new thread
So i've been perusing the different links on here and ive noticed that alot of yall are on the gay board fo long haired men as well. i just wanted to know how many people on here are straight and whose gay? it doesnt bother me. just curious. : )
Straight. Virgin. :D
I just wanted to know how many people on here are straight and whose gay? it doesnt bother me. just curious. : )
Very Straight
Not in the hippie sense of the word, I'd bet. [grin]
How DID the word get that "not gay" meaning, anyhow?
Bill
straight
... as a three dollar bill.
I personally have always been into women. Just worked out that way. But, I'm very supportive of gay men and women and even take my family to the local gay/lesbian parade every year to give support. I'm big on societal diversity.
What purpose does this have?
Whether anyone is 'straight' or 'gay' has no concern here. This Board is about long hair and divisive, nay corrosive, questions such as this should not be asked.
I agree completely--doesn't make any difference.
I think it's a fair question. Nobody has to answer if they don't want to, and saying I'm straight doesn't mean I don't support our friends who are gay.
"Divisive and corrosive?" Not to be sensitive, but how is revealing you're gay "divisive and corrosive?" That implies negativity.
GAY, in relationship with another longhair :-)
I am actually bisexual, I dont mind doing it with a woman but I like man as well. I actually prefer man because I find women to be somewhat untrustworthy... I know not all woman are like that but...
Queer lol
Longhair.......that should be enough
peace
clayton
Personally, I don't think that this thread is necessary for the board, nor do I think it really matters who is and is not gay out there.
But to answer your question: gay
Is that why you keep hitting on me? You got no chance. I'm straight.
I knew there was something wrong with you lol
Who defines what is wrong and what is right??
I think that everyone has to find HIS way of life.
Why is it so important to many people if someone is gay or not?
If someone is attracted towards men he isn't different. He is like everyone else.
Sexuality isn't that important I think.
I also don't like this stereotyped thinking.
There is nothing right and nothing wrong...
You're soo right, i can't understand why so many people always get hooked up on someones sexuality, it's not their business.
I think labels are totally unnecessary. Who cares who is gay or not, who is republican or democrat, black, white, muslim, jew, old or young! We are all longhairs either physically or spiritually. We are all looked upon differently by society, and need to stick together for support.
Bruce
N/T
I hope to god that was a joke. If not, I really don't appreciate it. If you have a problem with it, then you can address me privately.
-James
Don't take very seriously anything said by someone who didn't show his photo or a link under his name that means he supplied an e-mail address. These are often troll posts when a comment is negative.
In this case, the two comments made under fake names were relatively minor transgressions from a user who mostly has behaved, so a brief mention of it felt appropriate. The crew would really rather keep a good guy around than run him off. Had the offense been more severe, we would have just removed the posts, locked him out, and you wouldn't be seeing him anymore.
The guy does not post with an e-mail address, so the crew could not write him privately. We have two options besides making mention on the board - kick him out or ignore it. From the minor interest the comment stirred up, you see we can't ignore it. You can also see why we prefer to not mention moderation issues on the board. The few times we do so are for a good reason like in this case, and those few mentionings of it are enough exposure of the process to the users so they can see what rules we have, why we have them, and how we deal with them.
In more severe situations where we have no means of contact, we may lock someone out until he writes us wondering why. No mention of the action is made on the board in such cases. All that is what will happen in this case if the behavior recurs.
And of course in some cases having dialog would clearly be pointless, such as is the case with spammers. We just lock 'em out.
Bill
Why, Tom, did you call yourself "David" here? Being a bit naughty, perhaps? Also, you called yourself "Ken" in another post to this thread. We have another guy using that name already. What's up, boy?
When I post, do I have to use my real name?
Perhaps because he knew it was out of order?
(Bill is a moderator and I'm not, or rather not anymore, because I joined the tech crew but then never did anything to help...)
I do think it is out of order to criticise someone for their orientation. IME there is very little difference between gay and straight people. OTOH, I think the thread is on topic, because it is common for longhairs to be accused of being gay out of some confused idea that the two things are linked. I don't think we should be arguing about whether the thread belongs here, but we should be supporting one another, not saying that there is something wrong with anyone.
I agree with you that discussing orientation is on topic for the reasons you said. And I'd add, that individuals should be free to say what their orientation is, OR NOT, as they choose. I'd go further to say exactly the same thing about politics and religion. All of these can be touchy subjects with others who might be different from us, so in interests of group harmony we have to be discrete about what we say, not getting too much into detail. [grin] In my book, we should limit discussions of such topics to what is relevant to furthering our quest in getting to know our community of longhaired men.
Bill
Hi David/Ken/Tom, or WHOEVER you are!
The remark you made to James is offensive and totally uncalled for. As Bill said, you appear to be attempting to use the names of other members of the board rather than using your own name (whatever that is) and sticking with it, any particular reason you are doing this other than being sneaky?
David (the REAL one!)
...and a prude to boot ! HA!
.
There is a paradox in that there are s lot of gay guys here but not many gay longhairs in RL - I think it is because gay guys are more into their hair - LOL!
thats a good point, I was wondering why on here about 40% of longhairs are gay, but in real life the numbers aren't nearly as high, dunno why I didn't think of that, interesting observation
I perfer women sexually. Married with 2 kids.
