Male erotica in the LGBT group: Why now? What's changed?

[Duncan Grant]

This discussion thread was locked by Jamastiene (a host of the LGBT group).

Over the years, the tone of this group/forum has been similar to a 'salon'. We get together (Ls, Gs, Bs, Ts and our straight allies) and share current events, exchange ideas, learn from one another, and commiserate.

In recent months, male erotica threads are becoming more common. It seems to me there are millions of websites where one can view photos of men -- so, I'm wondering why these photos and threads are appearing here now? What's changed?

Personally, I think erotica in this forum/group diminishes its credibility. There's a time and a place for everything; I have nothing against the continuum of sexuality (far from it). I'd like to check in with the community of DU LGBT people and see if I'm alone.

Obviously, I can use the ignore/hide thread function but I thought I'd ask for a little discussion about this first. My request is that we discuss this thoughtfully -- no one is required to be "right" or "wrong".

Many thanks,
DG

p.s. I won't be able to post regular responses (very busy over the next few days) but I will try to check in.

[closeupready]

1. I don't think such threads should DOMINATE the group but

one can hardly say that they do currently, even at the rate of - what - about one per day?

I guess I think it's a judgment call with regard to NSFW type photos. It's a 50/50 call, IMO, whether those are appropriate here, and further, will it attract members who help build community here.

The types of photos like athletes and models, or even attractive celebrities, are totally fine with me.

[Duncan Grant]

8. This isn't unreasonable.

I tend to share your point of view. I've been participating in this forum for years; I rely on it for LGBT news, activism alerts, and to gain some exposure to contemporary lesbian and trans politics/thought. From my point of view, there's a shortage of places to do this -- while there's thousands of places to view and comment on NSFW type photos.

Appreciate your response, it's exactly the thoughtful exchange I was looking for.

[WillParkinson]

2. Sigh...

If people have a problem with the pictures that I'm posting (and I hardly call them 'erotica) I won't post them. It's simple enough to just ask me to stop.

[Rowdyboy]

14. Please don't stop....Its nice to take a breather from the bitching, arguing and nitpicking that one

encounters so often on this board. I know I can drop by this forum and see something to lift my spirits.

[queerart]

18. Keep Posting Just As You Have Been.....

For Christs sakes, the World is full of things we "ALL" don't like..... and some how, we as a society manage to maneuver around what we find "unpleasant"..... as in the real World....


"Things Don't Always Go Your Fucking Way".....


I VOTE TO LEAVE THINGS AS THEY ARE.....


So, Please Don't Stop Posting Your Eye Candy.....


IF IT AIN'T BROKE..... DON'T FIX IT!!!!

[Duncan Grant]

19. I have no right to ask you to stop.

My questions aren't about individual posters or any of the personalities that may drop by.

As I mentioned in the OP: I'm wondering why these photos and threads are appearing here now? What's changed?

I've been posting in this group/forum since its inception. A NSFW photo thread is new -- or at least, very rare. My own opinion is that there are innumerable places to share and comment on photos of men, their bodies, and their junk. Maybe this forum doesn't have to be one of those places?

To each his/her own. I'm simply interested in a thoughtful discussion. Thanks!

[William769]

3. From the LGBT Hosts I have talked to so far including myself

Do not have a problem with the OP that this OP is in response to.

We try to accommodate all of our LGBT members, but not everyone is going to be pleased with all things posted here. WHen it comes to LGBT members they take first priority over everyone else. If it happens to be a dispute with two LGBT members we take it on a case by case basis.

As to the OP that created this OP, the trash thread is your friend, that is the simplest solution to this problem. Why create friction when there is none to be made.

Anyone who spends any amount of time in the is Group will see the vast majority of OP's is to further our equal rights and to lend a helping hand to a fellow LGBT member. Thats what this Group is about, thats what the LGBT Hosts stand behind.

I hope your concerns have been answered.

William769
One of your LGBT Host's

[Duncan Grant]

20. Discussion is not friction.

Also, it's not your sole responsibility to answer my "concerns". This is a community of posters: you are but one among many. Governance (and/or speaking for all hosts) is above your pay grade, imho. Perhaps you would consider using "I" statements from here forward?

The exchange of ideas, the difference of opinion, and participation is important. As I mentioned in my original post, I know how to ignore or trash a thread.

Thank you.

[TriMera]

21. I don't believe that William said that he spoke

for all of the hosts. As a matter of fact, he said that this was the opinion of the hosts to which he had spoken (myself being one of those hosts). That is not at all above his pay grade and is actually quite true. I am also curious as to how you believe that these posts diminish the group's credibility. As a member of the group, I don't think they do. I think that they are a good way to lighten the mood and blow off steam.

[Duncan Grant]

24. Oh, dear. More host defensiveness.

Let's not make this about you and I -- or William.

As a long-term member of this group, I'm interested in a group consensus about what people would like this group to be. You have your opinion, I have mine.

If the participants of this group are endorsing NSFW photo threads, so be it. An exchange of ideas (not friction) will occur and maybe -- just maybe, we'll learn something about ourselves, too.

[William769]

25. If you have a problem with me being a LGBT Host, ask the LGBT members for my removal

I will honor their wishes.

Thats all I have to say to you on the subject.

Have a great Day!

[queerart]

26. You Are A Splendid Host....

... and you need to stay right the fuck where you are.....

[Zorra]

34. You're totally stuck with being a Host as far as I'm concerned.

No more of this silly removal talk, please.

[Duncan Grant]

47. You're too short for that gesture. Besides, it went out with Mrs. Fiske. (nt)

[Smarmie Doofus]

87. It seems to me your next move should be toward television.

There never was... and there never will be... another like you.

[Rowdyboy]

56. Count one more vote in your corner....You have been an excellent host among a really fine group....

[Jamastiene]

4. Why do you feel that the pictures diminish the group's credibility?

Last edited Fri May 18, 2012, 05:17 PM - Edit history (1)

I see you said you won't be able to respond really soon. So, I will wait for the answer.

My personal feelings on it are that the threads with the pictures are fine. I have no problem with it at all.

I guess we could ask that if someone wants to post some pictures, they could add a NSFW to the subject line for those that don't want to see the pictures. That might be a possible compromise.

[Duncan Grant]

23. This group could be "all photos, all the time" if that's the group consensus.

Maybe I'm asking: what's the function/vision of this group? I didn't realize we had shifted to NSFW threads (or as also recently happened: male porn star news).

[Fearless]

27. You can find the vision/function of the group in the SOP and the SOP thread pinned to the top

Of the group. Feel free to add your own two cents about what the group should be, as it is a community effort to shape the group. Your opinions are valued!

As for the "male porn star news"... That an ex-porn star is now working for UFC is of interest to some of our members, particularly those, like me, who see far too few gay sports stars. While I wouldn't say that he is necessarily or not necessarily a role model based on either his past or present careers, I do believe that LGBT exposure in all fields is important to society.

[Duncan Grant]

35. Yes, I'm aware of the pinned thread.

The porn star tickler I'm thinking of wasn't the one you mentioned. I'm interested in the UFC item, too -- especially how the UFC evolves or doesn't, as the case may be.

[Fearless]

37. Could you provide a link?

I'm curious of what you speak.

[Duncan Grant]

48. The point has been made, I don't think it will add anything to the discussion. (nt)

[Fearless]

77. Fair enough...

If you reconsider, I'd welcome being able to see things from your perspective as well!

[WillParkinson]

30. OK, excuse me?

Let's be clear about one thing.

I just went through 5 pages of messages that I started. 53 of those were news or entertainment related. 5 of them were relegated to the "Beefcake" category. One of those was the trailer for Arrow on CW, another was ads for Broadway Bares, an AIDS related fundraiser.

Five posts out of 58 and this is what you call 'shifted to'?

Really?

[Duncan Grant]

36. Please don't be defensive.

This isn't about you personally. This thread isn't a personal attack.

I'm asking others about what they think about NSFW photo threads in the LGBT group.

So far, people are participating. The discussion is thoughtful. No harm. No foul.

[Jamastiene]

33. There have only been a few pictures threads.

The vast majority of the threads in the group are not even close to how you are characterizing it here.

[xchrom]

5. sorry dude -- male erotica doesn't diminish us.

in fact i think it's kinda weird you said that.

[Evasporque]

6. If anything more L and T light erotica....

hot women, sexy trans folk...more firemen...wet firemen. With big hoses.....

[HillWilliam]

74. I wholeheartedly agree

Art, especially mildly erotic, is part and parcel to the community at large.

I most especially love the old photographs of L and G couples all dressed up to "have their pitcher took". It reminds me that however hard we think we have it now, their lot was much tougher.

[Evasporque]

7. HOT WET FIREMEN GOING AT IT!!

ON Edit: omg...that is kinda hot...

[racaulk]

9. As long as there is a NSFW tag in the title of the post, I'm OK with it.

Since I'm usually at work while I'm on DU, having that tag is incredibly helpful is avoiding threads that I should not open here!

