Split Thread [Ed] Personal experiences with gays

[The Shrike]

You are in an organisation that is as a matter of policy still formally antagonistic towards homosexuality. . . . Your anecdotes are therefore the result of skewed data.

. . . And a career choice likely avoided by many homosexuals in the first place.

 

[Rasmus]

Yes I have a tube of anal lube back home as well.

And why do you have it?

But in the case of this particular private, a barracks inspection was done early in the morning, and a dude was found still asleep in his bed with an open tube of anal lube right next to the night stand.

Why is it relevant that the tube was open? (Seriously: If it was left open after sex then there is no telling how long ago that was.)

Oh: I have slept on floors that were so dirty that you couldn't even see the actual floor without putting a good bit of work in.

ETA: He might very well be gay. But you cannot know this based on what you saw and/or found out.

 

[Quad4_72]

I can't judge that, of course. But what about the people here that have met these gays and know that they exist?

Do you not belief their accounts?

I am not denying your experiences. I just think that the conclusions you draw from them are wrong and I think that your view on reality is somewhat biased as well. What you think you experience is not what is really going on around you.

I do believe their accounts. They just simply have not been in any way similar to the accounts that I have had. Now let me ask you this, why is it that it is only possible for me to be the one who does not realize what is going on around him? Is it not possible that individuals in this forum have had personal accounts that are actually no where near what the real world is like, and are skewed into making them believe that there are an excessive amount of masculine gays in society?

I think it would be beneficial for you if you'd re-examined what you saw and experienced and if you could draw different conclusions from it.

I know you would love for me to draw different conclusions that coincide exactly with what you have experienced, but that's just not the way life works.

Do you agree that we are talking a lot about interpretation of the facts here? (Like whether someone you spend time with acts in a masculine or feminine way, say? That is a matter of opinion to a degree, right? And from that you need to conclude whether it is indicative of their being straight or gay, too. And in how far that is accurate is under debate, right?)

I think this went over my head. I'm not sure what you are saying here.

I am sure that is correct.

Like I said earlier, the issue is that what you think about gays and their behavior is a subset of what homophobes think about gay people. You are rather exceptional in thinking what you think whilst at the same time not holding certain others thoughts to be true as well.

I do believe that others thoughts may be true. It seems to me that everyone in this thread believes that my thoughts and experiences are the ones that are untrue. People keep insisting that SOME of the men I met in my sample just HAD to be gay. They can't grasp the fact that possibly I have never known personally a gay masculine man.

Because those arguing with you here know these gay men. We know they exist and we know they are not rare or exceptional. For you to truly have not met any you would have to have lived under very exceptional circumstances.

Perhaps I have indeed lived under exceptional circumstances. I find it unlikely though, seeing as how I have lived in so many different places and so many different parts of the country. Is it possible that the posters on this forum are just more in touch with gay communities and that is how their view of society has become skewed?

It just seems much more likely that you have met these people and were simply not aware of that. Especially since much of your reasoning is prone to a number of errors.

I don't think you are a homophobe.
I don't deny that you have experienced the things you say.
But I am certain your judgment is way of.

I respect your opinion.

 

[Quad4_72]

And with officers as broad minded as Quad they will all leap out of the closet.

Please direct me to a single post that indicates I would act negatively towards a gay soldier if he came out of the closet.

 

[Quad4_72]

You're right,It is labelled as sex lube. I wonder what was written on Quad's soldiers tube. I'll bet it wasn't labelled anal lube. What is Crisco,I'm too lazy to investigoogle today.

It was KYJelly. That is simply arguing semantics though.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

I do believe their accounts. They just simply have not been in any way similar to the accounts that I have had. Now let me ask you this, why is it that it is only possible for me to be the one who does not realize what is going on around him?

Nobody ever claimed it is only you. But whether there are more people making the mistake like you or not, it's irrelevant. It's still a mistake. How many people make it doesn't change the fact that it's a mistake, a faulty logic.

You still haven't answered my question: What about Ian McKellen? Is he just lying when he says he's gay?

 

[Alan]

It looks like he is ignoring me.

 

[Alan]

Please direct me to a single post that indicates I would act negatively towards a gay soldier if he came out of the closet.

Until DADT's repeal comes into effect, what would you do?

 

[Quad4_72]

Quad seems to be under the impression that only gays have anal sex.

Direct me to a post that indicates I think only gays have anal sex. If you are referring to what I think the KYjelly on my soldiers nightstand was used for, it was only assumed he used it for homosexual anal sex because he had another male soldier still asleep in his bed early in the morning.

 

[Rasmus]

Nobody ever claimed it is only you. But whether there are more people making the mistake like you or not, it's irrelevant. It's still a mistake. How many people make it doesn't change the fact that it's a mistake, a faulty logic.

I think the question is "If it is possible to be so mistaken about a situation, why should I be the one who makes the mistake, rather than all of you?"

The assessment of the situation can only be one or the other: Either Quad has come across "many" gay people, or he has not.

 

[Quad4_72]

In how many parts of the world have you lived in?

I have spent time in Mexico, Russia, and Iraq. Not sure what that has to do with this thread though...

 

[quadraginta]

Call me a bigot if you please, but I treat everyone with dignity and respect, no matter what color, race, sex, sexual orientation, etc.

