Of course it occurs under certain circumstances that generally involve buying a few drinks and an exchange of money.

And/or George Michael.

Running into perfect strangers and instantly having sex in a semi-public place is pretty much a pipe dream for most. Sure it does happen but it's that rare we generally brag about it for years.

Some people don't..... depends on the person, and the audience...... I seldom, if ever, feel the need to regale the assembled throng that I painfully associate with most evenings with tales of my past.

Ulysses, I agree that a non-homophobic person does not need to be perfectly PC in order to state a truth. But can an American citizen like rasseru, you or I make a statement against the operation of the govt. of the USA and still be patriots? Can we state factual reports of violent brutality of Israeli soldiers against unarmed Palestinians without being anti-Semitic? Can my friends have dinner with the president of Iran without being holocaust deniers? I think the answer to all these questions is yes...but it surely insults some gays, Americans and Jews.

All true.

Thanks, UG

We still have a thread in the gay forum about gay sex in public restrooms. Several hot spots were even mentioned, but I have used some of those toilets and never seen any action taking place. The anecdotes I have heard were sparse and questionable, even back home or here. I have seen more action at really private sex clubs. You might be amazed at what even the pros will not do here even for money, and then somebody else will do it for free. There is more sex without strings attached nowadays, and I think the author was making some of it up.

I wonder how much of anti-gay feeling by heterosexual males is caused by envy?

I could get into trouble for this...but here goes

a (male) friend said to me - men are in general insecure, but dont talk about it. when I think of it like that, many things begin to make sense. women we tend to talk about things (we can be insecure too...but I suppose the talking about it, and encouraging words from friends act like a therapy)

straight men who might be (or fear they might be) the subject of affection/attention of a gay guy gets overly defensive. so much so that some will take pre-emptive action to show their friends that they are so not interested in gays. in many cases these actions take the form of violence.

my other theory is - perhaps women are more vain than men? [ok this will put me in serious trouble for sure]

but think about it - if I had another woman show an interest in me, I wouldnt get offended at all, but would feel flattered (im straight). not many straight men would admit to being flattered if another guy find them attractive, would you?

certainly not any deep insight, but just some very uninformed theories

It's more a pack mentality thing Miggy, thugs don't need to wait outside gay haunts for someone to bash to prove their masculinity. They do it because they like to prey on people they consider weak... soft targets, and can consider that there would be little come back.

The same type prey on people who are of different ethnic groups, particularly if they can catch them on their own in an isolated spot.

I wonder how much of anti-gay feeling by heterosexual males is caused by envy?

but think about it - if I had another woman show an interest in me, I wouldnt get offended at all, but would feel flattered (im straight). not many straight men would admit to being flattered if another guy find them attractive, would you?

When I have gay men show an interest in me I too feel flattered!

I wonder how much of anti-gay feeling by heterosexual males is caused by envy?

but think about it - if I had another woman show an interest in me, I wouldnt get offended at all, but would feel flattered (im straight). not many straight men would admit to being flattered if another guy find them attractive, would you?

When I have gay men show an interest in me I too feel flattered!

When I have gay men show an interest in me I feel grateful

straight men who might be (or fear they might be) the subject of affection/attention of a gay guy gets overly defensive. so much so that some will take pre-emptive action to show their friends that they are so not interested in gays. in many cases these actions take the form of violence.

IMHO, "straight" men who attack gay men for being gay are usually closet cases themselves. The thought of a stiffie up their posterior gets them all excited and they are so scared they go out and hurt someone who does not deserve it so they feel more like a "man".

When I have gay men show an interest in me I too feel flattered!

really? you would be one of the very few exceptions then. and the worse part is - you'd likely get called a closet gay, as other men will not understand and feel that you can only appreciate the attraction cos you are gay too

When I have gay men show an interest in me I feel grateful

what about when a straight man shows an interest in you

ohh and while we are there, what about when a straight woman shows an interest in you

I know everyone is having a serious discussion, and I in no way am trying to belittle the seriousness of the issue (but just cant resist the occasional light-heartedness)

When I have gay men show an interest in me I feel grateful

what about when a straight man shows an interest in you

ohh and while we are there, what about when a straight woman shows an interest in you

I know everyone is having a serious discussion, and I in no way am trying to belittle the seriousness of the issue (but just cant resist the occasional light-heartedness)

When a straight man shows an interest in me I assume he needs to visit his optician and when a straight woman shows an interest I ask her if she wants to swap knitting patterns

When I have gay men show an interest in me I too feel flattered!

really? you would be one of the very few exceptions then. and the worse part is - you'd likely get called a closet gay, as other men will not understand and feel that you can only appreciate the attraction cos you are gay too

Not at all, it's because I'm so comfortable with my own sexuality.

As someone has already alluded, 'homophobes' have problems with their own sexuality and are probably living in denial!