We're a very diverse group of people here, therefore our contributions to this forum will be similarly diverse. That's a good thing, IMHO. I think there is enough room in this forum for topics of serious, heavy discussion as well as those that are light and provide some levity. I agree that we're seeing more of the latter compared to years past, but is that a good or a bad thing? I don't know the answer to that, but I'm willing to be permissive and let things ride and play out. That's better than overly moderating the forum with a heavy hand, I think.

As long as we're getting some good contributions to generate involvement in this forum, and as long as those contributions are not overly distracting and put our safe haven at risk, then I don't have a problem with it.

[Duncan Grant]

49. Good to hear from you on this topic!

Essentially, I don't disagree with you. I want to clarify that I'm not suggesting a heavy hand from on high to moderate. I'm suggesting a little thoughtfulness and sensitivity as it pertains to the broad membership of the LGBT group. Any moderation would be self-generated in this regard.

[libodem]

10. Hmmmm

I must have missed the good stuff. As a straight female, I don't mind a hawt, shirtless, fireman, once in awhile. Now, I know where to look.

[closeupready]

11. You do, indeed. If anyone knows a hot man when they see one,

it's a gay man.

[mitchtv]

12. I don't mind them

within reason , and they are within reason. God knows there are few enough particpants here as it is.

[Duncan Grant]

50. "few enough participants here as it is"

You know, that's a very interesting topic. Maybe a little "guerrilla marketing" would help?

[Fearless]

13. It seems to me that...

The line should be drawn at those photos which you are allowed to walk around in public looking like, and those you are not.

That said, no thread I've seen, has crossed that line. Rest assured, if one did, I would agree with you however, and I might ask the poster to take down the thread. This is my opinion as a person, William has stated the hosts opinion above me.

[Rowdyboy]

15. Sorry but I have to disagree.....they are few in number and hardly qualify as "male erotica"

I know where to find it online and whats posted here just doesn't fit my definition of the words. Your definition may differ and thats fine. Mine is just one opinion.

I certainly do not agree that they in any way diminish our credibility but, again, we each have a right to our personal opinions.

[Call Me Wesley]

16. May I ask you a question with all due respect?

Can you explain why 'it diminishes the credibility of the LGTB group' in your opinion? I find this a bit vague and hard to seriously respond to, but I'd like to, if I know more about the intent.

[Duncan Grant]

53. There's a great discussion about this idea further down thread.

The basic premise: This group is more than just gay men.

A friend of mine likes to say, "There's a time to step up and a time to step back." In my opinion, as far as the NSFW male photo thread is concerned -- it's time to step back.

[Smarmie Doofus]

17. I basically agree.

Which other ( non lgbt) forum features hetero erotica on an even infrequent basis?

Come on, now. He's got a point.

[Duncan Grant]

54. Thanks for checking in.

I think you're asking an interesting question about the other groups/forums.

[Ms. Toad]

22. Thank you for raising the question.

I am not particularly fond of those threads - and if we were taking a vote I'd vote to keep them out.

I belong to a group of LGBT individuals which meets in person a couple of times a year. We share a lot of laughter and a fair amount of sexualized play with each other (across all gender boundaries) - which I thoroughly enjoy. If I were assigning movie ratings to the strings of photos of men here and our play they would probably be equivalent (PG or PG-13).

What we share in person is a celebration of ourselves, our sexuality, and of our relationship with each other - an integral part of reclaiming our sexuality and our spirituality as divinely intertwined.

The strings of pictures, on the other hand, feel to me like turning people into sex objects - an entirely different activity, even if they are equivalent in terms of NSFW content. Rather than building community among all of us they turn our attention outward to sex objects who are not (so far as I know) part of our community - and in doing so they turn our attention away from each other along the dividing line of sexual orientation.

So - it isn't a matter for me of credibility, but of being put off by objectified scantily clad men (in whom I have no interest) which detracts from (rather than builds) community across gender lines, when gender integration is often a challenge in LGBT groups - and I don't think this group is particularly an exception to the rule.

[Duncan Grant]

58. Thank you for adding so much to the discussion.

The credibility issue for me is the lack of other voices. This group isn't just gay men (or people who agree with one another 100% of the time).

[yardwork]

28. I think that I am probably the only host who agrees with you, Duncan.

The threads are obviously very popular, though. As you note, this is a matter for our group to work out, and everybody's opinion is equally important and valid.

Maybe the compromise would be to label them NSFW in the subject lines. That way nobody gets in trouble at work, and it's also a fair warning to others who aren't interested not to open.

I appreciate your starting this OP. It's never easy to take an unpopular stand.

[WillParkinson]

31. No...

The compromise will be just to not bother at all. Simple enough. I've got enough on my plate right now that I don't need someone to cherry-pick a couple of posts that I made and claim that we're 'shifting to' NSFW stuff.

I'll make it much easier on everyone. If you guys want to have those posts, please feel free to do so. I've had it.

[yardwork]

32. You've got 3 people disagreeing with you and dozens in agreement, including all the other hosts.

Not sure why you are getting so crabby. If anything, this thread is a strong endorsement of the popularity of your threads. Sorry that a couple of people disagreeing upsets you so much.

[Duncan Grant]

61. Thanks, you've likely stuck a "kick me" sign on your back for saying so. :)

Truly, I don't think a formal procedure needs to be implemented regarding NSFW posts (although it is a thoughtful suggestion).

I think I want to advocate for more inclusion, awareness, and more leadership from other gay men.

[Zorra]

78. + 1. Yardie, I feel conflicted with regard to this issue also.

But I'm not a gay man, and I am female, and I don't understand this phenomenon, so I've been staying out of this so far, waiting to clarify my thoughts.

[FreeState]

88. Your not alone

I tend to side on the not needed here side of things (and believe me Im not a prude or a stranger to seeing half dressed men )

[beyurslf]

29. I enjoy the pictures and don't think they diminish our group at all.

I do like the NSFW tag in the header though. I often have my laptop out on the counter making dinner. My kids (teen boys) would just love to see me open a thread with half naked men so they could say I was looking at porn while making dinner.

[queerart]

38. This Thread....

.. is a "call out", plain and simple.....


This type of thing is not tolerated in other parts of DU, and certainly should not be encouraged here in the GLBTQI area.....


You can try to put lipstick on it.... and play at wanting to know "the opinions of others"....


But it's an "Old Fashioned Call Out".... Cut & Dry......

[Ms. Toad]

39. It is a legitimate question

It is our space, we can do what we want in it, and as far as I know this particular question has not been discussed.

The beefcake threads bother me mildly - I would prefer they not be here, but hadn't said anything. The space feels pretty male to me, which is not my thing, and the beefcake threads are a part of that.

If that is what most of the people want - fine. No big deal. But I suspect over time that may play a role in who feels comfortable or welcome hanging out in this space.

[queerart]

41. It is our space, we can do what we want in it.....

Really? ... and just "who" pray tell is "our space".....


As I tell you what, either you missed my name "QUEERART".... or you feel you are now in charge?


Shall we now refer to you as "Madame President"?


The thread is a "call out".... no matter how hard you try to spin it.... it's a CALL OUT!


... and to say that the beefcake is "soft core porn" is a stretch beyond that rubber band can expand to....


You know it's a call out, I know it's a call out.... and your next door neighbors dog knows it's a call out.....

[Ms. Toad]

44. I have no idea what you are talking about, or why you are so angry

This group belongs to all of us - not just you. Not just gay men. And I have no clue why you think expressing an opinion means I think I am in charge. I'm taking part in a discussion on a discussion board in a group I have been part of for a number of years.

As of the December, or so, the admins gave us control of deciding how we want our space to run. A question was raised about what we want in this space. You have an opinion, I have an opinion, other people have other opinions, we discuss them and figure out what we want.

[Duncan Grant]

64. I was appalled to read the hidden post.

Point proved.

Game. Set. Match.

[obamanut2012]

80. I am appalled at the hidden post, Ms. Toad

I'm so sorry you were talked to this why. I also feel ashamed for being too uncomfortable to speak up in this thread until now, because it isn't right you took all of that heat.

[obamanut2012]

79. Why are you being so hostile to Ms. Toad???

She was very reasonable and polite in her post.

Your post, and others like it, are why I have not felt safe or comfortable to post in this thread.

[Duncan Grant]

63. This is exactly it.

The beefcake threads bother me mildly - I would prefer they not be here, but hadn't said anything. The space feels pretty male to me, which is not my thing, and the beefcake threads are a part of that.

If that is what most of the people want - fine. No big deal. But I suspect over time that may play a role in who feels comfortable or welcome hanging out in this space.

I miss the lesbians who used to post here. They had sharp minds, declarative voices, and a gift for building substantive on-line relationships. It was a hell-of-a-lot different than NSFW threads.

[HillWilliam]

75. I heartily doubt that it's the

pictures threads that ran them off.

I'll say it yet again. I don't often click on the pics theads. I rarely if ever click on the entertainment threads. Yet I can not deny that these hold interest for the folks who do. So long as they are marked, I have the freedom whether to click or not.

