1 I'm not a homophobe . . Or at least I'm not afraid of a Homosexual. But I despise them because while they continue to tell us that Homosexuality is a genetic thing, averages tell me that it's a choice thing. In other words, they're a bunch of Perverts who have made a concious choice. A large number of entertainers are Homosexual or Bi-Sexual because they have become so callous about normal sex, it won't excite them, hence their "genetic" sexual practices.

And the thing that really gets me is that a large number of these assholes choose to make, buy or trade child porn, usually dealing with boys of all ages . . Yeah, I want one of them to be a scoutmaster for my 3 grandchildren . . in a Pigs's Ass! Be it a "Fudgepacker" or a "Carpetmuncher", they have no business looking after, educating or even being around children. All male homosexuals are Predators and at least half of the Females are! Prove me wrong!

2 Eh, I never had an issue with gays checking me out in the locker room. Hell, they want to stare and create some fantasy in their skull, they are free to do so. It's only fair, since I was visualizing killing them in painful ways, that they construct elaborate desires based on my beans and sausage.

3 Dude,

You want it bad? Try taking a shower at a gym in Seattle. I just cancelled my membership to the gym I've been a member of for 3 years because when I suggested to them they really should consider making the downstairs locker the "gay" locker room they laughed at me (what I mostly expected). It seriously creeps me OUT! Homos EVERYWHERE! Aaaaaaaahhhhh.

4 Wait, but it's still ok to like hot chicks that make out with other hot chicks, right?

5 Yeah, that's okay. You're right, as long as they're hot though. Otherwise, it becomes gross again.

6 So as GLAD/ACT UP! tries to do away with the Don't Ask/Don't Tell policy remember this--do you want your fellow soldiers checking out your junk in the shower?

Well who really cares, frankly? It doesn't mean much to me, so if it does to someone else it just seems like poor judgment (like overpaying for a bike part)... and you know what PT Barnum said about that.

7 I'd kinda like to see 70% of the male population to turn gay.
Think of the hot chick/straight guy ratio then! Yeah baby!

8 Um...your blog is so "insightful"

9 Shhhhhhh.I'm hunting wabbits.

10 The "PC bullshit" about gays IS that they are just like everyone else, except they like to have sex with other guys, you tool. If anyone was looking at you in the locker room it was likely due to the novelty of seeing someone with their head shoved up their own ass.

11 Don't worry Milton er Steve, we'll find that stapler for you...but we're going to have to move your desk.

Rusty, the dude who did the orgle...did he have his "O" face on?

12 'Oh, except for the fact that they want to, you know, have sex with other guys.'

be a man about it.

13 My take: We quit using terms of gay-speak like homophobia, or at least I do quit, since I am not afraid of homosexuality, I am simply morally and physically repulsed by it. "Homorevulsion" would be more precise than homos + phobos (same + fear). I don't want to see them kissing in my newspapers and on TV, I don't think they are clever when they invade some poor spode who puts up with their changing his lifestyle by pronouncing what's cool and what sucks in his home and closet, flouncing around him and wagging their fingers. What poor entertainment value there. And when someone inevitably writes to say "change the channel", I would tell them that I already have.

14 I dunno, I sort of get a kick out of it. It's really just a compliment. I'm sure gay men like it when women think they are attractive.

15 'My take: We quit using terms of gay-speak like homophobia, or at least I do quit, since I am not afraid of homosexuality, I am simply morally and physically repulsed by it.'

A one man war to change the world. how endearing.

16 I think adding the word 'the' in front of these words would suffice. Somehow 'the' makes things funnier.

Like 'the' gays, 'the' homophobia, 'the' AIDS, 'the' HIV....hilarious!!

17 News flash: there ARE gays in the military, always have been, always will be. They serve openly in England & Israel, & as the Royal Marines & IDF are the toughest bastards on the planet, just what we 'protecting' our boys from? I've heard a lot of whack-job arguments against gays in the army, but shower-shame takes the cake.

I especially like 'large's' child-porn crap, which is like the Jewish blood libel, & his Dan Rather-ish 'prove me wrong!' Sorry, nitwit, in the real world, if you make a whacko charge, it's up to YOU to prove it. DUH

18 I don't mean to shatter the image of gay men that some people have, but the skinny unathletic types were not the only gays. For example: the football player who used to love getting into my pants. Ah, high school. Good times...