Being a bigot isn't only about your public demeanor and reaction to people, it is also about the mechanisms and stereotypes you employ to make judgements concerning them.

In the bad old days when racism towards blacks was socially acceptable in this country there were plenty of white people who treated them with dignity, respect, and compassion, but their personal beliefs were no less bigoted for that public display.

Read the writings of some of the foremost advocates of both the abolition of slavery and of equal rights for blacks. Their goals were admirable, but their beliefs were clearly bigoted.

Bigotry isn't limited to overt hostility, even though the latter is often inspired by the former. It is also a part of how someone perceives and evaluates others.

It seems to me that some of the other posters experiences may be biased. If you live in a gay community your whole life, or even just in recent times, of course it is gonna look like EVERYONE is gay. But that is just simply a biased sample, and does not apply to my experiences.

The "gay community" isn't some sort of isolated commune, it is simply a subset of the larger society. This means that someone who was familiar with such subsets, where the members are less reticent about their beliefs and behaviors, is going to have a greater understanding of the characteristics of that group than someone who is not.

Take your sentence and substitute "Baptist", or White Supremacist, or "football fan", or "gardener" for "gay" and see if it still sounds as meaningful to you.

For example, tragic monkey said :

Who've spent decades with gays --being their friends, being their lovers, talking to them, hanging out with them. I go to gay bars. I date gay men. I talk to them. Most of my friends are gay men. I'm one myself. In January I attended a social event with nine thousand other gay men

How in the world is that even close to an accurate assessment of how general society is outside of a gay community?

I'm glad you brought that up, since I had set aside your response to him on that same point for a comment of my own when I caught up with the end of the thread. Now I won't wait.

Your response to TM,

So you are saying that having lived in the gay community and basically been surrounded by gays for decades gives you some sort of better sample for the general population? Actually, all that does is give you a biased sample.

Since you have clearly stated that your own experience with gays is limited largely to having worked in a bar whose clientele included a lot of en femme gays, and this is much of what you base your own position on it is hard for me to understand how you can find fault with TM for basing his own conclusions on a much larger and less focused sample.

 

[Quad4_72]

How many times? You have met at least one but you didn't know. Who cares anyway? What people get up to in bed is their business. I am not interested. Why are you?

I actually do not care what they do in their personal life. I just knew them well enough to know what they did in their personal lives, and none of them were gay.

 

[Quad4_72]

You don't know that,and given your attitude and the loony religious mores of the southern states I'm not surprised. At least one of them was bi.

Don't think so.

 

[quadraginta]

But as posters in this thread have suggested, I should have met at least one masculine acting gay guy who was open about being gay. Why have I not met such an individual with all of the people I have known over the years?

"Should have" is not the same as "must have". Your very occupation would act as a filter against your incidence of contact with openly gay men, as well as "effeminate" men of any sexual orientation.

Mix in a little confirmation bias and selective perception and this personal experience is not hard to explain.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I do believe their accounts. They just simply have not been in any way similar to the accounts that I have had. Now let me ask you this, why is it that it is only possible for me to be the one who does not realize what is going on around him? Is it not possible that individuals in this forum have had personal accounts that are actually no where near what the real world is like, and are skewed into making them believe that there are an excessive amount of masculine gays in society?

I love that you think your experience trumps that of the many actual gay and bi people who have told you that you're wrong in this thread. It's truly priceless.

 

[Quad4_72]

The usual question: How do you know this?

And for each of the answers you give for each of these men: How hard would it be to fake that?

Marriage? Yes, not exactly easy to fake.
Looking after a girl and observing how hot she is? Easy.

Just never making any statements that would give away you're gay and rely on everyone assuming that you're one of the 90% straight people and further rely that nobody actually keeps personal statistics on who said which girl was hot: It couldn't be easier.

For each of the people that you know we're talking about, could you *really* give us a precise description of the thing they did that makes you so certain they aren't gay?



Once again: There is a very strong incentive in the military to not come out as gay: It might cost you your job. So, no, you wouldn't necessarily have met them because there would indeed be fewer openly gay people.

And, no, there is no need to put on a show to pass as straight. People will assume that you are straight to begin with, and as long as you're not doing anything to contradict that expression, that is all that is needed.

Seems we may be arguing in circles here. I stated earlier that my margin of error allows for some individuals to be putting on a show. But I still ask the question, shouldn't there have been at least one male I have came across in all my travels who I have known personally who behaved masculine but was gay as well? And again, I have had many experiences outside of my military career.

 

[Quad4_72]

Ugh. It's just not getting through.

You are using your military anecdotes.

You are in an organisation that is as a matter of policy still formally antagonistic towards homosexuality. People are required to not disclose their orientation if they are not heterosexual. Your anecdotes are therefore the result of skewed data.

I am not just using military anecdotes.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Quad - which of these do you think is the reason for the discrepancy between your experiences and the others on this thread?

1. The vast majority of gay men are effeminate, the others in this thread have been exposed to unusual populations where there are significant numbers of "straight-acting" gay men.
2. There are plenty of straight-acting gay men around, but you happen to have met an unusual sample which contains none.
3. There are plenty of straight-acting gay men in your environment, but for some reason or another you haven't identified them as such.

 

[Belz...]

Or that Shatner is bi,but always acted the macho in Star Trek whilst wearing a syrup.

Shatner doesn't wear a toupee, as far as I know. He's had pretty short hair in the last few years.