Sign in to follow this  
PudgyPaddy

Why am I not gay?

Recommended Posts


Syo Emerald wrote:

Yes, people from that "corner" seem to be everywhere in SL, difficult not to stumble across it. :catlol:

Oh I know how you feel, seems I can't go anywhere in SL without running into a straight person.

...Dres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the "humans are designed to be homosexual" was a misinterpretation of things. All animals who are not asexual beings (Humans included) are designed to be heterosexual as per evolution. If a species wishes to exist, then it must procreate. Otherwise, it will die out. However, I would say that some humans are designed to be homosexual, for whatever reason. For some reason, some people are born that way. One, two, and three. Homosexuality does exist within nature, but obviously not everyone is gay.

Regarding the population, I would argue that the numbers aren't exactly fair simply because they're not polling enough people. That, added with the fact that a lot of people are lying. (When you live in a country that discriminates on sexuality, for example with blood donorship, then there's going to be lying.) But, that said, I tend to agree with this.Do I think the number is vastly high? No, but I think it is far more than the estimates that there are 1% of people who are gay. I think that around 10-20% of the population is a fairly reasonable number. Most tend to guess that the number is around 10%, but surveys vary. And that doesn't account for all the people who have not been surveyed, who are in the closet, etc.

However, I do find your post humorous. Whether intentional or not (I'm assuming it is), your post mirrors something a homosexual might ask, about why they aren't straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Randall Ahren wrote:

You're just not a very happy person.

Are you kidding?  I'd be very happy if my dad dressed up in drag... not to mention, I'd be laughing my ass off.

...Dres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Griffin Ceawlin wrote

@Eileen: Do they get to wear hats?

 

No, but a lot of them were bald in true eagle fashion. lol

 

As to my original post in the other thread, that struck a nerve with Pudgy evidently, the focus went to the subjective adjective 'huge' I used (perhaps a bit liberally - pun intended), but thinking on it, I really think my error in that statement was using the word 'percent'. Had I typed ''a huge part' instead, it would have probably come across a little better, making the same point.

The issue with the other post was actually resolved right in the topic I think. It was sort of a flip-flopped sentence the person posted and it later became evident they were talking about the scientific theory that assets that genetics play some part in things.

The other misuse (and abuse) of a word or phrase in that thread is when the OP of this thread came in with a flame post throwing around different variations on the word ignorant, all in bold. I believed it to be not only an attack on me personally but totally out of line and written in a spirit that wouldn't be taken as good natured debate in any arena (short of maybe klingon high counsil or something). And that's why I have that person muted on the forums and on the grid now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think identifying the body as the human is a bit of a simplistic approach. We have a body, we are not the body. To claim we are the body also aserts there is no after life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Eileen Fellstein wrote:


Griffin Ceawlin wrote

@Eileen: Do they get to wear hats?

 

No, but a lot of them were bald in true eagle fashion. lol

 

As to my original post in the other thread, that struck a nerve with Pudgy evidently, the focus went to the subjective adjective 'huge' I used (perhaps a bit liberally - pun intended), but thinking on it, I really think my error in that statement was using the word 'percent'. Had I typed ''a huge part' instead, it would have probably come across a little better, making the same point.

The issue with the other post was actually resolved right in the topic I think. It was sort of a flip-flopped sentence the person posted and it later became evident they were talking about the scientific theory that assets that genetics play some part in things.

The other misuse (and abuse) of a word or phrase in that thread is when the OP of
this
thread came in with a flame post throwing around different variations on the word ignorant, all in bold. I believed it to be not only an attack on me personally but totally out of line and written in a spirit that wouldn't be taken as good natured debate in any arena (short of maybe klingon high counsil or something). And that's why I have that person muted on the forums and on the grid now.

A good natured debate does not involve 'HUGE' amounts of misinformation.  My post was not a flame to you, I don't know you and I simply do not care about you.  I don't care if you and/or all your friends mute me.  What I care about is the 'HUGE' amount of misinformation that is written in the forum.  If you can't handle the truth then do not write falsehoods; it's as simply as that. You mute me but you respond (and a HUGE number of times) on my thread.  Is your mute working properly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:


Eileen Fellstein wrote:


Griffin Ceawlin wrote

@Eileen: Do they get to wear hats?

 

No, but a lot of them were bald in true eagle fashion. lol

 

As to my original post in the other thread, that struck a nerve with Pudgy evidently, the focus went to the subjective adjective 'huge' I used (perhaps a bit liberally - pun intended), but thinking on it, I really think my error in that statement was using the word 'percent'. Had I typed ''a huge part' instead, it would have probably come across a little better, making the same point.