19 I worked in an office (in San Francisco) where at least 40% of the office was gay.

Generally speaking, the gays were the most intelligent and kind-hearted men that I never wanted to have sex with.

20 Today, I understand some of what the muslims are upset about.

21 I love it. One fag gives his personal view on VH1 and all the straight boys are covering their precious virgin asses. Get a grip. No more black dudes in the locker rooms, fellas...I heard in a rap song they want to put a cap in your hairy white ass.

22 I worked in an office (in San Francisco) where at least 40% of the office was gay.

Yeah, but how many of the people in it were? Frankly, homosexuality isn't much of an issue. The issue is the effect of something euphemistically called "gay marriage" on the social institutions that are meant to be the formative environment for children. When families fall apart, civilizations fall. If it were proved to me that "gay marriage" would have no impact on that then it would be a non-issue... but somehow I just can't convince myself that that's very likely. Even Charles Murray, who doubts a lot of the statistical evidence for an effect of family structure still believes "gay marriage" will contribute to family dissolution. (He just doesn't think it's a lot.)

I should add that Charles Murray was the fellow who thought the "race gap" was primarily a matter of genetics... so he's not very likely to be concerned about something (family environments) that he has already discounted in favor of a purely genetic theory of intelligence. Most of the studies since his Bell Curve book, however, (see Dave Armor's Maximizing Intelligence) indicates that the primary impact on IQ is not genetics but family environment.

So, just how important is it to have gay marriage if the price for it is a dumbed-down population, and a wider intelligence deficit for black people? In fact the widespread opposition to gay marriage in the black community could be seen as a self-defense mechanism... an attempt to make sure things don't get even worse than they are.

Which is, in fact, the correct way to look at it.

The onus of "proof" that gay marriage would be innocuous for the society is on gays and libertarians, since they're the ones proposing to change the institutions supporting the family.

23 'If it were proved to me that "gay marriage" would have no impact on that then it would be a non-issue... but somehow I just can't convince myself that that's very likely.'

I see homophobia as something can wreck families. I don't see how other people getting married and living life in a committed relationship can wreck someone else's marriage.

24 The personal solitude I get from this is seeing history repeat itself.
The same minds that were speaking against:
1. integrating women into the population of land owners.
2. those who were opposed to slavery.
3. allowing blacks to vote and own land.
4. allowing white women to vote.
5. allowing alcohol to be consumed.
6. allowing interatial couples.
7. allowing blacks to vote.
8. allowing divorce to take place.
9. allowing gays and lesbians to live in the open.
10. allowing gays and lesbians from marrying.

As some might have figured items one through nine have been accepted by society as basic rights and those who vehimently spewed their undying fight, well what were their names again? The same thing will happen with item ten as did with item five and our grans children will sit back, while watching the history channel, and laugh at us.

To the point of worrying cause someone is going to see you naked, well as wise statement that a dead white old wise man said; "You aint got nothing we aint seen, drop them and cough!" If everyone is so worried about how they look, they should all be running their fat asses off on that treadmill another 10 hours a day. I am more offended by seeing some fatso in the gym locker room than some posturing fit body.

Get over you fat bodies and run!

25 relax guys, we're only checking out the cute guys

26 I think we should immediately boycott not only VH-1, but also Plato's Republic for condoning homosexuality. The ideas of Socrates should be purged because of his radical homo views.

27 Like a lot of the straight guys I know, I am a homophobe.


I had that realization last week when a guy named Jake gave a presentation to a meeting I was in. I disliked him on sight, though he seemed perfectly nice. And I had the realization that I thought he was defectively gendered. He didn't walk right; he didn't sit right; he didn't talk right.


I am not a fan of Jerry Falwell and Jesse Helms. I don't reject homosexuality on Biblical or in fact any other grounds. But I have a visceral reaction of hostility to men I perceive as gay.


Homosexuality seems like a performance to me, whereas heterosexual masculinity seems natural.


Now sometimes I suppose it's fair to say that homosexuality really *is* a performance. There's no doubt that Greenwich Village drag queens are at play in the fields of gender; that they're very purposefully trying to compromise the categories of male and female. And perhaps Jake, who seemed very androgynous (though in fact I don't know his sexual orientation) was consciously messing around with gender too.


But the funny thing is, heterosexual masculinity is also a performance. My ways of walking and talking and dressing and sitting were things I actually remember choosing and learning in my adolescence. At the time when my own sexual identity was fluid, I consciously chose and performed heterosexuality.


