Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Great "Gay" Con
The Washington Dispatch | June 23, 2003 | Patrick Rooney

Posted on 06/23/2003 2:13:00 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 next last
To: Scenic Sounds
I have no personal knowledge regarding its accuracy,

Just invented for fictional entertainment reading purposes huh? That isn’t logical is it?

but again, it's before the Sixties.

It was the gay nineties, that’s the 1890’s and not “gay” in its current meaning, when the first openly public support for homosexuality began by European intellectual elites. And the “sixties” in the article is referring to the sexual revolution and is accurate in doing so.

61 posted on 06/23/2003 5:05:24 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks; Cathryn Crawford
It was the gay nineties, that’s the 1890’s and not “gay” in its current meaning, when the first openly public support for homosexuality began by European intellectual elites.

See, Cathryn, here's still another historical view. Again, before the Sixties!

And the “sixties” in the article is referring to the sexual revolution and is accurate in doing so.

The "real" sexual revolution began in the Fifties, not the Sixties! The folks were like rabbits back in the Fifties.

62 posted on 06/23/2003 5:11:40 PM PDT by Scenic Sounds (Just trying to escape this ugly June gloom, these clouds in A minor, and this vague sense of doom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks; Scenic Sounds
Just invented for fictional entertainment reading purposes huh?

Well...since he was alive at that point, I guess he has plenty of knowledge about it.

63 posted on 06/23/2003 5:15:23 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford (I'm not prejudiced - I hate everybody equally.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford; Clint N. Suhks
Well...since he was alive at that point, I guess he has plenty of knowledge about it.

Well, that could be. Who knows? You know, not everyone was invited to the Sexual Revolution. ;-)

64 posted on 06/23/2003 5:31:02 PM PDT by Scenic Sounds (Just trying to escape this ugly June gloom, these clouds in A minor, and this vague sense of doom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
OK that just made my Husband Puke.
65 posted on 06/23/2003 5:48:15 PM PDT by JonathansMommie (How are inlaws different from out laws? Out laws Are wanted!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Comment #66 Removed by Moderator

To: Cathryn Crawford
Women don't get off on watching men - we think it's just about the nastiest thing we can think of.

Definitely. I am also creeped out by the girl/girl thing, although I can tolerate watching it more than I can two men together. That's the worst.

67 posted on 06/23/2003 6:24:15 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (There_are_no_spaces_in_my_life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
Language being important, the word “homosexual” was overthrown, and replaced with the happy word “gay.”

------------------------

Gay is short for "gay Lothario." It was coineed by gays.

68 posted on 06/23/2003 6:57:11 PM PDT by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
What you said.
69 posted on 06/23/2003 7:22:35 PM PDT by LibertarianInExile (this tag line was seized by the T.S.A.--it had a point)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds
You just have no idea how much damage
 was done to this country by those Rolling Beatles. ;-)


Is it true Paul McCartney was in a group before Wings?  ;)
70 posted on 06/23/2003 7:50:19 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Is it true Paul McCartney was in a group before Wings? ;)

The real Paul McCartney died in a car crash before his "substitute" later formed Wings. The real Paul McCartney couldn't play bass worth a damn. :-)

71 posted on 06/23/2003 7:53:44 PM PDT by Scenic Sounds (Just trying to escape this ugly June gloom, these clouds in A minor, and this vague sense of doom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
The Homosexual Movement - A Response by the Ramsey Colloquium
72 posted on 06/23/2003 7:57:13 PM PDT by Salem (FREE REPUBLIC - Fighting to win within the Arena of the War of Ideas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
Even today, the average person still cringes when they see two men mouth-kissing one another. The truth is, the practice is innately abhorrent

Sigh. Religionoids make stuff up like this and then cite is as fact. If this guy would crawl out of his cave from time to time he would find out that there are cultures where a greeting between two men includes a mouth on mouth kiss.

73 posted on 06/23/2003 8:05:29 PM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
That's why government should get out of both health care and marriage IMO.

Exactly. The state has no business defining marriage of any sort, other than to recognize any voluntarily entered contractual relationship.

74 posted on 06/23/2003 8:07:09 PM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
GOOD ARTICLE.

THANKS.

I would quibble slightly with the kissing thing, though.

A number of cultures--particularly in the middle east--include men kissing on the lips much as a hello handshake and good bye rigual.

It can be disconcerting at first. But the incidence of homosexuality in those cultures is likely at least not higher than in cultures where the practice is absent.

The key, to me, would be--what's going on in the mind and elsewhere in the bodies of the parties doing the kissing.

Of course, at some point, mouth kissing can become--what was the Golden Pond term--suck face kissing. That's not what I'm talking about!!!

Part of me still suspects--without stats as I know no suitable research with stats--but part of me still suspects that cultures in which men are routinely and healthily affectionate WITHOUT BEING homosexual should logically have FEWER homosexuals.

Particularly so, given that so much of it seems like a desperate perversion trying to recover affection from Dad that never occurred at critical psyche/personality forming early years.
75 posted on 06/23/2003 8:16:30 PM PDT by Quix (FAIR MINDED & INTERESTED--please watch UFO special Tues eve & share opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
Well...since he was alive at that point, I guess he has plenty of knowledge about it.

Scenic Sounds was alive when Leviticus and Romans were written?

76 posted on 06/23/2003 8:36:31 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
If this guy would crawl out of his cave from time to time he would find out that there are cultures where a greeting between two men includes a mouth on mouth kiss.

Sigh…do you know the difference between sexual and plutonic, a kiss an "kissing"?

77 posted on 06/23/2003 8:39:56 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
The state has no business defining marriage of any sort

Compelling state’s interest maybe?

other than to recognize any voluntarily entered contractual relationship.

Why? Try going to a lawyer for your contracts outside of marriage, I hear they are very helpful.

78 posted on 06/23/2003 8:44:56 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds
The folks were like rabbits back in the Fifties.

That case can be made after every war ever fought and is more true in the late 40’s than it was in the 50’s. Historically the sexual revolution started in the late 60’s with the feminist movement…burning bras etc.

79 posted on 06/23/2003 8:51:24 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds; Clint N. Suhks
The "real" sexual revolution began in the Fifties, not the Sixties! The folks were like rabbits back in the Fifties.

The 1950s had Hugh Hefner and Kinsey. A revolution needs its leaders.

LSD existed in the 1950s but it took Timothy Leary on the East coast and Ken Kesey on the West coast to make it an indulgence.

80 posted on 06/23/2003 9:03:24 PM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson