Bio
Just your average gay, left-wing, atheist musician.
TMI
- What song or movie makes you cry?: The Joy Luck Club
- What piece of art would you steal?: David
- Vampire or Zombie
- Tom Skerritt or Dave Matthews
- What do you like to read when you poop?: Nothing, I like to get it over with and be done as quickly as possible
Apr 24
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
As far as getting horny while studying, that happened to me all the time in college. But it had nothing to do with studying. It had to do with being in college.
For the first time I was surrounded by mass numbers of young people my own age, and finally in a situation where it might actually be more easy and upfront to get someone into bed.
A college campus is an incredibly sexually charged environment. If you could harness that sexual energy you could run NYC indefinitely on it. As I recall pretty much everyone in college was perpetually horny. Hell, I used to get a hardon walking into the dinning hall at dinner time.
So yeah, I jerked off after a few hours studying. But I jerked off anytime I was alone for more than a few hours.
And as for sleepovers, I think that if I had both straight and gay kids and decided to have a no sex rule for one I would have the "no sleepovers with romantic interests" rule across the board because you can't really justify letting one do it and not the others. If you are going to take the "no sex route at all" (personally I wouldn't have such a rule at all so long as I was convinced my kids were responsible and knew how to take proper precautions against pregnancy).
I do think there is more reason to let gay kids have sex at home however.
But ultimately Keksutaja hits the nail on the head.
When I was a teen and having sex at home it wasn't at night when I had someone sleep over. Even when someone I was having sex with slept over we pretty much never had sex at night.
Thin walls.
No. Sex time was between 3 and 6, after we were out of school but before mom and dad got home from work.
The only time I had sex at night at that age was when I was sleeping over someone else's house where there was more privacy.
In the end, kids will have sex, and not allowing kids to have sex at home just means they will have sex someplace else. And while that can actually be fun and exciting, it is one thing when getting caught means just getting a stern talking to and another when getting caught means having legal action taken against you and having the fact that you are gay become public knowledge and make your life in high school miserable.
Straight kids get a stern talking to and a pat on their backs from their friends in school. Gay kids get legal problems and picked on for the rest of their school career.
More...
For the first time I was surrounded by mass numbers of young people my own age, and finally in a situation where it might actually be more easy and upfront to get someone into bed.
A college campus is an incredibly sexually charged environment. If you could harness that sexual energy you could run NYC indefinitely on it. As I recall pretty much everyone in college was perpetually horny. Hell, I used to get a hardon walking into the dinning hall at dinner time.
So yeah, I jerked off after a few hours studying. But I jerked off anytime I was alone for more than a few hours.
And as for sleepovers, I think that if I had both straight and gay kids and decided to have a no sex rule for one I would have the "no sleepovers with romantic interests" rule across the board because you can't really justify letting one do it and not the others. If you are going to take the "no sex route at all" (personally I wouldn't have such a rule at all so long as I was convinced my kids were responsible and knew how to take proper precautions against pregnancy).
I do think there is more reason to let gay kids have sex at home however.
But ultimately Keksutaja hits the nail on the head.
When I was a teen and having sex at home it wasn't at night when I had someone sleep over. Even when someone I was having sex with slept over we pretty much never had sex at night.
Thin walls.
No. Sex time was between 3 and 6, after we were out of school but before mom and dad got home from work.
The only time I had sex at night at that age was when I was sleeping over someone else's house where there was more privacy.
In the end, kids will have sex, and not allowing kids to have sex at home just means they will have sex someplace else. And while that can actually be fun and exciting, it is one thing when getting caught means just getting a stern talking to and another when getting caught means having legal action taken against you and having the fact that you are gay become public knowledge and make your life in high school miserable.
Straight kids get a stern talking to and a pat on their backs from their friends in school. Gay kids get legal problems and picked on for the rest of their school career.
Apr 17
Fortunate commented on SL Letter of the Day: Big Time.
Fortunate commented on SL Letter of the Day: Big Time.
Whatever the letter writer is attracted to is irrelevant. What matters is his attitude towards who he is attracted to.
If you are only attracted to people you have total disdain and contempt for that is just an indication that you are royally fucked up and damaged. If he loved fit, pretty, blond model types but saw them as all vapid, selfish and vain and not worth his time outside of bed it would be just as fucked up.
If you are only attracted to people you have total disdain and contempt for that is just an indication that you are royally fucked up and damaged. If he loved fit, pretty, blond model types but saw them as all vapid, selfish and vain and not worth his time outside of bed it would be just as fucked up.
Apr 15
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
Phlak @98
It's very nice that you don't hate gay and lesbian people. I will take your word on it although I am often amazed how narrow a definition of hate many Christians have that allows them to dismiss the most hateful of behaviors as something other than hate. But since you are a Catholic I will assume you are being accurate and don't hate gay people. After all, most Catholics in the US and Europe don't pay much attention to the teachings of their church that they find inconvenient, so I just like all the Catholics I know who use birth control, have premarital sex, and snicker at the idea that Mary literally ascended in to heaven bodily, I can easily put you in with the majority who have no problem with gay people and think that same sex marriage falls short of being the work of Satan, unlike your Pope.
That said, the Catholic church is NOT loving towards gay people. Your new Pope has stated that my relationship with my partner is the work of Satan. Sorry, but referring to someone's most important personal relationship as Satan's work is not a loving thing to either think or say.
The Catholic church has opposed same sex marriage around the world. That is NOT loving.
The Catholic church has opposed employment protection for gay people. That is NOT loving.
The Catholic church has fought for the right to deny gay people access to the public, non religious services they provide to the public. That is NOT loving.
The Catholic church opposed a UN resolution to condemn laws punishing people for being gay around the world. That is SO NOT loving.
The problem with many Christians is that they think that so long as they do and say hateful things with a smile on their face that makes it not hate. That if they pepper their condemnation with the word "love", and express sympathy towards other people as they take away their rights and harm them in very real ways, that makes it not hate.
But you don't have to be screaming at someone while foaming at the mouth for your words to be hateful. You don't have to be hitting someone with a baseball bat for your actions to be hateful.
The Catholic church hates gay people. They can say they love gay people all they want, but so long as the fuck with our lives in a negative way that IS hate.
Matthew 12:33 - Either make a tree good and it's fruit is good, or make the tree bad and it's fruit is bad, for the tree is known by it's fruit.
The fruit of the Catholic church regarding gay people is bitter and rotten. No amount of protestations of love will counter the actions they do that harm us.
And as for this:
" If the issue is sex . . . that’s something else. It is not the driving force of life (well, maybe in a biological sense, but only that). It has its purpose and can have beautiful results when it functions in the right context. To allow it to be a controlling influence in one’s life, to be the basis of important thought and decision- making is a mistake."
Does show you are at least a bit biased. Like many when you think of being gay you reduce it to sex.
Sex IS an important part of intimate romantic relationships. To deny that is naive at the least. But being gay isn't just about sex. It's about the romantic connection with someone you love. When ever someone focuses on the sex they miss the point. The fight for marriage rights should be a reminder of that. We aren't fighting for the right to have sex, we already have that. We are fighting for the right for the RELATIONSHIP to be recognized and for the rights AND RESPONSIBILITIES of that relationship be granted to us as they are to straight couples. That has nothing to do with sex and IS what the current SOB in the Vatican calls the work of Satan.
So you may not hate gay people, but you still clearly have a bias.
But don't tell me that the Church loves me right after they got done fucking me over and hurting me. It's like a parent beating their child while telling them that it is for their own good and that it hurts the parent more than the child. Just like with that, when you are on the receiving end of it you don't have to work hard to see the lie.
More...
