Serious thread: Why are homosexuals so "Gay"?

[|A-Man|]

Yeah in social settings it's more comfortable around those gay guys that you couldn't tell are gay until they tell you. It's hard focusing with these dudes with the make up, glitter, loud talking, and wild expressions. Saying something slick to you about your sphincter

Why they act so extra, I don't know. Probably just attention garden tools that didn't get enough of it when they were younger.

This thread reminds me of a recent skit on The Colbert Show/Daily Show where I think Minnesota became the new capital for gays and how gays from SanFran were mad about it. The gay dudes in Minny were pretty regular while the SanFran dudes were on some S&M steez trying to prove extra hard they're the gayest.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by AZwildcats

My man Watermelon ^^ said it perfectly. It is to seek attention. Its not genetic, its just to bring attention on to themselves

so when black people act stereotypically, is this also a cry for attention?

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by AZwildcats

My man Watermelon ^^ said it perfectly. It is to seek attention. Its not genetic, its just to bring attention on to themselves

so when black people act stereotypically, is this also a cry for attention?

 

[hoosierdaddy282]

Originally Posted by Big J 33

Originally Posted by red mpls

I have a lot of thoughts about this topic but these are the first two that come to mind...

1.  Identity is FLUID, period.  This includes racial, ethnic, gender, sexuality, etc.

2.  Obviously the majority of gay people are not "flamboyant" about it (as has been stated and agreed upon in this thread).  The people that are gay that act "normal" are much more prevalent than those that "act gay"; however, we don't often don't even know that the former are gay so our view of gay people becomes severely skewed.
P.S. The title of the thread and many of the posts in here imply a lack of that basic understanding.

Well said.
Rilla, as mentioned in point 1, you're failing to understand gender is not as black and white as you believe, and that seems to be crucial to your logic. You say "go be a guy, straight or gay, just be a guy" So what is a guy? Of course, there are certain biological and physical characteristics that are dominant in men, which make us vastly different from women, and vice versa, but when you attempt to say "just be a guy" you're being influenced by heteronormative expectations of what makes a man, a man. Most of society's expectations of men, are based in strict heterosexual expectations and ignore any possibility of different interpretations of gender and sexuality. 

You can't say if you want equality, stop "acting gay" and be normal. Then what is normal? How you define normal might not fall in line with what everyone else believes... more often than not "normal" simply means "the average" or "the most common"

It's a bigger issue than simply "why do homosexuals act 'gay'", because when people say anything like "why does _____ act like _____" you're comparing to a subjective "normal", and it's challenging to make those kind of sweeping blanket statements especially when so many things are all related... because you have to account for factors of gender, sexual orientation, racial, societal, etc.

Gimme a sec to digest this. Props for adding something thought-out to the discussion though.
  

 

[hoosierdaddy282]

Originally Posted by Big J 33

Originally Posted by red mpls

I have a lot of thoughts about this topic but these are the first two that come to mind...

1.  Identity is FLUID, period.  This includes racial, ethnic, gender, sexuality, etc.

2.  Obviously the majority of gay people are not "flamboyant" about it (as has been stated and agreed upon in this thread).  The people that are gay that act "normal" are much more prevalent than those that "act gay"; however, we don't often don't even know that the former are gay so our view of gay people becomes severely skewed.
P.S. The title of the thread and many of the posts in here imply a lack of that basic understanding.

Well said.
Rilla, as mentioned in point 1, you're failing to understand gender is not as black and white as you believe, and that seems to be crucial to your logic. You say "go be a guy, straight or gay, just be a guy" So what is a guy? Of course, there are certain biological and physical characteristics that are dominant in men, which make us vastly different from women, and vice versa, but when you attempt to say "just be a guy" you're being influenced by heteronormative expectations of what makes a man, a man. Most of society's expectations of men, are based in strict heterosexual expectations and ignore any possibility of different interpretations of gender and sexuality. 

You can't say if you want equality, stop "acting gay" and be normal. Then what is normal? How you define normal might not fall in line with what everyone else believes... more often than not "normal" simply means "the average" or "the most common"

It's a bigger issue than simply "why do homosexuals act 'gay'", because when people say anything like "why does _____ act like _____" you're comparing to a subjective "normal", and it's challenging to make those kind of sweeping blanket statements especially when so many things are all related... because you have to account for factors of gender, sexual orientation, racial, societal, etc.

Gimme a sec to digest this. Props for adding something thought-out to the discussion though.
  