As another hint, UG, the use of 'you folks' and 'you people' (presumably referring to those of us posting who are gay- or are you also speaking of Crow Boy?) is a common linguistic pattern in- wait for it- certain Caucasian American persons attempting to tell African Americans how they (the African Americans) 'really' are. It tends to show that the speaker is not addressing you directly as a person and in fact may be unable to regard you as a person. It's a telling indicator that usually points to prejudiced or bigoted thought patterns- not to mention protesting that you 'have nothing against gay people.' I imagine next you'll be saying that 'some of my best friends are gay.'

'Ijustwannateach', I'm coming back to look at this thread after reading some of your comments on the political correctness thread and I find it most telling. I am straight, you are gay and so are most of the folks that disagree with my comments on this thread which is discussing homosexuality. What am I supposed to call you?

I normally vote as a Democrat. If I was addressing a bunch of Republicans in a political debate, I would not refer to them as "us". If I was talking to guys on another sports team during a game, I might call them, "you folks". If I was discusing relegion with a Lutheran (I am Catholic), I would call them, "you people". Everything you said above is political correctness run amuck and just make any sense in context of this conversation.

If I was talking to an individual or a group of people, and I addressed them in the context of their religion, ethnicity, gender, nationality, or sexuality as 'you people' or 'you folks,' it would be a sign of a prejudiced attitude and both they and I would know it. If you don't believe me, go visit some area of the states with a lot of African Americans and start talking to them using 'you people.'

I doubt you are unaware of this; more likely just feel in an argumentative mood.

Sometimes straight-identified gay men go through a long (sometimes permanent) painful period of denial in which they date women publicly but satisfy their same-sex desires covertly, frequently blaming their same-sex partners for 'making them feel this way.'

Are you talking about Ulysses G here?

As another hint, UG, the use of 'you folks' and 'you people' (presumably referring to those of us posting who are gay- or are you also speaking of Crow Boy?) is a common linguistic pattern in- wait for it- certain Caucasian American persons attempting to tell African Americans how they (the African Americans) 'really' are. It tends to show that the speaker is not addressing you directly as a person and in fact may be unable to regard you as a person. It's a telling indicator that usually points to prejudiced or bigoted thought patterns- not to mention protesting that you 'have nothing against gay people.' I imagine next you'll be saying that 'some of my best friends are gay.'

'Ijustwannateach', I'm coming back to look at this thread after reading some of your comments on the political correctness thread and I find it most telling. I am straight, you are gay and so are most of the folks that disagree with my comments on this thread which is discussing homosexuality. What am I supposed to call you?

I normally vote as a Democrat. If I was addressing a bunch of Republicans in a political debate, I would not refer to them as "us". If I was talking to guys on another sports team during a game, I might call them, "you folks". If I was discusing relegion with a Lutheran (I am Catholic), I would call them, "you people". Everything you said above is political correctness run amuck and just make any sense in context of this conversation.

If I was talking to an individual or a group of people, and I addressed them in the context of their religion, ethnicity, gender, nationality, or sexuality as 'you people' or 'you folks,' it would be a sign of a prejudiced attitude and both they and I would know it. If you don't believe me, go visit some area of the states with a lot of African Americans and start talking to them using 'you people.'

I doubt you are unaware of this; more likely just feel in an argumentative mood.

Actually, I just think that you are way off the mark. If I started talking to a big group of African Americans and used the word "us", they would most likely laugh their heads off and kick the sh*t out of me if we were in their part of town.

Are you talking about Ulysses G here?

He's feeling sorry for Crowboy!

Are you talking about Ulysses G here?

He's feeling sorry for Crowboy!

Speaking of Crowboy... where the <deleted> is he?

Working in Australia for a while. Employment in Pattaya for expats is hard to come by these days.

I've got his email address somewhere, I'll get in touch and wish him the best. We always got on well and exchanged many a PT.

I think the thing that people (straight and Gay) is that it's 'different strokes for different folks'. Most gays have experienced a fair amount of discrimination and being the butt (pardon the puns) of jokes. The general feeling by the majority is one of degrees of contempt. Acceptance really isn't a part of the equation--that's why there are laws to protect them and most of them haven't been easy in coming.

As a gay who lived in San Francisco, but grew up in the very conservative middle of the US, I've looked at life from both sides. My best friend had never had sex until he was 29 years old. I on the other hand was (and am--but age does catch up with you) a complete sleaze bag. He would never be in a relationship that wasn't based on monogamy and I would never be in one that was.

I don't even know after all these years and I don't understand why some people are strictly tops and others bottoms. I don't know why some people only like 'looking' and others mutual mastubation and some giving or receiving blow jobs. But I am glad some of them exist.