The issue with the other post was actually resolved right in the topic I think. It was sort of a flip-flopped sentence the person posted and it later became evident they were talking about the scientific theory that assets that genetics play some part in things.

The other misuse (and abuse) of a word or phrase in that thread is when the OP of
this
thread came in with a flame post throwing around different variations on the word ignorant, all in bold. I believed it to be not only an attack on me personally but totally out of line and written in a spirit that wouldn't be taken as good natured debate in any arena (short of maybe klingon high counsil or something). And that's why I have that person muted on the forums and on the grid now.

A good natured debate does not involve 'HUGE' amounts of misinformation.  My post was not a flame to you, I don't know you and I simply do not care about you.  I don't care if you and/or all your friends mute me.  What I care about is the 'HUGE' amount of misinformation that is written in the forum.  If you can't handle the truth then do not write falsehoods; it's as simply as that. You mute me but you respond (and a HUGE number of times) on my thread.  Is your mute working properly?

Doesn't seem to be, lol

To begin with, the thread in question wasn't even about a debate of any sort. It was about a 'what would you think if you saw' type of scenario. I answered truthfully for me, but because of the nature of the question, most any response to it would have been opinionated or subjective.

But hmm, I wonder if you can see that the 'I don't know you and I simply don't care about you' stance is every bit as offensive to others as your distaste for prople posting 'misinformation'? What about how often people offer a small slice of truth and attempt to twist it to their advatage with opinions, dogma, myths, rhetoric and who know how much 'missing' information? That seems to happen on both sides of any hot issue. I can turn on my television and see examples of it daily.

But heh, someone's poll or research data showed that 'these people over here' that 'we do not know and simply don't care about' are insignificant in number and therefore are of no consequence.

So you care about accuraty of posted data. How do you feel about how that data is gathered? There's an example right in this forum that I just posted to. Someone has a link to a survey about love and relationships in online games that seems to be aimed at people that play games like wow etc, with mutiple choice answers.

How will that get accurately reported? Will some news host show a little graph that says 'this percent of people wuld like to be like their game character then it switches to a scene of people engaged in brutal combat?

Would be like posting a survey to a wow forum that asked questions like 'Do you feel like you are actually making love when veiwing your avatar with another on adult pose balls?' or 'How much of your RL income is subsidised through sales of things made of computer generated pixels?'

 

I don't know. I don't put a lot of faith in suposed 'factual data', when much of the data is manipulated to begin with. While looking around at some sites with information pertaining to the trainwrecked topic in question, I saw some things I found to be pretty scary personally, like one site that had a header where they chose to depict 'god' as looking like Zeus from clash of the titans. If the whole notion of them doing a presentation like that wasn't so gut wrenchingly offensive to my senses, I would have laughed at the irony of them using imagery that looks very much like that used in a movie based on mythology, particularly when the sequil is just out. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:

What I care about is the 'HUGE' amount of misinformation that is written in the forum.

PudgyPaddy also wrote:

It's not strange, it's commonplace.  Question Madelaine and your post gets ARed.  Some will join to defend Madelaine while some sit back until it gets too hot for her. 


One could be excused for thinking that your first statement meant that you care about reducing the amount of misinformation in the forum. However, you leave a breadcrumb trail that suggests otherwise.

For such a young turk (only two months old) that's a mighty big chip you carry, Pudgy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Madelaine McMasters wrote:


PudgyPaddy also wrote:

It's not strange, it's commonplace.  Question Madelaine and your post gets ARed.  Some will join to defend Madelaine while some sit back until it gets too hot for her. 


For such a young turk (only two months old)
that's a mighty big chip you carry,
Pudgy.

This young turk has seen a lot in his short time.  The "mighty big chip" is relative to the mighty big problem this young turk has witnessed.  Some may even say a "huge" chip for a "huge" problem, but that, too, would be an overstatement.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you'll pardon me not quoting all the relevant posts. All this endless quote of quote upon quote stuff on forums really drives me bananas at times.

I can't help but notice though in the small amount  I have seen Pudgy,  that the minute Madelaine appears in the thread, you drop everything else to have a go at her. Yet you would wonder why people might feel like coming to her deffense?

Somehow my subjective use of an adjective form in an informal opinion poll type thread has earned me a slot not too far down on your list of priorities, which is evidenced by the very existance of this topic.