It's very nice that you don't hate gay and lesbian people. I will take your word on it although I am often amazed how narrow a definition of hate many Christians have that allows them to dismiss the most hateful of behaviors as something other than hate. But since you are a Catholic I will assume you are being accurate and don't hate gay people. After all, most Catholics in the US and Europe don't pay much attention to the teachings of their church that they find inconvenient, so I just like all the Catholics I know who use birth control, have premarital sex, and snicker at the idea that Mary literally ascended in to heaven bodily, I can easily put you in with the majority who have no problem with gay people and think that same sex marriage falls short of being the work of Satan, unlike your Pope.
That said, the Catholic church is NOT loving towards gay people. Your new Pope has stated that my relationship with my partner is the work of Satan. Sorry, but referring to someone's most important personal relationship as Satan's work is not a loving thing to either think or say.
The Catholic church has opposed same sex marriage around the world. That is NOT loving.
The Catholic church has opposed employment protection for gay people. That is NOT loving.
The Catholic church has fought for the right to deny gay people access to the public, non religious services they provide to the public. That is NOT loving.
The Catholic church opposed a UN resolution to condemn laws punishing people for being gay around the world. That is SO NOT loving.
The problem with many Christians is that they think that so long as they do and say hateful things with a smile on their face that makes it not hate. That if they pepper their condemnation with the word "love", and express sympathy towards other people as they take away their rights and harm them in very real ways, that makes it not hate.
But you don't have to be screaming at someone while foaming at the mouth for your words to be hateful. You don't have to be hitting someone with a baseball bat for your actions to be hateful.
The Catholic church hates gay people. They can say they love gay people all they want, but so long as the fuck with our lives in a negative way that IS hate.
Matthew 12:33 - Either make a tree good and it's fruit is good, or make the tree bad and it's fruit is bad, for the tree is known by it's fruit.
The fruit of the Catholic church regarding gay people is bitter and rotten. No amount of protestations of love will counter the actions they do that harm us.
And as for this:
" If the issue is sex . . . that’s something else. It is not the driving force of life (well, maybe in a biological sense, but only that). It has its purpose and can have beautiful results when it functions in the right context. To allow it to be a controlling influence in one’s life, to be the basis of important thought and decision- making is a mistake."
Does show you are at least a bit biased. Like many when you think of being gay you reduce it to sex.
Sex IS an important part of intimate romantic relationships. To deny that is naive at the least. But being gay isn't just about sex. It's about the romantic connection with someone you love. When ever someone focuses on the sex they miss the point. The fight for marriage rights should be a reminder of that. We aren't fighting for the right to have sex, we already have that. We are fighting for the right for the RELATIONSHIP to be recognized and for the rights AND RESPONSIBILITIES of that relationship be granted to us as they are to straight couples. That has nothing to do with sex and IS what the current SOB in the Vatican calls the work of Satan.
So you may not hate gay people, but you still clearly have a bias.
But don't tell me that the Church loves me right after they got done fucking me over and hurting me. It's like a parent beating their child while telling them that it is for their own good and that it hurts the parent more than the child. Just like with that, when you are on the receiving end of it you don't have to work hard to see the lie.
Apr 15
Fortunate commented on This Morning's NYT Book Review.
Fortunate commented on This Morning's NYT Book Review.
@31, Here is a link to a transcript from a seminar Andrew Martin did.
http://www.signorile.com/2010/07/transcr…
Sorry, but Dan was right on. This is basically him admitting that his approach is just a way to keep from driving gay kids away from religion so that they have an opportunity during what he considers a critical window from 13 to 15 to keep them from fully integrating their sexual identity and give them hope for a different kind of life than what he considers a stereotypical gay life, which he clearly looks down upon.
This page has the actual audio clips so you can hear this guy say these things himself, just in case anyone wants to question if the transcripts are accurate:
http://www.signorile.com/2010/07/more-of…
Also it contains Signorile's rebuttal of Martin's lie that the Advocate retracted Signorile's article about him.