The more I read in this thread, the clearer it becomes that those who participate the least in the group are the most upset by a few picture threads. My suggestion is that if you want different material in the group, then post some. We'd all be richer for it.

[Ms. Toad]

85. Not exclusively,

they are part of a bigger picture, from my perspective. Nearly 24 hours ago, in response to a polite suggestion that this was a discussion I welcomed, I was the target of two hateful, blasts - the first mildly gender based, and the second blatantly gender based - and hooked into the homophobic belief that lesbians hate men.

The man who started the thread, and two women have responded directly to Queerart. Another man, in response to my prompting, agreed that Queerart's comments were over the top - but suggested it was only one man. In other words, no big deal. Not a single host (other than in response to my prompting in a separate subthread) has suggested that Queerart's comments were way out of line. That sends a message to me that nobody particularly thought they were.

At least one other woman has heard the same message I'm hearing - she said that responses like Queerart's were the reason she has not felt safe or comfortable posting in this thread.

Rather than casting doubt on the suggestion I made, isn't it more likely that infrequent participants choosing this conversation to participate in suggests that the picture threads (and the kind of responses I encountered when I suggested I would prefer not to have them here) might be a contributing factor?

[theHandpuppet]

110. Well, it's one of the reasons I rarely visit anymore

I do feel the beefcake photos diminish this discussion space and have turned it into a gay man's club. As a lesbian I would feel equally unconfortable if the women here (or the ones still here) decided this was a space to post "cupcake" albums and drool over pics.

Well, to each their own, as the saying goes... and sadly, this just isn't my cup of tea any longer.

[Duncan Grant]

120. Thank you for posting.

There's so much to be said about inclusiveness, privilege, entitlement...but who's listening?

The problem with this group is the minority.

Happy trails!

[HillWilliam]

40. I don't see a problem

so long as there are no explicit bits showing. I don't get any particular charge out of pr0n; I've always preferred to admire naked men up close and personal. (My realm is less in the visual and more in the tactile and olfactory. Give me a hug with fresh clean skin and we'll start talkin' from there )

I do love good photography, good composition and lighting. A few of the pics that have been posted here fall into that category. Because I'm a gay man, I do admire a well-worked male physique. Still, to me, it's a case of ars gratia artis. There is no disputing that all manner of depictions of the male form are part and parcel of our culture. If it weren't, nobody would ever have heard of Tom of Finland, Seago, Esteban, and many others. (I have a few originals of which I'm very fond; again, as art.)

If I see NSFW in the OP title, I don't open it unless I'm at home. Even then, I may or may not. There are tons of other threads to read through on DU. No need to get uptight about it, even less to piss on the thread. Live and let live AFAIC.

[Ms. Toad]

43. Thank you for illustrating my point

There is no disputing that all manner of depictions of the male form are part and parcel of our culture. If it weren't, nobody would ever have heard of Tom of Finland, Seago, Esteban, and many others. (I have a few originals of which I'm very fond; again, as art.)

When you say "our culture," "our" seems to me to ignore that this group is more than gay men - a phenomenon which has happened in more than one LGBT group of which I have been a part. While it may be part and parcel of your corner of LGBT culture, it isn't (and I'm not particularly thrilled about it becoming) part of my corner (or the shared space) of our culture.

I'm not jumping up and down screaming and asking for it to be banned - but I do think it is worth considering what the impact that bringing that piece of gay male culture into shared LGBT space might have on who feels invited and comfortable here.

[Behind the Aegis]

51. Do you not see gay/bi men as part of "our culture?"

The thread in question is about male pictures, if it were females and a lesbian/bi woman stated "our culture," would you also parse the phrase as you have with HillWilliam's post? I agree there is often a focus on gay/bi men (well, not really bis, which is another problem), but it doesn't mean gay male culture should be ignored or marginalized.

[Ms. Toad]

57. I have to give you a two part answer

I would if, for example, the assertion had been made that, "There is no disputing that lesbian separatists are part and parcel of our culture."

But my point is broader than that. Gay men (well, men more generally) often aren't often aware when making broad generalizations about things that are essential to their world view that those same things may not be essential to a lesbian's world view (and may even serve to discourage lesbians from participation). So I can't even really imagine a lesbian making that statement - talking generally about the LGBT culture, particularly about pictures of scantily clad women, or even about other things which really are part and parcel of lesbian subculture.

And considering not having beefcake threads isn't about marginalizing gay male culture any more than not using certain words is about being a word police. It is about figuring out how to be intentional about sharing this space in a respectful and considerate manner. Having the walls in shared space plastered with scantily clad male bodies just isn't really welcoming to most lesbians - and turning people (of either gender) into sex objects is something at least some of us find generally offensive - so for some of us the threads are doubly offputting.

I don't know the genders of everyone here - but if you just scan down the thread starters on the first page, most of them are identifiably male. Ever wonder where the women are - and why we seem to be underrepresented?

[Behind the Aegis]

60. Your answers weren't at all clear.

Your first paragraphs make no sense. I am not even sure what you are trying to convey.

Let me explain how I see this group. It is not just a political group, it is also a personal group. There are many threads in this group that are more suited for the Lounge, but they aren't locked because this is a community. As such, there are a variety of subgroups. This group cannot, nor will it be, the group everyone wants. I will include the "The Man, the Boy and the Donkey" fable at the end of this post to drive the next point home. I feel you and others are making this Molehill Country in regards to this topic because this isn't an everyday occurance, it isn't a frequent issue from what I can see. Some people seem to want this to a "poltics only" group; it isn't going to happen, anymore than it is going to turn into a gay.com chatroom.

As for wondering where the women are? No, I don't really wonder all that much because people will post as they want to post. I don't wonder where all the ally posters are, I don't wonder where all the bisexual posters are...do you? What about non-white posters? Your implication this group is unwelcoming to women is flat out offensive! Where are YOUR topic starter threads? Some people just don't post threads but rather reply. I don't post thread starters often, but I do reply in a number of threads. I will give you that there is gender inequality in our community, as well as the population-at-large. But quite honestly, I think you are looking for a problem where none exists!

A MAN and his son were once going with their Donkey to market. As they were walking along by its side a countryman passed them and said: “You fools, what is a Donkey for but to ride upon?”

So the Man put the Boy on the Donkey and they went on their way. But soon they passed a group of men, one of whom said: “See that lazy youngster, he lets his father walk while he rides.”

So the Man ordered his Boy to get off, and got on himself. But they hadn’t gone far when they passed two women, one of whom said to the other: “Shame on that lazy lout to let his poor little son trudge along.”

Well, the Man didn’t know what to do, but at last he took his Boy up before him on the Donkey. By this time they had come to the town, and the passers-by began to jeer and point at them. The Man stopped and asked what they were scoffing at. The men said: “Aren’t you ashamed of yourself for overloading that poor Donkey of yours—you and your hulking son?”

The Man and Boy got off and tried to think what to do. They thought and they thought, till at last they cut down a pole, tied the Donkey’s feet to it, and raised the pole and the Donkey to their shoulders. They went along amid the laughter of all who met them till they came to Market Bridge, when the Donkey, getting one of his feet loose, kicked out and caused the Boy to drop his end of the pole. In the struggle the Donkey fell over the bridge, and his fore-feet being tied together he was drowned.

“That will teach you,” said an old man who had followed them:

“PLEASE ALL, AND YOU WILL PLEASE NONE.”

Source: http://www.bartleby.com/17/1/62.html

[Ms. Toad]

66. I am not looking for a problem that doesn't exist.

The question was raised by someone else. I didn't bring it up - BUT it is something I have felt and because the question was asked I took the opportunity to express it - and to suggest that it might be worth further exploring.

Sorry I wasn't clear as to my first comment - it is late. You asked if I would have parsed the comment if the threads had been women's pictures - which is like asking if I would have parsed the comment if Lake Erie went dry (I'm exaggerating some, of course, but oodles of pictures of scantily clad women is just not a large part of lesbian culture), so I was trying to come up with an equivalent example of something which has played a large role in lesbian culture but which was largely absent from gay men's culture. If a lesbian had ascribed to our (collective) culture something which was exclusive (or nearly so) to the lesbian subculture, yes I would have parsed the comment. And the second part of my response was that it would surprise me very much if a lesbian would ever make such a comment because of the cultural differences associated with being the generic he, rather than the invisible other.

As for whether the group feels unwelcoming to women, are you - as a man - really saying that it is offensive for me - as a woman - to express my feeling that the beefcake threads make me feel less welcome here? Or that you find it offensive when I suggest it might be good for this group to consider whether others might feel similarly and whether that might be impacting the demographics of the group?

[Behind the Aegis]

67. Maybe, maybe not.

It isn't a matter of whether you brought it up or not, so put that strawman to bed.

I understand it is late, which is why I may not have been as clear either. I asked the question prior to the knowledge you dislike those threads anyway, so it is of little consequence now.