I'm supportive of everyone rights though, regardless of their orientation.
Ever heard of the Kinsey Scale?
Excerpt:
Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects, (p 639).
While emphasizing the continuity of the gradations between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual histories, it has seemed desirable to develop some sort of classification which could be based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or response in each history... An individual may be assigned a position on this scale, for each period in his life.... A seven-point scale comes nearer to showing the many gradations that actually exist, (pp. 639, 656)
Kinsey, et al. (1948). Sexual Behavior in the Human Male
0- Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual
1- Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2- Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3- Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4- Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5- Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6- Exclusively homosexual
Probably the most widely cited part of the Kinsey Reports regard the prevalence of different sexual orientations — especially to support a claim that 10% of the population are gay. In fact, the findings are not so straightforward, and Kinsey himself avoided and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals, asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behavior can be understood both as physical contact as well as purely psychic phenomena (desire, sexual attraction, fantasy).[citation needed] Instead of three categories (heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual), an eight-category system was used. The Kinsey scale ranked sexual behavior from 0 to 6, with 0 being completely heterosexual and 6 completely homosexual. A 1 was considered predominantly heterosexual and only incidentally homosexual, a 2 mostly heterosexual and more than incidentally homosexual, a 3 equally homosexual and heterosexual, and so on. An additional category X was created for those who experienced no sexual desire.
The reports also state that nearly 46% of the male subjects had "reacted" sexually to persons of both sexes in the course of their adult lives, and 37% had at least one homosexual experience.[1] 11.6% of white males (ages 20-35) were given a rating of 3 (about equal heterosexual and homosexual experience/response) throughout their adult lives.[2] The study also reported that 10% of American males surveyed were "more or less exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55" (in the 5 to 6 range).[3]
7% of single females (ages 20-35) and 4% of previously married females (ages 20-35) were given a rating of 3 (about equal heterosexual and homosexual experience/response) on the 8-point Kinsey Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale for this period of their lives.[4] 2 to 6% of females, aged 20-35, were more or less exclusively homosexual in experience/response,[5] and 1 to 3% of unmarried females aged 20-35 were exclusively homosexual in experience/response.
That being said (copied and pasted), I'd give myself a "2".
Hey Bragi,
THANK YOU! Hmn, my intuition sez it must be that Suth'n hospitality of yours ;-) In light of your posting it is for the same well-defined reason I remain in an open marriage with a completely #6 woman with a certain allowance for my own "variance" permitted. Enlightened?
Say, methinks that mayhaps the initial inceptor of this thread unconsciously wanted to know how he could never be confused as anything other than he defines his orientation as. What say ye to that? Once again, thank you for contributing your observant, well-explained posting.
Yours in hirsutism
Quenyan (:-)}
The problem with Kinsey is that he didn't use statistically valid samples of people, so we have to take his numbers with a pinch of salt. He himself was bisexual, and I think that this skewed his perceptions (i.e. he was predisposed to think that everyone else was bisexual), as well as his selection of people in his survey, which was biassed towards the circles he moved in himself, and even towards people he sought out because of their interesting sex lives.
OTOH, all these years later we don't seem to have anything much better to refer to. There have been some studies suggesting his numbers were a bit off, but none of them seem to have been as comprehensive as the Kinsey Report itself.
I think that everyones sexuality is one's own business that no one else has anything to do with, but to answer your question, i'm just sexual:)
Simon
Gay in a relationship with another longhair who's pic is further down in my last post (wearing black polo)
Although I haven't posted on the gay longhair board (no particular reason) I have in the past been on other forums and sites most notedly the former Dognuts. (hi Ken)
I think the few negative comments you got were more a gut reaction. For our non American friends as most of you know the gay marriage debate over here and state after state banning gay marriage and in some cases civil unions has created somewhat a tense atmosphere. Fortunately the vast majority on the board are very open minded and or not bothered.
The question doesn't bother me and curiosity is not a bad thing.
If nothing else it has provided for a few laughs. I would like to add I liked Bragi's reply well done. I'm a 5
Kevin
Kevin
I think that this is a fair and rather interesting question, although a tad bit controversial, but hey, that makes it more fun.
I am bisexual, but I am most attracted to guys with "pretty" features which includes long hair and a pretty face. I really don't think that my sexual preference makes me as queer as the fact that I am totally monogamous and in today's society that probably does make me very queer in both the straight and gay community.
Jeffrey.
perfectly straight.
Wow calvin you never answered the question you asked us guys
Ok Ill put it this way them ive spoken to guys in the chatroom here or MSN Messenger & they know which I am so ive no need to post my orientation on the bulletin board so in other words you will have to find out another way as this is a personal issue and should remain private unless asked though chat !!
Axel
There's also gay guys with buzz cuts and totally shaved heads. So what? I hope gay long haired men can do for all men what the lesbians did for women's movement. It's usually gays who push the envelope on gender bounderies. Us straights are too afraid of being called gay to venture outside narrowly prescribed gender roles. Point being there's perfectly straight women doing what were once traditionally male jobs but chances are that the first women to break down the barrier to those jobs were probably lesbians.