So the guy is a liar, evasive, and clearly not gay positive no matter how big a smile he puts on his face when he talks to gay people. He is playing both sides but clearly stands on one side. He has made evasiveness an art and uses it to fool kids into trusting him so that he can try to guide them away from being gay.
Here is a clue. Anyone who uses the term Same Sex Attraction, and tried to minimize the importance of sexuality when talking about people who are attracted to the same gender the way he does is on the anti gay side.
More...
http://www.signorile.com/2010/07/transcr…
Sorry, but Dan was right on. This is basically him admitting that his approach is just a way to keep from driving gay kids away from religion so that they have an opportunity during what he considers a critical window from 13 to 15 to keep them from fully integrating their sexual identity and give them hope for a different kind of life than what he considers a stereotypical gay life, which he clearly looks down upon.
This page has the actual audio clips so you can hear this guy say these things himself, just in case anyone wants to question if the transcripts are accurate:
http://www.signorile.com/2010/07/more-of…
Also it contains Signorile's rebuttal of Martin's lie that the Advocate retracted Signorile's article about him.
So the guy is a liar, evasive, and clearly not gay positive no matter how big a smile he puts on his face when he talks to gay people. He is playing both sides but clearly stands on one side. He has made evasiveness an art and uses it to fool kids into trusting him so that he can try to guide them away from being gay.
Here is a clue. Anyone who uses the term Same Sex Attraction, and tried to minimize the importance of sexuality when talking about people who are attracted to the same gender the way he does is on the anti gay side.
Apr 15
Fortunate commented on This Morning's NYT Book Review.
Fortunate commented on This Morning's NYT Book Review.
@31 - So instead of just answering Dan's actual concerns this guy decides instead to post a bunch of testimonials from people the rest of us don't know (or even know if they really exist) that beat around the bush and also don't address the issues Dan raised? Many of whom claim to actually work for this foundation, so clearly aren't impartial to begin with even if they are real people?
I know nothing about this foundation, and maybe Dan is completely wrong about them. But after reading that response I'm more inclined to believe Dan than I was before I read it because that degree of evasiveness typically indicates the person is hiding something.
I know nothing about this foundation, and maybe Dan is completely wrong about them. But after reading that response I'm more inclined to believe Dan than I was before I read it because that degree of evasiveness typically indicates the person is hiding something.
Apr 10
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
@40: "My opinion is that someone has to love him THROUGH this."
Sure, but loving him doesn't have to include dating him.
Be friends with him, support and encourage him, and be there for him. But date him? No thanks.
Sure, but loving him doesn't have to include dating him.
Be friends with him, support and encourage him, and be there for him. But date him? No thanks.
Apr 10
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
Fortunate commented on Savage Love.
I agree with Dan's advice to Gay. I had a (not too long) list of deal breakers that I learned early on to use when dating. The first two items on that list:
1) no closeted guys
2) no religious guys
Finding non-closeted guys was always fairly easy. But contrary to the myth perpetuated by many fundamentalists that gay people hate and are out to destroy religion, I actually found it hard to find non-religious gay guys. I mean, you could find non-fundamentalist Christian gay guys fairly easily, but completely non-religious is very hard to find even among gay folk.
And while it limited my dating pool it was best in the long run because I didn't have to worry about ending up with a guy who I generally liked, but who I would have to decide at some point if I could deal with (what to me were) their irrational beliefs or not.
1) no closeted guys
2) no religious guys
Finding non-closeted guys was always fairly easy. But contrary to the myth perpetuated by many fundamentalists that gay people hate and are out to destroy religion, I actually found it hard to find non-religious gay guys. I mean, you could find non-fundamentalist Christian gay guys fairly easily, but completely non-religious is very hard to find even among gay folk.