I find your continued baiting offensive. Are you -- as a woman -- saying that I -- a man -- shouldn't have an opinion as to what I find offensive? See how that works?

Have you ever considered some women don't post here because it isn't of any interest or of major interest to them? Is it possible that some women don't start threads, not because they feel marginalized or un-included but rather they, like many here, just don't start threads? Are you familiar with identity acquisition theory?

I posit that there may be a variety of reasons why we don't see thread starting female posters (lesbian, bi, ally, transgender). This may be one, and should be explored. However, given the infrequency of such posts, I don't see it as a major factor and you have failed to prove it is one, so I see your suggestion as more of speculation. Still worthy of discussion, but hardly conclusive. There are a number of reasons why people don't post in this group. How would you accommodate them all?

[Ms. Toad]

70. I'm not baiting

You described my expression of what I am feeling as an offensive implication about the group. As we both know from explaining LGBT issues over and over again in the general population of DU, things which are done or said with completely innocent intent can still feel unwelcoming, or worse - and that it really doesn't matter what the speaker intended. I don't think most gay men in the LGBT group intend to be unwelcoming to women (with one notable exception upthread) - and I don't think the people posting the threads gave it a second thought. That doesn't change how I experience the threads, or give you the right to dismiss my feelings as an offensive implication about the group. I hoped phrasing it as a question might encourage you reach the conclusion on your own. (And, FWIW, I did not generalize my experience to all women - I posed a question about whether other women might have similar feelings.)

As to the rest of it, you are reading way more into my posts than I actually said. All I have done is made an observation or two about my feelings, the group composition, and general dynamics in most LGBT groups - and raised questions about the observations which I think it might be useful for the group to explore in the context of the current discussion.

BTW - I only pointed you to the thread starters because it is a convenient at-a-glance view of people participating here, not to distinguish thread starters from any other participants in the group. I don't suspect the in-the-thread demographics would be dramatically different, I just figured a glance at the front page would give you a quick and dirty overview of gender balance.

[Behind the Aegis]

71. We will have to disagree on your subject line.

I didn't dismiss your feelings. I saw your remarks as an offensive implication, which is MY opinion, which you seemingly have no problem "dismissing". Your "question" was a loaded implication based on your experiences. I understood this and responded based on it.

I have simply challenged your opinion with my own opinions.

As for your "quick and dirty view," based on that information (thread-starting), we only have about 7 posters as members of this group. If you want to to imply this group is unwelcoming of women, then it might be more prudent to show the number of threads that only deal with "male problems/issues" as opposed to those which are more inclusive of the entire community.

[Duncan Grant]

65. For what it's worth, your post was perfectly clear to me.

And considering not having beefcake threads isn't about marginalizing gay male culture any more than not using certain words is about being a word police. It is about figuring out how to be intentional about sharing this space in a respectful and considerate manner.

[Jamastiene]

82. I'm female and have no problem if they guys want to post a picture thread.

It doesn't discourage me from posting in the group.

Edited to add: I'm female and like women, just for the record, in case my subject line wasn't clear enough.

[HillWilliam]

73. Not necessarily, dear

There is such a thing as lesbian and trans artistic depictions. Being a gay male, I haven't looked for them. I have seen many such at LGBT fairs and gatherings. (Okay: lesbian and gay art and photography. I am disappointed to have to report that I wouldn't know trans art if it showed up on my livingroom wall.) It's really not my concern who wants to own or look at what. Just because you haven't seen or purchased any doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I do apologize. My mind thought "human form" but my fingers wrote "male" since we were specifically discussing depictions of male figures. One simply cannot deny that semi-clothed to nude depictions are an integral part of OUR --alllllll our -- culture. That means, if you are a member of the LGBT community, there is art to your taste somewhere from bar posters (of which I have a great collection), to leather contest prints, to photography, and media.

But really, now, you did miss my major point entirely. So long as the threads are marked, what is the problem? We all have the freedom to click on them or not. As I repeated and will repeat again: there are many other threads on which to click. Anyone can click on those instead. If the threads in question are marked AND no explicit parts or actions are visible, I still fail to see what the problem is. It is not our job to struggle not to offend the str8 community. It is our job to be who we are and to quit trying to change to please them.

The last paragraph being a restatement, yes, it does seem that you are lobbying to have them removed entirely. Just come out and say so: Your opinion is as valid as any other person's in this community.

[Ms. Toad]

81. The place of nude and semi-clothed depictions of people

really does play a very different role in the lesbian v. the gay culture. It is a minor part, and tends to be more abstract and focused on sensuality, and generally less "in your face" in the lesbian culture, Existing in a culture (how you described it in this post - and I would say is accurate for the lesbian culture) - is very different from being part and parcel of a culture (how you described it in your first post - which I would say is accurate for gay male culture). If you pick up any gay newspaper, the difference should be pretty obvious - as it should from the threads here which, as far as I know, have all been males. The predominance of scantily clad males in sexually inviting poses does make me feel as if this (newspaper, this group, wherever that balance exists) is a place that is not mine, and I am a tolerated intruder rather than a welcome member. Your initial comment - which focused on the prevalence in gay male culture as if it were the prevalence in all LGBT culture is part of that. I'm not ascribing any deliberate intent on your part to generalize the gay perspective as that of the LGBT community - it is just what happens in our culture (very broadly) because unless we are intentional about it, the norm is still - unfortunately - whatever the norm is for men. That tendency is often even stronger in our smaller LGBT culture for reasons that I'm not even sure I could articulate.

As to what I want - I haven't been avoiding saying it - I said in my first post (#22) that if we were voting I would vote to not have them. The rest of what I have said has been in response to other contributors (more about that below).

I also suggested it was worth exploring whether others feel the same way, and whether it might be a contributing factor to what seems to me to be a population in this group which is heavily weighted toward the male end of the spectrum.

The tone of most of the responses is much more troubling to me than the beefcake threads themselves. Your response is the mildest, but it still presents the gay male perspective as the perspective of the LGBT community as a whole, and focuses on our presentation to the world (and see post #46). My concern whether the presence of these threads contributes to an atmosphere that discourages participation in this group by some parts of our community. As I have said, it does, for me - and there may be others. The responses have almost universally had a tone of hostility - disbelief, offense that I would express my feeling of being an outsider in my own community, accusations that I am a man-hater and troll, and offense at exaggerated characterizations of what I actually said. I have responded much more strongly to those reactions (mostly because they caught me completely off guard) than to the original question. I suspect it is why it feels like lobbying to you.

I encourage you to look through these threads and see the responses that the expression of my personal feelings have generated, and ask yourself whether other people who have similar feelings about our shared space (if there are others) would feel invited to express those feelings. (And I see, by this morning, that there are at least two new voices suggesting some level of discomfort, one suggesting she has been quiet about her discomfort because of the kind of reaction I have been getting.)

If beefcake threads are what the group wants - fine. I have a very strong real life LGBT community, which includes a lot of sexual play but which is very intentional about making sure that play is inclusive rather than exclusive. I am not in search of another LGBT home. I may drop in occasionally to share something I have run across that I think folks here might be interested in, but I won't likely spend a lot of time here. I don't now. The only real difference is that now anyone who is curious about group demographics has a clue why at least one lesbian is an infrequent participant.

[Capt. Obvious]

42. I get the question about cred

I'm fine with the photos but I get that point. I can see haters/slows pointing and saying, "what's with you guys and those gay pride parades huh?"
I can see that same reaction here; as if the photo threads become the topic outside instead of what's really important.

I think this group can handle both the politics and the photos (as is or in a vacuum). I can see them going their separate ways too.

Basically, I think you have a good point to raise.

Carry on.

[Ms. Toad]

46. I'm actually less concerned about how it looks to outsiders

than about how welcoming it is to the entire spectrum of folks in the LGBT umbrella who might want to hang out here.

Gender balance is historically a challenge in the LGBT community, and I don't think hanging beefcake on the walls particularly helps that balance.

As for the rest of the world - tough noogies. Some of our advances were only made because of people who were so far from gender normative that they couldn't pass, and didn't have much to lose by being themselves. If we reject the men at Stonewall, the women who are stopped everytime they use the women's restroom, or the "outrageous" behavior at gay pride parades because we are afraid of what others will think, we lose some very rich and vibrant parts of our collective culture.

[Behind the Aegis]

52. Personally, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

A few sporadic "beefcake" threads do not pose the problem you seem to think it does, IMO. I wouldn't be offended if a female poster here did the same thing, unlike the interlopers who brayed about the "icky men," I don't feel that way about females or their bodies. I have seen "skin" threads in the Lounge before and sometimes look them over, no big.

[Rowdyboy]

55. +1

[Ms. Toad]

59. The question was raised by someone else.

I didn't raise it - but it has been something I have found mildly annoying. I hadn't shared that before, but since the question was asked I shared it in a single independent observation, then engaged in discussion in response to observations made by others. I hardly think that is making a mountain out of a molehill.