But you act (yes I belive act is the accurate term here) surprised that we showed up to respond to this pointed post done with backward sarcasm.

I think you couldn't have summoned us more effectively had you burnt a pentagram in the floor of your cellar and boiled a goats head in your own blood!

 

I don't know Madelaine well. We've never even been on the same sim inworld that I am aware. But I do consider her my friend. There's been more than one act of kindness that didn't go unnoticed. :)

but hmm, 'Question Madelaine and your post gets ARed'?

Would it be reasonable to guess that you may have questioned her in the same fashion that you did me? Perhaps even more obnoxiously to the point she and others felt an AR was the appropriate thing to do? I don't know. I wasn't there for whatever it was, but your own comments seam like they suggest something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Eileen Fellstein wrote:

I can't help but notice though in the small amount  I have seen Pudgy,  t
hat the minute Madelaine appears in the thread, you drop everything else to have a go at her.
Yet you would wonder why people might feel like coming to her deffense?

I don't know Madelaine well. We've never even been on the same sim inworld that I am aware. But I do consider her my friend. There's been more than one act of kindness that didn't go unnoticed.
:)

 

This is my OP silly.  Madelaine posted to me.  Madelaine addressed me.  Go now silly rabbit, tricks are for kids.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Eileen Fellstein wrote:

 

I can't help but notice though in the small amount  I have seen Pudgy,  that the minute Madelaine appears in the thread, you drop everything else to have a go at her. Yet you would wonder why people might feel like coming to her deffense?

 

Perhaps you mean this thread where she was defending you, again posting to me; addressing me?

Did you mean to write: "that the minute Pudgy appears in a thread, Madelaine drops everything to have a go at him?"

 

More misinformation based on what 'you' want to read opposed to what is being written.  You seem to do this often.

ETA Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Eileen Fellstein wrote:

I hope you'll pardon
me not quoting all the relevant posts.
All this endless quote of quote upon quote stuff on forums really drives me bananas at times.
.

You did not quote anything because your response was not founded on any relevant posts written; it was just a "go" at me.  Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These arent instant messages. It's a puplic forum where everyone can see all posts. I generally just hit the reply to topic button unless there's a reason to quote an individual but I don't consider that to be exclusive to them. I often reply to several comments by different poeople in one post.

I guess that would screw up them getting replies in email huh? Unless they subscribe to the thread.

I know how it works, SILLY (see? another example of how you uncaringly allienate people - is this crusade to 'clean up' forum posting so impotant to you that you make yourself into a form of griefer to address it?) I was a forum admin for several years on a popular site for a video game. I may not understand all the nuances of this particular software package but yea, I know what the buttons are for and what the 'reply to <dated comment> means.

and no, I meant exactly what I said. You were all over me in the other thread till she posted, then when she did you picked up whatever axe you have to grind at her and went at her with it and were still at gher and another person when I returned several hours later after going to dinner.

But you still didn't answer the question.  Did you post some accurate data somewhere to back up the claim that people get AR'd for questioning Madelaine? How would you even be privy to such information? There's only one way that comes to my mind. Either someone you know was ARed after questioning her or it was you, yourself on a different account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:

Or, at least, a LB or T.  I know why I am not an L, but I am getting confused with all the facts disseminated on this forum.

If LGBT's make up a
regardless what country we are talking about...then why not me?

I ask because I was never told that we are all
, but I was not.  

Is it me?  Why am I different than others? Can someone please tell me the truth.

 

 

<sarcasm on>

Hhmmm...  just to turn this around - have you ever tried to be gay?   Perhaps if you just stop fighting your designated nature and it would all just come naturally to you.  Or...  Do you enjoy being 'special' and straight?  I have not spent much time myself pondering the value to others of my sexual identity.  Maybe I should spend more time worrying about what others think of me.

<sarcasm off>

Or I could just be myself, realize I don't really give a s**t what others think and have fun with the life I have.  I don't know...  Why ARE you not gay?

I personally think the posts you highlighted were just miscommunication and the 'designed to be homosexual' comment was designed to do exactly what it did - cause controversy.  Now everyone has something to debate, take the wrong way and beat into the ground.  Sounds like a win-win to me.

Did I turn my sarcasm off too early?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Cinnamon Mistwood wrote:

Hhmmm...  just to turn this around - have you ever tried to be gay?   