And while it limited my dating pool it was best in the long run because I didn't have to worry about ending up with a guy who I generally liked, but who I would have to decide at some point if I could deal with (what to me were) their irrational beliefs or not.
Apr 8
Fortunate commented on SL Letter of the Day: Breaking the Code.
Fortunate commented on SL Letter of the Day: Breaking the Code.
First of all, if there are two single people you don't want to get together you DON'T invite both of them to your wedding. That's pretty much an invitation for them to get together.
I mean, what the hell do you think single people DO at a wedding? They throw rice, eat awful cake, and spend most of the night looking for the other single people to find someone to hook up with.
The whole, "you can't date my ex" thing is childish. It's one thing if it was a bad breakup. That's understandable.
But if you like someone enough to invite them to your wedding you should like them enough to want to see them happy with one of your friends.
If I had to play armchair psychologist I would say that the Bride saw her wedding as an opportunity to rub her good fortune in the nose of her friends, or her ex, or both, and got miffed when that turned on her and they ended up finding good fortune in the situation.
When my partner and I moved once we had a house warming party at our new place, and among the people we invited were two of my exs. They ended up hooking up together and I was thrilled. I really liked them both and thought they made a great couple. I was actually upset when it didn't work out with them. Why on earth would I not want to see my friends, or exs, happy with other people I hold in high regard? Especially since I'm not on the market anymore so it isn't taking away anything from me?
It would only make sense to get upset at that if I were still available and hoping rekindle something with an ex. Which is why I feel sorry for the poor groom. If his marriage is starting off with his new wife upset that her ex hooked up it doesn't bode well for the marriage.
More...
I mean, what the hell do you think single people DO at a wedding? They throw rice, eat awful cake, and spend most of the night looking for the other single people to find someone to hook up with.
The whole, "you can't date my ex" thing is childish. It's one thing if it was a bad breakup. That's understandable.
But if you like someone enough to invite them to your wedding you should like them enough to want to see them happy with one of your friends.
If I had to play armchair psychologist I would say that the Bride saw her wedding as an opportunity to rub her good fortune in the nose of her friends, or her ex, or both, and got miffed when that turned on her and they ended up finding good fortune in the situation.
When my partner and I moved once we had a house warming party at our new place, and among the people we invited were two of my exs. They ended up hooking up together and I was thrilled. I really liked them both and thought they made a great couple. I was actually upset when it didn't work out with them. Why on earth would I not want to see my friends, or exs, happy with other people I hold in high regard? Especially since I'm not on the market anymore so it isn't taking away anything from me?
It would only make sense to get upset at that if I were still available and hoping rekindle something with an ex. Which is why I feel sorry for the poor groom. If his marriage is starting off with his new wife upset that her ex hooked up it doesn't bode well for the marriage.
Apr 6
Fortunate commented on SL Letter of the Day: Porn Conundrum.
Fortunate commented on SL Letter of the Day: Porn Conundrum.
I think the laws regarding this are idiotic.
That said, they are what they are, and the way our crazy justice system goes after people for stupid things if it were me that porn would be soaking in a vat of acid right now.
That said, they are what they are, and the way our crazy justice system goes after people for stupid things if it were me that porn would be soaking in a vat of acid right now.
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
I think that is what it really comes down to. I don't think parents have to invite their kids to have sex in the house, or make some kind of declaration of approval.
All they have to do is not outright forbid it or try to prevent it.
In this case gay son asks mom and dad, "can Joe stay over Friday night?"
Mom and Dad only have to say, "sure", and then when Joe comes over they refrain from barging into the room to try to catch them at something.
It's more about what parents don't do rather than what they do. Don't forbid sleepovers. Don't outright forbid sex, or sex in the house. Don't insist that anytime someone is over the doors stay open, or try to barge in to catch the kids doing something.
Nothing encouraging or promoting of sexual activity needs to be expressed. All that needs to be done to create a healthy and safe environment for kids to explore their sexuality is for the parents to not try to interfere.