Whether you would mind if women put up similar threads isn't really the question, since I think that is unlikely to happen spontaneously (although it might well just to prove a point after this thread) - the question I am raising is whether the threads of men are making this group less inviting to parts of the LGBT community, and if they are does the group want to do anything about it.

Frankly, I'm a little bit surprised at a really major overreaction by one poster - and much milder reactions by others, but still defensive or offended that anyone really might not like the threads.

FWIW - I would have objections to skin threads in the Lounge because I don't like viewing people as sex objects. But the lounge isn't particularly my taste anyway so I'm not likely to run into them. And it doesn't have the same implications that it does in a smaller marginalized community which has struggled to integrate the voices of women, bis, and trans individuals.

[Behind the Aegis]

62. As I said, you are still in Molehill Country.

You have also shown you have another reason all together for dislike of these threads, so I appreciate you at least being honest in that respect.

This community is many things to many people, and if you don't "appreciate" those type of threads, then you can opt out. I don't open every thread in this group, do you? Sure, the title might need to be more explicit, I'll give you that. But, it isn't even a common occurrence. You have expressed your opinion, as have others, myself included. Personally, I think some have reacted in a "offended" manner because those pictures were called soft-core porn, some persons are being perceived as judgmental of anyone who likes said threads/posts, and that such rare threads are somehow "de-legitimizing" this group. For me, I am a bit put off because this whole conversation was started by two posters who aren't even members of this community, one had NEVER posted in this group before. They were, IMO, shit-stirrers...and good on them, "mission accomplished" as far as I am concerned.

[Ms. Toad]

68. I guess what I find troubling is that a lot of the overreaction and offense was directed at me.

Even though I don't think you can find anything in any of my posts in which I suggested they were soft-core porn, or that I passed any judgment on anyone who liked the threads, or that I cared a hoot what anyone outside of this group thinks (or whether the threads had anything to do with the legitimacy of the group). My focus is on community, and whether the threads have an impact on who feels invited into this community.

I certainly did nothing to deserve the two blasts from Queerart. That kind of reaction - this is a gay man's domain, and I'll tolerate you as long as you aren't too obtrusive - makes explicit the much less tangible (and I'm sure completely unintended) feeling I get from the beefcake threads.

As for my "other" reason - in case you didn't catch it, it was there in the first post I made in this thread (#22). They are not entirely separate reasons since (as I indicated) I think play (including sexualized play with each other across all gender boundaries) draws a community together - but sexual objectification separates it.

[Behind the Aegis]

69. Who let the dogs out?! ME! ME! ME!

Sorry, I had to let the little demons (4 chihuahuas) out to potty. I also hate coming up with "titles" for my posts.

The soft-core porn comment was in regards to the OP, not anything you said; nor did I claim you were passing judgment, but rather that may be how some were feeling, and thus producing the comments made. As for Queerart's comments, I also feel that was over the top, but I am not Queerart, nor do I see the other responses to you even resembling his comments, which is reflective of the rare beefcake threads reaction on your part, IMO.

Your other reason, while interesting, is still nothing more than speculation based on your reactions to threads you consider exploitive.

On edit: I am also curious as to why you see my replies to you as "overreaction" and "offensive?"

[Ms. Toad]

84. Glad the dogs got out -

I'd hate to think of consequences if they hadn't.

I started by expressing some pretty mild preferences - consistent with the level of the impact of the threads themselves on my experience here.

I'd rather not run across them, as I had the experience of doing before the NSFW label was added to the thread yesterday. The subject line wasn't that different from one I opened up last weekend by William769, "If you ever need a pick me up, this is what I listen to." I opened up Friday's thread, decided I'd rather not, and moved on. I didn't bother to even scroll down and see the comments. When you said the two posters who started this had been blocked I went looking to see if Duncan Grant had really been blocked from the group for starting this discussion (and to try to figure out who the second one you were referring to might be) and discovered that you weren't referring to Duncan Grant at all.

You have responded to my comments in this thread as if they were a continuation of another conversation I was unaware of (until now) because, ironically, I did what you and others have suggested - shut the other thread before I even scrolled down to the conversation.

So, yes, when you drag that other stuff I had nothing to do with, and was unaware was even going on, into your reaction to me, that feels to me like an overreaction. (The connection to the other conversation is recognizable now, in retrospect, but was not when I had no awareness of the other conversation.)

I expressed my personal feelings about the impact of the threads on my experience in this group. Rather than accepting it for what it was - a personal expression of my feelings, you turned it into an implication about the group which you attributed to me, and then told me it was offensive. How you would feel if you said that something going on in a group made you, as a gay man, feel less than welcome, and suggested it might be worth exploring whether other gay men felt the same way, and the response from straight folks in the group was, "Your implication this group is unwelcoming to gays is flat out offensive!"

You say I'm looking for a problem that doesn't exist (when, again ironically, I had actually been avoiding the "problem" by not bothering to go beyond opening the thread, noticing its content, and closing it). From my perspective, this thread was a new conversation started by a member of this community who raised an issue that had already been on my mind.

The first thing that happens when I politely suggest that I think it is an appropriate discussion is that I get a hateful blast out of nowhere from Queerart. And no one says a word.

Queerart's comments were extremely blunt and crude and dripping with disdain and disrespect, and very gender specific. Until I specifically called it to your attention - no male other than the person who started this thread, and not a single host, even bothered to suggest Queerart's comments were inappropriate. The message that failure sends has already come though loud and clear to at least one other woman.

Any of my conversation beyond that exchange was much more a reaction to being told to STFU and called a man-hater (and more), and to the deafening silence that followed, suggesting no one thought Queerart was particularly out of line, than it was to the threads themselves. (if you read carefully, you will see that I often referred to my concern as the threads, and the atmosphere to which they contribute - it is the atmosphere in which it is acceptable to let that hateful gender based blast stand unanswered that I am referring to).

I'm mystified at how you reconcile what you can see I experienced in this thread with being offended by the thought that I might personally find this group not terribly welcoming to women.

So take this as an opportunity for soul searching - or not. As I said in another post. I may drop in occasionally to share something I have run across that I think folks here might be interested in, but I won't likely spend a lot of time here. Not much obvious change, since I don't now. The only real difference is that now anyone who is curious about group demographics has a clue why at least one lesbian is an infrequent participant.

(And - just for the record - I said nothing about threads here, or elsewhere, being exploitive.)

[Puglover]

86. You have said this 2 times.

" The only real difference is that now anyone who is curious about group demographics has a clue why at least one lesbian is an infrequent participant."

You have also said you don't care all that much about the beefcake thread. So you don't care all that much but it's enough to keep you an "infrequent participant".
Sorry but which is it? Yeah Queerarts post was very much out of line and was rightfully hidden. So what more did you want? You don't care that much but you wanted everyone to step up and denounce a hidden post? Somehow the GLTB posters are wanting because they didn't create a huge subthread excoriating Queerart?

Frankly I won't be the slightest bit curious why you would be an infrequent participant. That is pretty much how I would feel about any poster here unless I had a personal relationship with them. I would certainly not expect you to be curious as to why I don't post here a whole lot. It's a big board and there are lots of posters. Some prolific and others not so much. And I don't mean to sound harsh but I think it unrealistic to expect folks to be concerned about the frequency of my posts. Again EVERYONE who is supportive of the GLTB struggle for equality is welcome but while this group is a protected group I do not believe it is a support group. (I am not saying you do.) And before you say I am not being welcoming to all that simply is not the case. I (I am speaking here as an individual not as a host) welcome everyone who is interested in posting on a robust and spirited message board. Skinner himself said on DU2 "have a thick skin" I don't believe that has changed here.

To expect this forum or any other on this message board. to be styled according to mine or anyone elses particular sensitivities is IMHO not a realistic position that will work for anyone much less the group as a whole.

[Ms. Toad]

90. One of the challenges LGBT groups often face

is that absent an intent and hard work to be inclusive, many lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender individuals often feel unwelcome in LGBT groups. We've had to work through that in virtually every real life LGBT group in which I have been a participant because there are cultural differences - and if we are honest internal prejudices and hierarchies. Unless people are intentional about it, the gay male norm becomes the norm for the group - which does not always feel very welcoming to people who are not gay males.

The same thing happens in groups in the general population in real life. There are any number of groups I have been part of which have looked around and said, "Why is the group so white? Everyone who is interested in {name the cause} is welcome?" If we bother to ask, we often find out that there are a variety of reasons why racial minorities don't feel welcome even when we intend to (and try to) extend an invitation. Saying everyone is welcome - even with the best intentions in the world - isn't the same as doing the hard work it takes to really figure out how to make the "other" feel welcome.

As to Queerart, that's easy pickings from a welcoming perspective. The LGBT group is a safe haven group - and Queerart launched an attack, which included a homophobic stereotype directed at lesbians - in the middle of a conversation about (among other things) whether this space really feels welcoming to lesbians.