RuPaul is a performer of gender. But you know what? So is, let us say, Bruce Springsteen. The "plain" clothes (jeans and a white shirt) the studiously unkempt hair, the stage swagger: these are public performances of heterosexuality, no more "true" or "natural" than RuPaul's. In fact, the staging of heterosexual masculinity is extremely elaborate and takes a long time to learn. It is extremely elaborate performance that is supposed to be effortlessly natural.


One is simply supposed to be heterosexual and masculine, effortlessly, by nature. But the repertoire of gestures and inflections that mark one as masculine are things that must be learned. Male effeminacy is threatening because it indicates that masculinity is optional, that it is a public performance.

The attack on homosexuality has often taken the form of saying that heterosexuality is natural and homosexuality is unnatural. Heterosexuality is what mammals do in order to reproduce; homosexuality is just a distortion or a pathological state of the reproductive impulse. But in fact sexuality has many functions in mammalian life, including various kinds of partnership and bonding.


As a philosopher, I have long argued that there is absolutely no defensible distinction between the natural and the artificial. Everything human beings do is perfectly natural: we can no more violate the laws of nature than can a squirrel. Our minds are natural objects. And, by the way, everything we do is also artificial, in the sense that it is something human beings do.


Springsteen's outfits are no less artificial than RuPaul's: Springsteen also communicates an identity by his manner of dress. I say this as seriously as possible: natural and artificial are the same.


And that's how I try to reason myself out of homophobia. That's how I stopped hating Jake. But it's a constant task, a constant discipline, because homophobia is built into the structure of heterosexual masculinity.

28 you americans are fucking nuts...and who the hell watches vh1 anyway?

29 Rusty,

scroll up under your other subject on homophobia and see my response.

Cindy

30 You homophobes are nuts. What the hell are you afraid of? They know who is who and what is what and they sure as shit aren't going to hit on a straight man and anyone around you, including your bosses could be gay. I really hate this racist crap with a passion. I have a gay cousin - and he's been that way since the day he was born. On the other side of my family, I have a female gay cousin and I love them both to death, just as I love their partners. My God, people - you too Rusty - grow the hell up!! Anyone who is homophobic is that way because they aren't sure enough of themselves or it wouldn't even come to mind. Think about that.

If you want to get over your homophobia, watch TORCH SONG TRILOGY, PHILADELPHIA, BIRDCAGE and AS GOOD AS IT GETS. If you know who you are and what you are and are perfectly comfortable with that, then homophobia would NEVER enter your brain and if that's all you can think of when in a crowd of men, you have the problem, not the homosexuals. GET OVER IT AND GROW UP!!

And to the first commentator, it is not a matter of choice, its a matter of the brain and it's genetics which is why men go through hell until they come to terms with it. They were born the wrong sex. If your child was gay, it would not make you love them less and you'd know it from the day they were born and if you were stupid enough not to figure it out until it's too late, then you were ignoring the signs and not allowing them to be what they truly are; all I can say is just don't think about what they do and how they do it - just support them - they cannot help who they are or how they were born. I have never met a homosexual person who was ever violent in any way or one that would just walk up to a heterosexual person and try to "hit" on them - they know each other whether they are flamers like Carson on the FAB5 or in a 3 piece suit and tie or even a professor!!! So again, watch the movies and others like it, figure out who and what you are and get over it. If you're homophobic, YOU are the one with the problem, not the gays - whether male or female. Actually I think men are worse than women because guys like to see two women together; they don't like to see two males together.

And I have to agree with spaz - who watches VH1 anyway? I've never even heard of it much less watched it.

Oh, there's another subject here too - those are the hermaphadites - the people born with both sex organs - are you afraid of them too?? Intolerance is not a good thing to pass on to your children, Rusty, and homosexuality should be open and honest as heterosexuality but for some reason, most gay men pretty much keep it under wraps especially in public; they should be given the same respect as any of you expect. I hope I never see the word "homophobic" here on this site again.

Cindy

31 CINDY: Please be more patient with us who don't have any gay family members.

32 Grey Rooster: what's that got to do with the fear of homophobia?? Just because I have relatives that are gay has nothing to do with it; it's how I feel about everything - tolerance is probably the appropriate word; adding in my two cousins is just a bonus but being homophobic is just plain stupid.

Cindy

33 I strongly suspect that the only reason you publicly lash out against homosexuals is because you are so afraid that people might pick up on your own homosexual urges. You filthy pervert.