Topics created by leatherbear

@wittysimba:

I think it is kind of obvious, I mean, most of the male str8 pornstars have large dick; If no one look at it - why would the directors care about their size?

you bring up a good point that i never thought about.

There is a feature length film i watched about a year ago where being gay was normal and twice you in your life ti me you had sex with the opposite gender to reproduce. The kids would live with both parents as if they were divorced moving back and forth week after week. Then the man charter turned out to be straight and his girlfriends where made fun of.

Yeah, this is sad, I have had meningoencephalitis (different to the above) before and had been in a coma for over a month, mine was viral though and took my ability to walk for months after I had woken up. it was practically 18 months later that I began to feel and be myself again. i contracted mine through bacteria in lake water. Needless to say, I am more wary of where I swim these days.

He's retired now but had a good career and was a well respected player around the league it seems.

It's a nice video, and song

@myrea:

it takes a lot more of masculinity to be camp in a dumbed down society that can only interprer it as a joke.

And let's be fair: not only straights interpret those camp guys as a joke; many gay guys do it as well, which is very sad. I always say that gay guys should know better, but instead they have all those prejudices other people also have. I don't deny the existence of 'preference', but doesn't it tell us something that so many gay guys have this 'preference' for 'masculine' guys, and choose to express that preference so aggressivelly in apps such as Grindr, by saying 'fems gtfo' and things like that? As it was said before: its way easier to deal with prejudice if you look masculine and only hang out with other masculine guys… in other words: if you disguise yourself and try to look invisible, to look 'more straight'. Well but I'll say that: if people don't like camp guys sexually, the least they can do is respect them... because they are much more responsible for gay visibility, and suffer much more prejudice then all those 'invisible gays'.

Very nice myr  ^-^ Following the anthropological bit we could go on a lot while you might have imagined mine was a more "philosophical" focus.
This is mebbe too serious and not very chit chat though. We will come back to that in future perhaps  :hug2:

Wow, Bearforce One's "Christmas Medley" is the worst Christmas song I've ever heard 😮

Duncan Hosie, Princeton Student Who Challenged Antonin Scalia On 'Anti-Gay' Writings, Speaks Out

The gay Princeton student who challenged Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on legal writings which some have deemed anti-gay is speaking out about the experience.

In an appearance on MSNBC’s "The Last Word," Duncan Hosie said, "I think there’s a fundamental difference between arguing that the Constitution doesn’t protect gay rights and [saying that] the Constitution justifies that we need to use this language when talking about gay rights, and that was the point of my question."

Hosie had questioned Scalia’s comparison of bans on sodomy to those on bestiality, murder and incest. Scalia was appearing at Princeton University to promote his new book, "Reading Law."

Scalia replied by saying he was not equating sodomy with murder but rather drawing a parallel between the bans on both, but Hosie didn't buy it.

"I think he needs to persuade a lot more Americans about his views because I think they're becoming increasingly out of the mainstream," Hosie, who said he received an "overwhelmingly positive" reaction after the story broke nationwide, noted.

Video @  hXXp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/12/duncan-hosie-princeton-student-antonin-scalia-legal-writings_n_2286826.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

@AndyZ:

OMG this is hilarious!  Christian "scientists" attempting to explain homosexuality does not have biological underpinnings by the merely describing the common phenomena of biologic variation.  If it isn't hard coded into DNA, then "God" didn't intend it and it must be labelled sinful and must be shunned.

There are hundreds of thousands of DNA variations that create the phenotypical individualism we see throughout the human race.  Not to mention the additional variation that is created as biology interacts with environment.  How ridiculous to sanctimoniously proclaim superiority of one variation over another.

Variation is an integrate part of life that has allowed it to adapt and advance into many different strata of life.   Macro-Evolution describes how certain variations will tend to be advantageous, but are wholly dependent on the type of environment to which they are exposed over long periods of time, as in hundreds of thousand to millions of years.   Yet, in the micro-evolutionary scale, in which we live, variety IS the normal and desirable process of life.  But if one makes certain suppositions about life's origin, one no doubt will be led to faulty conclusions that actually have no foundation in true science.  And so it goes with our Christian "scientist" brethren.

Of course here things could get slightly more complicated Andy cause if we can say that variation is an integrate part of life we could say also that this "variation" may be predicated of things we don't denote as living. English then has a wonderful word: lively.
But, closing this semanic bracket which could lead us off topic, when we come  to

a true science
a false science
a junk science
a sound science….etc.

thence the quite deep hole of the science, its methods and its problems seems to open...

🙂