If Queerart had been straight, telling a lesbian she was a man-hater would have earned him an immediate block from the group. While I don't really expect him to be blocked, I do expect at least a visible response from the hosts. The lack of response, particularly under the circumstances in which the attack was made, is just a tangible example of the general feeling I have that this space is mostly gay male space in which the rest of us are tolerated guests.

The rest is a lot less concrete.

I am (generally - in both real-life and in a mixed online/real life community) pretty heavily invested in raising awareness about diversity issues, specifically about exploring why our communities aren't as diverse as we might like them to be, and what changes we can make to so it as easy and inviting for minority members to participate as fully as it is for majority members. So my investment in the general principle, combined with a thread which caught my attention in connection with this issue prompted my first two responses. The attack by Queerart, and the implicit message in the silence which followed it, are driving my continued participation in this thread. I'm just kind of astounded that with that blatant an example of something that might make lesbians not feel particularly welcome here, I'm still getting the "how dare you not feel welcome" reaction. And - FWIW - the list of women who have expressed feelings similar to mine with regard to the threads is growing quietly in the middle of this thread.

As to this specific group, I don't have a lot of investment in changing this particular LGBT group. In the big picture, whether this particular group feels welcoming to me, a part of which is whether it decides to keep beefcake threads, isn't a major issue for me. Right now - it feels far less welcoming than when this thread started - and I have lots of other places that meet any need this group could fill.

The group can either take a look around and notice that there really aren't very many women posting here (as near as I can tell), and wonder why, or whether that is a good thing, or it can continue as is.

It is in that context that I made the comment about knowing why one lesbian is an infrequent poster - not because I would expect you to care about me, specifically, but if you ever start wondering why the group is so male (and think that is a bad thing) it is information that might provide a starting point to figure it out. And to just clarify it isn't the beefcake threads, in isolation, that keep me an infrequent poster. It is the atmosphere in which they exist - of which Queerart's homophobic attack and the silence that followed are a concrete illustration.

[William769]

91. I was going to stay out of this thread but you have made me change my mind.

Just look at all the things that are posted on the 1st page of this group let alone the other 23 pages and this is what your spending your time and energy on? I also will ask this of the person who wrote the OP Really? Do you actually think people cannot see whats going on?

Speaking for myself I post articles for the benefit of Gay, Lesbian, Bi, & Transgendered which happen to be the LGBT Community I try to put our best interest first. I'm here to lend a helping hand, I have given my shoulder to cry on for those who needed it, I have come out swinging against those that would deny us our basic human rights. This is what I do in this Group as well in my personal life and it does not matter if it's male or female.

I don't know you outside of DU so my comments will be specifically for here on DU (please note that) but I have to say you as a person who posts on DU does not impress me I can't speak for all your posts but the one's I seem to run into are (let's just say threads that were known on DU2 as flaming threads). To even imply that it is not safe to post in this Group is ludicrous for Gay, Lesbian, Bi & Transgendered for whatever reason. Maybe you need to take a look at yourself and what you post and Don't post here (I do that with myself on a daily basis).

I will continue to post as I have been posting, I will continue to support the people that need support and most of all I will continue to help keep this Group safe for all that actively participate here.

I will not respond to Queerart's interaction with you (that was dealt with Community Standards) but it has been noted.

Consider this post "tough love", or you can consider it however you wish.

And in closing I will say I am speaking now as a LGBT member and not as a LGBT Host and I do wish you the very best in whatever you decide to do.

Have a good evening
Bill

[Ms. Toad]

92. I did not say or imply it was unsafe.

But another member did.

The comment by Queerart, and the lack of any visible response by the hosts to a comment that would have gotten any straight person banned, is one of the reasons for that feeling. Community standards are not responsible for maintaining the safety in this group - they are intended to hide generally over the top comments, not to address behavior that is specifically related to the safe haven nature of this group. And it is pretty presumptuous for you to call the feeling a woman expressed regarding posting here ludicrous - in the same way it it presumptuous for a straight person to make that comment regarding how a gay person says they feel in a particular space.

What I said was that this space doesn't feel particularly welcoming to this particular lesbian, in part because of the beefcake threads and the atmosphere that supports them. That isn't the same as being unsafe (which is not my personal feeling) - but it means I am less likely to spend time here because it feels more like gay men's space than space intended to be inviting to all of the LGBT community. If you look upthread there are a growing number of others (I believe 6 total - all but one women, I believe, and roughly 1/4 of the people posting in this thread) who would prefer the threads not be here (without going much beyond that to explain why they feel that way). That says to me it is something worthwhile for the group to think about - and from my perspective, I think part of that thinking should include looking at the demographics of the group.

[Puglover]

72. This

" For me, I am a bit put off because this whole conversation was started by two posters who aren't even members of this community, one had NEVER posted in this group before. They were, IMO, shit-stirrers...and good on them, "mission accomplished" as far as I am concerned."

Just as I have rarely, if ever seen a beefcake thread in our forum so it goes with those two shit stirrers. They dropped in, crapped in the punch bowl and left. Thankfully they are now blocked.

It's just like the folks who point at drag queens during gay pride and say "See, that's what they are all about" Bullshit. If another thread like Will's pops up and you(generic you) don't like it then trash it. But stop trying to change the environment to suit your sensibilities. DU has a few posters that make it miserable for the rest of us doing just that. Constantly. And I really do not want that bullcrap coming into our forum.

[HillWilliam]

76. [phone]

If people want different threads, might I respectfully suggest they start some.

Again, I may click on the pics threads if I've read everything else. Mostly, I don't. What's the BFD? If someone clicks on a labelled thread and THEN gets offended, now who did that? It wasn't the OP.

[Rowdyboy]

89. If WillParkinson's bare chested men draw such condemnation, imagine posting pics from Pride!

YeGods! I've posted shots from Southern Decadence in New Orleans in the past and no one has ever batted an eye.

And "Trash Thread" does work. I tried it today for the first time and it was simple enough for a toddler. Don't want to see it-block it and it goes away.

[Duncan Grant]

98. It was a NSFW thread.

I'm simply asking for a group consensus if NSFW threads are the direction this group wants to go.

[William769]

99. This is what I don't understand

This group is NOT headed in that direction, never has and never will.

If you think it's headed in that direction, give us some cold hard facts. Prove to us that it is, if not your just blowing smoke. I am here on a daily basis, I see what gets posted. As I have said before beefcake threads are minuscule here compared to what gets posted. Prove me wrong and then we can have a honest discussion. I don't think thats asking to much at all. And yes if a LGBT member wants to post a "beefcake" thread, I will support them in that. This is after all a community for all and we have a diverse community, not everyone is going to be pleased with what is posted.

[Duncan Grant]

101. I don't have to prove you wrong to have an honest discussion.

I asked in my OP that everyone abandon this idea of "right" and "wrong". This is an exchange of ideas. No one has to win or lose in this moment. Do you understand? Emotions do not add credibility to one's opinion. I resent this implication that I'm (in your words) "just blowing smoke". That idiom means that I'm practicing some sort of deception. Are you certain that your own position is authoritative?

We did, in fact, have a NSFW thread posted. In post #98, I said: I'm simply asking for a group consensus if NSFW threads are the direction this group wants to go.

As to your remarks about this being a diverse community; I would refer you (again) to post #90 by Ms. Toad for more on this subject. I think she's offering a more substantive assessment of diversity in the LGBT group.

[William769]

103. And I quote,

"I'm simply asking for a group consensus if NSFW threads are the direction this group wants to go."

I'm not going to let you off as easy as Fearless did up thread. Talk about avoiding his question.

The only thing you will hear from me from now on in this thread is show us where this is happening all else is blowing smoke.

EDIT: I firmly believe it is now not a honest discussion.

[Duncan Grant]

106. In other words, this discussion is all lies. Is the thread all lies, too?

I'm not doing anything dishonest in this thread.

You can imply that I'm a liar -- but your saying so doesn't make it true. Why are you making this about me personally? Will you ban me now, a member who's been here from the beginning, for asking for a group consensus?

Some people are engaged in a discussion in this thread. There's nothing threatening about that, this is a discussion group. I gave you a link to a NSFW thread. Are you saying it didn't get posted, that we can't discuss it?

There's no "honest discussion" problem here. There might be a comprehension problem but there's room for that, too.

[William769]

107. Once again show where this group is headed in that direction.

[Duncan Grant]

105. So, we're going to kill the messenger now? I've been waiting for this.

You're entitled to your opinion about my motives. If it makes you more comfortable to locate me as a "divider" -- knock yourself out. Your other option is to offer me the benefit of the doubt (but I'm not asking you for that, you'll have to find your way there on your own).

A NSFW thread was posted here. That's a truthful statement. As a long-term member of this group, I'm perfectly within my rights to ask the group for a discussion about it.

As to my "outrage" (what an interesting projection!) about other NSFW threads: Did they contain images of Dan Savage's cock and pubes? If so, I must have missed them. However, to answer your question, yes -- I would question whether Dan's dick was the content we wanted to discuss here.