 

[AZwildcats]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by AZwildcats

My man Watermelon ^^ said it perfectly. It is to seek attention. Its not genetic, its just to bring attention on to themselves

so when black people act stereotypically, is this also a cry for attention?

depending on what specific stereotype your talking about, I would argue yes it is

 

[AZwildcats]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by AZwildcats

My man Watermelon ^^ said it perfectly. It is to seek attention. Its not genetic, its just to bring attention on to themselves

so when black people act stereotypically, is this also a cry for attention?

depending on what specific stereotype your talking about, I would argue yes it is

 

[hoosierdaddy282]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by AZwildcats

My man Watermelon ^^ said it perfectly. It is to seek attention. Its not genetic, its just to bring attention on to themselves

so when black people act stereotypically, is this also a cry for attention?

YES. Just trust me on that one kid

. It's either that, or they weren't socialized to act any better. Nothing is inherent about it though. Blame parents, WSHH, BET or what have you. But something compells certain Black people to act colored while others, like myself, are happy enough being black without acting all steroetypical. If anything, I do the opposite.

 

[hoosierdaddy282]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by AZwildcats

My man Watermelon ^^ said it perfectly. It is to seek attention. Its not genetic, its just to bring attention on to themselves

so when black people act stereotypically, is this also a cry for attention?

YES. Just trust me on that one kid

. It's either that, or they weren't socialized to act any better. Nothing is inherent about it though. Blame parents, WSHH, BET or what have you. But something compells certain Black people to act colored while others, like myself, are happy enough being black without acting all steroetypical. If anything, I do the opposite.

 

[debso]

my thing is...

not only do i wonder about why some gay men act so flamboyant but why would a gay man want to be with a gay man that acts like an overexaggerated female????

you don't like women but you want to be with a fake woman?

i don't get it.

females too. why would you want a butch female when you don't like men???

 

[debso]

my thing is...

not only do i wonder about why some gay men act so flamboyant but why would a gay man want to be with a gay man that acts like an overexaggerated female????

you don't like women but you want to be with a fake woman?

i don't get it.

females too. why would you want a butch female when you don't like men???

 

[j dot reem0]

because their gay. why do fat people love buffets? because their fat.


sheeeeeeesh

 

[j dot reem0]

because their gay. why do fat people love buffets? because their fat.


sheeeeeeesh

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by cartune

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.

 You're about to get murdered

aye, sue me

. Most people don't know their history

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by cartune

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.

 You're about to get murdered

aye, sue me

. Most people don't know their history

 

[proper english]

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.

 

[proper english]

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by proper english

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.

take it elsewhere you lemon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology




Psychology was one of the first disciplines to study homosexuality as a discrete phenomenon. Prior to and throughout most of the 20th century, common standardpsychology viewed homosexuality in terms of pathological models as a mental illness. That classification began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in the research, which consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality. As a result of such accumulated research, professionals in medicine, mental health, and the behavioral and social sciences, opposing the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder, claimed the conclusion that it was inaccurate, and that the DSM classification reflected untested assumptions that were based on once-prevalent social norms and clinical impressions from unrepresentative samples which consisted of patients seeking therapy and individuals whose conduct brought them into the criminal justice system.[sup][1][/sup]

Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions has moved to the belief that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation, while there remain those who maintain that it is a disorder.[sup][2][/sup] In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. The American Psychological Association Council of Representatives followed in 1975.[sup][3][/sup] Consequently, while some still believe homosexuality is a mental disorder, the current research and clinical literature now only demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, reflecting the official positions of the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association.

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by proper english

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.

take it elsewhere you lemon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology




Psychology was one of the first disciplines to study homosexuality as a discrete phenomenon. Prior to and throughout most of the 20th century, common standardpsychology viewed homosexuality in terms of pathological models as a mental illness. That classification began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in the research, which consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality. As a result of such accumulated research, professionals in medicine, mental health, and the behavioral and social sciences, opposing the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder, claimed the conclusion that it was inaccurate, and that the DSM classification reflected untested assumptions that were based on once-prevalent social norms and clinical impressions from unrepresentative samples which consisted of patients seeking therapy and individuals whose conduct brought them into the criminal justice system.[sup][1][/sup]

Since the 1970s, the consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions has moved to the belief that homosexuality is a normal variation of human sexual orientation, while there remain those who maintain that it is a disorder.[sup][2][/sup] In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. The American Psychological Association Council of Representatives followed in 1975.[sup][3][/sup] Consequently, while some still believe homosexuality is a mental disorder, the current research and clinical literature now only demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, reflecting the official positions of the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association.

 

[scarsorscabs]

Originally Posted by HOOSIERdaddy282

ScarsOrScabs wrote:

---

"Moment of Clarity" reference?

My GUESS is that it for those that "act gay" it could be genetic, it could be a need to identify with themselves or each other, it could also just be a matter of feeling repressed that once they are comfortable with their sexuality and letting it be known, they have no desire to hide it. The main thing is that not all gay people act gay in that sense, other people just see those and automatically identify those people as being the way that gay people (males) are.
Not ALL of ANYbody acts a certain way. I think everyone gets that at this point. I never intended to imply that I saw all gay people as one particular way. If I did, I apologize for that. But for those that do perpetuate the stereotype, can't they see that at this stage of social evolution it does less to highlight individuality and much more to incite segregation? Isn't that counterproductive?