I think men are basically whores--in a nice sense. For straight men that means roses, dinners, dating and waiting. For us it can mean a trip to the public restroom. Men are also visually stimulated more easily than women (I think). Men like porn a lot, most women don't. Since those porn is made for men, it plays on their fantasies--so there is plenty of sex on beaches, in the woods and other 'dangerous' and semi-public places.

Men are hunters and gay men often just put that into practice in a sexual way--bushes, parks, rest stops on the roadways and public restrooms. But lots of gay men prefer the more domestic lifestyle, the safety, security and love from one person only.

So what is it--just different strokes for different folks.

Well said.

Homophobia@ The forgotten hate crime

Moss

There's a gay magazine in the UK called 'Attitude'. 11 months of the year it's full of brainless, vapid articles about celebrities and pictures of half-naked men but once a year they do the 'Youth' edition where they go out and talk to children and young people who are gay. Some of the stories they print are horrifying. Kids taunted and physically attacked at school - young teenagers being kicked out onto the street by their parents when they tell them they're gay. It's hard work being young and gay. I'm glad I'm an old fart

I think that the greatest measure of tolerance that anyone or any society can have is measured by its treatment of gay youth. The tendency of all concerned is to make them 'straight' and there is a certain level of unhappiness by all concerned.

People that manage to wage the war of being young and gay and survive are usually very strong people.

From The Times

March 23, 2009

This tide of bigotry should not go uncensured

Gays don't want ‘special rights', but equality. Let us be equal before the law, and let common sense do the rest

Tim Teeman

It's always surprised me, paying my taxes and keeping drearily within the letter of the law, that my human rights are negotiable just because I'm gay. Political figures and comedians can seemingly say absurd things about gays and, instead of being criticised or censured for doing so, it is we few who query this remorseless tide of insults and hatred (sometimes overt, sometimes under the guise of “irony”) who are accused of being “politically correct”, “too sensitive” and ignorant of “freedom of speech”.

Suppose an MP described black or Asian people as an abomination and compared them to paedophiles. That MP would surely earn not only the opprobrium of his or her political party but also a visit from the police for inciting racial hatred, be on the news a lot and have to apologise.

The Democratic Unionist MP Iris Robinson, wife of Northern Ireland's First Minister, will not face charges over comments that homosexuality was an abomination akin to paedophilia; that is was “viler” than child abuse and could be “cured”. This is insidious nonsense, but even if it's not inciteful nonsense, she also escaped censure from her party.

The Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary says that if gays have gay sex they should be stoned to death. The good news, unless you are an exhibitionist, is that under Sharia there must be four witnesses. Choudary also equated gay sex with having sex with donkeys. Do those in authority not condemn this because they think it is laughable or because they are frightened to tackle a Muslim cleric? So much bigotry is tied up with an obsession about gay sex, but to conflate what people do in bed with their human rights makes as little sense as comparing homosexuality with bestiality.

Last week Rowan Atkinson said that he feared a “culture of censoriousness” for comedians should a “free speech” exception to a planned law on inciting hatred on the ground of sexual orientation be scrapped. But if this exception is passed anyone could argue that any homophobic garbage was in the spirit of “free speech”, which surely negates having a law in the first place.

No one likes being told what to say, and gays don't want “special rights”, but equality. So, as with racism, a law preventing incitement to hatred on sexual orientation should have no exceptions at all. There must be a balance between the right to free speech, the right to express one's faith and gay people's right to live equally and free from fear. Let us be equal before the law, and let common sense do the rest. The true abominations are bigots such as Iris Robinson and Anjem Choudary.

Tim Teeman is arts and entertainment editor of The Times

Suppose an MP described black or Asian people as an abomination and compared them to paedophiles. That MP would surely earn not only the opprobrium of his or her political party but also a visit from the police for inciting racial hatred, be on the news a lot and have to apologise.

Until very recently, homosexuality was considered to be a mental illness by doctors and psychiatrists and was treated much like pedophilia is today. It will take time for middle-aged and older people to realize that they were being brainwashed for much of their youth.

Suppose an MP described black or Asian people as an abomination and compared them to paedophiles. That MP would surely earn not only the opprobrium of his or her political party but also a visit from the police for inciting racial hatred, be on the news a lot and have to apologise.

Until very recently, homosexuality was considered to be a mental illness by doctors and psychiatrists and was treated much like pedophilia is today. It will take time for middle-aged and older people to realize that they were being brainwashed for much of their youth.

General I sense that you have come a long way in your attitudes about this subject. Good for you.

Thank you, but I did live in San Francisco for about 20 years. I realized that homosexuality is biological/natural within about 6 months of meeting gays that were not hiding what they were.

The final sentence of endure's article from the Time needs emphasis

The true abominations are bigots such as Iris Robinson and Anjem Choudary.

It is the homophobic leaders, like the gluttonous late Jerry Falwell, who are the abominations.