And your "Why now? What has changed...?" flip to me is petty and adds nothing to the original discussion (which wasn't about me personally). I've always respected you, I'm a bit disappointed that you've decided to make this about me. That's so unlike you.

[Rowdyboy]

114. And I see absolutely no harm in one being posted now and again....As I have repeatedly said in this

Last edited Mon May 21, 2012, 12:37 AM - Edit history (1)

discussion I have only one opinion and I plan to express it vocally. Apparently at least 75% of the regular posters in this group agree with my opinion and disagree with yours. That you don't like to see shirtless men really doesn't concern me, your apparent desire to control content in this group however is extremely important and makes me wary of everything you say.

Those offended by the casual nature of the LGBT forum could easily petition for a new group-say LGBT Civil Rights and Issues. Oh, wait, that group already exists. It has no hosts and is rarely used. Its SOP is 100% consistent with your aims-serious discussion of LGBT issues without the irrelevent culture/sexual influences. You could move in,hold elections, and host serious discussion without ever seeing anything unpleasant because you could be the chief host. Here we already have selected hosts who are upholding the community's apparent current standards.

I think you've had your answer for quite some time now, its just not the one you wanted. Such is life.

[stevenleser]

83. As a straight supporter, I dont understand the OP

The pictures undermine the groups credibility with whom? To whom does the LGBT group need to curry favor or legitimacy?

Up until now, I havent seen any objections from anyone.

In the lounge, there are occasionally off color photos of all kinds posted. I think as long as the pictures stay PG-13 on down, you can post pictures of good looking men, women and other adults all along the gender continuum.

I expect to see occasional pictures of those kinds here that LGBT people enjoy. And I am happy that they are enjoying them.

Anyway, those are my 2 cents.

Edited to add: I just saw the OP that apparently prompted this OP and it really is no big deal at all. It's not erotica. A movie with that equivalent of skin showing would easily qualify for a PG-13 rating, perhaps even PG.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

93. to me the issue is where is the female erotica?

outsiders be damned.

[Vanje]

94. Right on!

I like the dance scene from Frida.

[William769]

95. Nice pics.

I try to contribute.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113713345

[Rowdyboy]

113. Last year while in Merida Mexico we bought a Kahlo reproduction....

Beyond being an utterly fascinating woman, she was incrediby talented. This is a copy of our reproduction...

[Duncan Grant]

96. That's a very good question. But who are the "outsiders"?

Let me take this opportunity to encourage everyone to re-read my OP; it never mentions outsiders (whoever that may be).

The OP also suggests that an exchange of ideas can occur without anyone being assigned the role of "right" or "wrong". Unfortunately, some of the "insiders" (LGBT group members and hosts) have decided to identify those with a minority opinion as "the other". The minority in many cases has also been insulted, treated with contempt, and mockery. Not the greatest moment in the LGBT forum, to say the least.

I have seen the minority (and a few "insiders&quot in this thread ask for more thoughtfulness, awareness, sensitivity, empathy, inclusiveness, and leadership.

So, like you, I'm not the least bit concerned about the outsiders. The insiders however, are beginning to worry me.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

97. i totally understand not wanting this group to devolve into a gay.com forum

so i get the apprehension.

i am not really sure what everyone is so upset about.. i dont find your questions upsetting and i dont think it's an illegitimate question either.

i still think i am fine with hot guy pics or hot gal pics so long as those posts are in the minority

[Duncan Grant]

100. Thanks, I appreciate that.

I think stepping back from NSFW threads is in the long-term best interest of the LGBT group (for a variety of reasons).

I have nothing against hot guy or hot gal pics but I don't think they're necessary here. Gay men can socialize over hot guy photos at more than one site on the internet. Just my .02 cents: There's a time and a place for everything.

Thanks again for your comments.

[Call Me Wesley]

104. When you replied to my post further up,

you referred to other posts. You never answered my question (and it doesn't matter if I'm offended or not,) actually why you were so offended.

Now, you put in parentheses, for a variety of reasons. Can you explain that further?

And don't get me wrong. I value your concern, but if you say something like 'There's a time and a place for everything' multiple times, do not mind me ask you what time, what place.

One thread out of hundreds.

[Duncan Grant]

109. An expedited response:

Re: Referred to other posts

I'm confused. I don't understand what you're asking me. Yesterday, I asked you to read a discussion Ms. Toad had introduced. She shared many thoughtful ideas and new ways to think about "all this".

Re: For a variety of reasons

That statement is parenthetical exactly because that's not something I choose to share publicly. The hosts of this group can form their own lists of reasons why NSFW threads are (or are not) in the long-term best interests of this group. Non-hosts could do that, too.

Re: Offense

Again, I don't understand what you're asking me.

Re: A time and a place for everything...

Simply put, do members here think NSFW threads belong here now? Several people have offered their opinion. Where's the downside to this discussion?

Re: One thread out of hundreds

There have been other NSFW threads posted here. The OP is not addressing an isolated incident; this is not about the quantity of NSFW posts. I'm asking "Why now?", "What's changed?", and "What do you think about it?"

(Not so expedited a response after all -- but that's all I have time for now)

[mitchtv]

111. +1

agree

[La Lioness Priyanka]

108. upon re-reading you are right, you never said outsiders

just general credibility. i can see both sides on this, and generally dont think its a big deal.

however if many of the women started objecting because it may feel to them that gay men are taking over this space, i would side with them. as of now, it doesn't feel like that.

[MNBrewer]

112. STOP FUCKING PUSHING THIS TO THE TOP OF THE LIST

Erotica is fine... Fuck anyone who can't stand getting an erection

[Duncan Grant]

118. Let the race to the bottom begin (no pun intended).

The caps lock button has no power here. Only words do.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

123. can i ask you what is making you so upset about this?

i really genuinely dont get why anyone is so worked up about this question

to me, it's a legit question

[HillWilliam]

115. I've been holding on to this

hoping the thread would sink (no such luck) so please allow me to review points and suggestions I have made up-thread. I am addressing no single poster, only the group at large.

WE, as in each and every poster in this group, make the posts and line of discussion whatever they may be.

If people want more diverse threads, why don't they try posting some. I'll say it again as I've said elsewhere in this thread several times: the group will be richer for it. Start the kind of OP you want to see in order to enrich the group experience. Don't whine about not getting what you want to read in a group. The power rests in your participation, keyboard, and mouse, not in waiting for someone else to do all the work.

Each of us is as free and encouraged to post as any other group member. There's plenty of LGBT news out there. Find some and post it.

"I quit visiting because of what's posted" is a lazy whine, period, end of story. The group experience is in no way enhanced by people who won't put effort into finding and posting the stories they find interesting, yet can find the energy and time to condemn what does get posted. That's just lazy.

You can't make the group only what you want it to be by shutting down bits of it. You make it the kind of group you want it to be by offering the kind of material you want to represent it. Unpopular threads will sink on their own. Interesting stories will rise to the top.

It IS that simple. That's how DU works.

Whilst reading topics: If you like a given kind of thread, click on that kind.

If you don't like a given kind of thread, don't click on it.

If you click on a thread that's marked somehow, don't cry offense after the fact. That's a very fundy kind of thing to do. I expect us to be above that.

If there isn't the news you want to read, go find some and post it. Complaining from the sidelines has the one and only effect of causing disruption.

If a person doesn't like pictures of men then why do they click on those threads? If they didn't click on those threads then why are they so concerned about them? You have control of your mouse -- or so I should hope.

The picture threads are few in number. That was demonstrated up-thread. They are hardly the preponderance they're being made out to be. They're hardly porn. I see worse in mainstream magazines. There's no need to be concerned about them. Don't click on them and bitch about it later.

Don't complain about men dominating the group. Find some LBT articles and post them. You have the power and the stories would most certainly be of interest to the group at large. If there aren't articles of interest to you here, why haven't you posted some?

If I can ignore the vast majority of picture or entertainment news threads and thus be unaffected, I'm sure the rest of us can manage to equal or outdo me in that regard. I set that as a challenge. Enrich the group by participating, not by claiming offense or concern after the fact.

It's seldom that I ever click on a pic thread (I have limited bandwidth, time, and interest). I only do when I've read positively everything else I care to read. When I do click on one of those topics, I have pretty good idea what might be posted there. Can't claim to be shocked and no one else could, either.

Just the same way I would have no right to be offended by my own action of clicking on them, others have equally little room. You have the power to assume control by posting that which you care to read.

If a thread is truly offensive, you have an alert link. Use it. That's what it's for. If you don't want to alert, contact as many hosts as you think is necessary. There is no excuse to be concerned in-thread.

It is exactly that which starts in-fighting and diminishes group standing, not the posts in question. May I present this entire thread as evidence.

Each of us has the power to set tone and content. If you want different content, may I respectfully suggest you exercise your own power by posting the kind of content you want to see. If you aren't guiding discussion by posting that which you find interesting, don't complain about people who are.

It's entirely up to each participant how to proceed.

[Rowdyboy]

116. Its hard to see how much else needs to be said....you've encapsulated my feelings far better than

I could. Thank you and +1....