Sometimes you feel like a nut.  Sometimes you don't.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


PudgyPaddy wrote:

Or, at least, a LB or T.  I know why I am not an L, but I am getting confused with all the facts disseminated on this forum.

If LGBT's make up a
regardless what country we are talking about...then why not me?

I ask because I was never told that we are all
, but I was not.  

Is it me?  Why am I different than others? Can someone please tell me the truth.

 

 

Not everyone is gay, no.  Whoever said that is just baiting you. 

And not everyone is even monogomous.  Some people are even bisexual and love two people, which is probably a hard life for all people involved, as both a woman and a man could love that person, so one will get hurt.  Freddie Mercury was bisexual.  "Mama" written about in the song Bohemian Rapsody was the woman he loved for many years, but left when he found he loved a man more.  It is obvious in that song, Mercury was a very torn soul who obviously still loved the woman he referred to as "Mama". 

A more interesting topic I think is I wonder if gay couples chose a straight SECOND LIFE couple from time to time or not just to try it, or if they even would be interested in trying it, even if it were role play in their own rl relationship...?

I've found it interesting that many "gays" are actually bisexual.  They don't talk about it to everyone, but it has been shared with me in confidence.  They are in a homosexual relationship, but have a desire they don't understand to be with the opposite sex also, and all that is a spectrum towards bisexual.  However, it hurts their partner very badly.  It's not always black and white, especially where bisexuality is concerned. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Mayalily wrote:

Freddie Mercury was bisexual.  "Mama" written about in the song Bohemian Rapsody was the woman he loved for many years, but left when he found he loved a man more.  It is obvious in that song, Mercury was a very torn soul who obviously still loved the woman he referred to as "Mama".  


"Mama" is a fantastic tune.  I remember reading about this.  It is rumored he did a follow up to "Mama" called "Papa" (aka "We are the Champions") when he met the dude of his dreams.  

Thank you for the rest of your response, it attempted to be kind so I understood it as such.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding bisexuality, the same could be said about straight people. There are a lot of people who are straight, in straight relationships, but either have fantasies of being with the same sex or are sexually attracted to the same sex.

It takes a lot of experimenting to understand sexuality, I think. I know I started out trying to be attracted to girls, and I had to give an effort to pretend to be interested...before realizing that I'm not interested in women on a sexual level. It takes a lot of introspection to do it, to really understand. I think that's maybe why a lot of people are in denial, but that's another topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have no clue about these 40 some odd messages i just read but it seems that somebody has accussed you of being gay when you are not. am i right in saying that?

now as for the word "convinced" idk what it means but i do know that what we believe it to mean, i can use that meaning to say i am convinced that dres is a medical surgon ready to T surgery on anybody who wants it.

now i really am confused on the whole thread here but i believe that i personally owe pudgy an appology as i have hasseled him before in certain subjects. so i am sorry for that. but it seems like somebody has to be nice to him for once in his forums life time we are all human no matter our race coler religion (yes i said the r word. hehe and i did say it while typeing it as 3 people ask me why i just said religion) or our relationship status. so if you are gay or not who gives a d*** just get over it as far as life and everybody in it cares. that is my (o word) about the subject. good day my fellow friends.

 

~EMMETT CULLEN~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


emmettcullen93 wrote:

i have no clue about these 40 some odd messages i just read but it seems that somebody has accussed you of being gay when you are not. am i right in saying that?

One should always consider the source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almond Joy's got nuts, Mounds don't.

 

 

 

I cannot count the number of things that are wrong with that commercial.

The company is the Peter Paul candy company.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


emmettcullen93 wrote:

...

now i really am confused on the whole thread here but i believe that i personally owe pudgy an appology as i have hasseled him before in certain subjects. so i am sorry for that. but it seems like somebody has to be nice to him for once in his forums life time we are all human no matter our race coler religion (yes i said the r word. hehe and i did say it while typeing it as 3 people ask me why i just said religion) or our relationship status.


Aww emmettcullen93, there you go writing kind words; and some apologetic words too.  I was not expecting these words from you at my direction.  I, too, have hassled you before in certain (grammar and English) subjects, so I guess we are even.  Please accept my apologies as well.  And thank you for not text speaking your response, as I probably would not have read it if you had. 

 

Insofar as you writing: "someone has to be nice to him in his forum lifetime" really touched me.  And deeply.   All I can say to you is many are nice to me, and I don't like it in the least.  But thank you for looking out for my forum life well being.  

 

How odd that both Mayalily and emmettcullen93 write kind words to me in the same thread.  Go figure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this