First question, yeah but someone made the point that they thought it was scars will scab.  I understood the lyric as you can do something to me, it can either be a scar OR just a scab.

About your response, it wasn't directed solely at you but somewhat implied in what you stated despite your intentions for that not to be the way it came across and unfortunately, people commonly stereotype.  My point is that there are likely just as many, if not more, homosexuals that don't act like the stereotype.

I know people hate the comparison between homosexuality and race in terms of the struggle for rights but it can just as easily be view in the same light as races that perpetuate certain stereotypes, whether they're truly negative or just something that people view as a commonality.

Is flamboyancy a negative trait, aside from the opinions those that don't accept homosexuality?  I do get what you're saying, I'm just looking at it from the broader perspective.  Regardless, I just don't see any part of flamboyancy as being a problem.  I don't have any answers scientifically and once again, it wasn't aimed just at you.  I do think it's a nature vs. nurture question and it could very well be that it's genetics, potentially higher levels of estrogen in gay males.  Just as there are tomboys who are straight females, straight males that are more effeminate, people differ in many different ways and specifically regarding gay males, it is the flamboyant ones that people automatically associate with the stereotype.

 

[scarsorscabs]

Originally Posted by HOOSIERdaddy282

ScarsOrScabs wrote:

---

"Moment of Clarity" reference?

My GUESS is that it for those that "act gay" it could be genetic, it could be a need to identify with themselves or each other, it could also just be a matter of feeling repressed that once they are comfortable with their sexuality and letting it be known, they have no desire to hide it. The main thing is that not all gay people act gay in that sense, other people just see those and automatically identify those people as being the way that gay people (males) are.
Not ALL of ANYbody acts a certain way. I think everyone gets that at this point. I never intended to imply that I saw all gay people as one particular way. If I did, I apologize for that. But for those that do perpetuate the stereotype, can't they see that at this stage of social evolution it does less to highlight individuality and much more to incite segregation? Isn't that counterproductive?

First question, yeah but someone made the point that they thought it was scars will scab.  I understood the lyric as you can do something to me, it can either be a scar OR just a scab.

About your response, it wasn't directed solely at you but somewhat implied in what you stated despite your intentions for that not to be the way it came across and unfortunately, people commonly stereotype.  My point is that there are likely just as many, if not more, homosexuals that don't act like the stereotype.

I know people hate the comparison between homosexuality and race in terms of the struggle for rights but it can just as easily be view in the same light as races that perpetuate certain stereotypes, whether they're truly negative or just something that people view as a commonality.

Is flamboyancy a negative trait, aside from the opinions those that don't accept homosexuality?  I do get what you're saying, I'm just looking at it from the broader perspective.  Regardless, I just don't see any part of flamboyancy as being a problem.  I don't have any answers scientifically and once again, it wasn't aimed just at you.  I do think it's a nature vs. nurture question and it could very well be that it's genetics, potentially higher levels of estrogen in gay males.  Just as there are tomboys who are straight females, straight males that are more effeminate, people differ in many different ways and specifically regarding gay males, it is the flamboyant ones that people automatically associate with the stereotype.

 

[GTA 809]

Son I didn't read the entire thread but I def see what you mean. My brother it openly homosexual. But he wears timbs, watches nba, doesn't talk with a lisp, and his neck doesn't sway everywhere when he speaks. He got into fisticuffs outside one of "those" clubs cause he told someone to stop acting like such a f word... You know, the one kobe said.
I didnt understand him at first but he explained it that flamboyant people make him look bad. They make gays seem like a caricature.
I love being latino but I hate the ones that fit the stereotype. The mira mira hick a$s knickerbocker ave types make it harder for me to be taken serious. So I can se where my bro is coming from.

 

[GTA 809]

Son I didn't read the entire thread but I def see what you mean. My brother it openly homosexual. But he wears timbs, watches nba, doesn't talk with a lisp, and his neck doesn't sway everywhere when he speaks. He got into fisticuffs outside one of "those" clubs cause he told someone to stop acting like such a f word... You know, the one kobe said.
I didnt understand him at first but he explained it that flamboyant people make him look bad. They make gays seem like a caricature.
I love being latino but I hate the ones that fit the stereotype. The mira mira hick a$s knickerbocker ave types make it harder for me to be taken serious. So I can se where my bro is coming from.

 

[iYen]

Originally Posted by Wr

Originally Posted by proper english

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.

 

[iYen]

Originally Posted by Wr

Originally Posted by proper english

Originally Posted by Wr

homosexuality is not synonymous with "gay".

One used to be considered a physiological disease until gay rights changed it. The other is just and adjective describing a happy state of being.