw the connection between the importance of OBVIOUSLY and APPARENTLY overtly gay persons and the breach of social control as practiced by the politicians and their agents, the police forces. While the students were instrumental to the advance of our causes, I argue that it was openly and identifiably gay (not exclusive of students and their organisations) activists that were the catalysts to force our issues undeniably and 'permanently' into the public consciousness, through the famous riots in Sydney, and that those who pushed the envelope the furthest were drag queens, in part because of their notoriety and obviosity.
 
Oh you bunch of sissies... be real men!

If you need tips just go ask a bull dyke. :P

hugz and kisses hehe
 
Oh god #-o Now gays are getting sick of each other. If the community can't even be tolerant of itself, do you know what that means? CATFIGHT!! (!)
 
Back
Top