[Duncan Grant]

117. I would invite anyone to read my journal if they're interested in what I like to post.

Again, I don't think it's a problem for the group to discuss a topic like NSFW threads.

I do demand the right to open and free discussion here. Minority opinion is important -- and there's much to learn if one is willing. Also, there's nothing "fundy" about people communicating openly.

One may not like the discussion but to characterize this thread as in-fighting and diminishing group standing would only apply if one holds the majority opinion. As I said in the OP, there's no need to make anyone right or wrong here. And the free exchange of ideas is not the problem with this thread.

[WillParkinson]

121. No, the problem...

Is exactly what you just said.

"I would invite anyone to read my journal if they're interested in what I like to post."

So, in order for your stories of interest to be read we need to go to your journal? Instead of posting them here, to try to bring forth discussion, you expect us to go searching for your journal? That makes little sense.

I post stories that I find interesting, in hopes of sparking conversation. All of us could just post to our own journals, effectively killing the LGBT board.

You don't like the picture thread. I get that. I'm sorry it's such a burden to you that some of us enjoy some downtime and to exchange a few lighthearted moments. Meanwhile, we're still out there, searching for stories that we think are of interest to everyone, but so many people just seem to ignore that fact.

You tell us what you don't want, but no one bothers to say what they do want. In fact, there's not really been much in the way of direction here at all. I'm going to continue to post what I find interesting. Read it. Don't. Ignore the threads I post. Ignore me. Any of those options work, it is just dependent on you which you'd like to exercise.

[WillParkinson]

119. OK, I've had enough....

Originally I had told some of the hosts and a few friends I wasn't going to post in the LGBT board any longer, because I did not want to be the one that divided the community. I've read this thread through and now I find my assertion to be quite laughable. *I* am not the one who will divide the community.

I've spent the last 2 days going through threads on old DU and new DU. Got to say, it's kind of eye opening. If you go back and check there are other beefcake threads on old DU, including some of the type of pictures that has got some here having vapors. Old DU didn't collapse. It didn't fall into an abyss. The community there was much stronger than the one we have now, in general.

I also spent part of that time going through the 20+ pages of threads here. Again, rather eye-opening. To those who say that beefcake threads make you feel unwelcome here: Ignore me. Ignore the threads. The option is there. However, I would like to point out that the majority of those who claim to feel put out by the pictures hardly post here anyway, and these threads have only been posted in the last week or so. What was your excuse then?

I counted page upon page of original posts started by me. The vast majority of those posts were national gay and lesbian news. Of interest to everyone. Do you know how many replies those threads got? Do you know how many replies those threads got from those of you that are now claiming to be upset over a thread of pictures?

A community only works when the members work. Remember that. It is not handful of us doing the work, so that the rest of you can read what we put down, perhaps rec the thread, and that's it. There's no conversation, no exchange of ideas. Per the about group function the LGBT group has Number of posts, 30 days: 3,448 Number of posts, All time: 13,583 and 258 subscribers. Let's break that down. For the past 30 days we've had approximately 115 posts per day. The bulk of those threads and replies came from a small handful of the 258 subscribers. If anything, the community we have here is one of lurkers. Not people interested in actually making something of this place.

I also took the liberty of checking for the preponderance of 'beefcake' threads that have some of you so up in arms. 1 thread, a thread of PG rated pictures where the wild claim of 'cock' has been tossed out, is what seems to have a few of you freaking out. One thread. And that thread has pictures you'd be able to find from just about any magazine (in fact, it seems some of them came from magazines). One thread that has a link to some pictures of a semi-famous actor. Yes, there's ONE picture there that has him completely naked (and it's a stylized picture), but unless you clicked the link (which was listed as NSFW) you'd never see it. And one thread that has some boys cavorting in an effort to sell underwear.

And, finally, for those of you who are claiming the damage it does to our group: Please go through the pages of threads here. Look to see who started the majority of them. Look to see how many replies those messages have. Then tell me what is more damaging to our community: A couple of threads that you don't like or the obvious indifference so many of you have to our 'community'. Until something gets posted you don't like. Then suddenly it's the end of civilization. Except most of you weren't there to build it in the first place.

[Puglover]

122. +1000

"Then tell me what is more damaging to our community: A couple of threads that you don't like or the obvious indifference so many of you have to our 'community'. Until something gets posted you don't like. Then suddenly it's the end of civilization. Except most of you weren't there to build it in the first place. "

[Zorra]

124. For what it's worth...

I've been thinking about this a whole lot. And this is how I feel about this issue...

1) I see nothing inherently ethically or morally wrong with posting these images in our group.

2) From my POV, both the female and male forms are uniquely beautiful. While I do object to many forms of objectification, I don't see the posting of these images as potentially damaging to impressionable minds within or from within the context/relative confines of our Group.

3) Illogical and artificial religious, cultural, and societal mores should not be perpetuated. As LGBT individuals and as an LGBT community, we have long been vicitimized in every way due to unreasonable institutionalized bigotry based on various widely held superstitions, and there is no reason for members of our Group to be limited in their choices based on any unreasonable artificial mores that have arisen from superstitions.

4) Simply out of respect for anyone who, for any reason, may be offended by images of the human body, it would be a nice gesture on our part if the subject line in the OP of all threads containing the types of images in question were labeled with an appropriate notice of content.

5) Hard core pornography could exceed the limits of reasonable ethical standards, and would probably violate DU rules, and from my POV the policy most beneficial for our Group would be for everyone to voluntarily refrain from posting hard core pornography.

This is just my two cents worth, based on my perspective as a host serving our Group.

[stevenleser]

125. This and WillParkinson's 119 are some of the best DU posts I have ever seen.

Hell, they may have been the best comments I have ever seen on any website, anyware.

[Rowdyboy]

126. And people like you and Will and Jamestine and Bill and dsc are why this group works so well.....

When we selected our hosts, we chose carefully and deliberately and it shows

[Ms. Toad]

127. Thank you for your thoughtful response.

It is characteristic of the kind of discussion we ought to be able to have about what content we want or don't want in this space (and why, or why not).

Had more of the responses been made with the tone and thoughtfulness of yours, losing a vote (or however we agree to decide what is ok in this space) would be no big deal.

I disagree with your characterization of the concern raised - my experience is not based on artificial mores that have arisen from superstitions. It arises out of the differences which often exist between gay men and lesbians about the role of public explicitly sexual behavior within our communities. It plays a much more prominent role in gay men's communities, and a much less prominent role in lesbian communities (and I don't have enough experience to speak beyond those two pieces of our community). It is a tension that has been present in every real life LGBT group I have been part of, and in those communities, out of respect for each other, we have openly discussed and reached compromises so that the shared space is inviting to all of us.

My take-away from this discussion is that this is gay men's space and those most vocal in this community have no interest in making sure it is an inviting place for all of us. I am welcome to visit or post here, but any expression that this space makes me, as a lesbian or a woman, feel unwelcome will be met with hostility and ridicule.

That, from my perspective, is far worse than the threads themselves, because it is the same as the response that angers us when we hear it from the wider DU community in response to members of this community suggesting that we feel unwelcome out there.

[Prism]

130. But why does it make you feel uncomfortable?

I ask that question quite in earnest, because the picture threads are mostly readily recognized and avoidable. It feels a little like flipping through the cable guide, seeing a particularly wretched film listed, and calling Comcast to register an objection. I don't have to watch Gigli, and no one can make me click on it.

I'm sympathetic to your feelings to a degree. Gay male culture can make me uncomfortable (this is actually a whole 'nother discussion, but I'll paraphrase briefly). When I was younger and just coming out, around 18 or so, I did not much fit into the generally desirable physical type at the time in the particular corner of the gay world I inhabited. In a bar culture that valued thin, hairless twinks, I was musclebound with a hairy chest. I knew nothing about bear culture and all that. I just knew there was a type that was obsessed over, and it made me uncomfortable, shy, and feel ostracized.

To this day, I register a light disdain or hurt because it makes me think back to that time when I felt lonely and ugly as a gay youth who kept encountering men who seemed to only be attracted to barely pubescent 13 year-olds. That feeling persists even though I have a very healthy self-image as a 33 year-old. (I was damn cute back then, I now realize. I just didn't know the right people). The weird cliquishness and typing that I encountered actually soured me on the community in a way that persists to this day. I don't go to bars or socialize with many other LGBT people on account of it. (again, this is a long sub-discussion for a different day).

But even with that history, I see the pics, roll my eyes, and move on. It's not my bag, but in a forum where I control what I do and do not consume, a choice I dislike remains just that - a choice. It isn't like a community center meeting where we're all captive to what other people are doing. You know, if you showed up at a gay event in a crowded room, it was everyone running around in thongs, I would totally understand digging in and objecting vocally. But that just isn't the case in this forum. Our experience is shaped by ourselves. I don't share the OP's or your concern primarily because my experience of this forum isn't similar due to my unwillingness to click on those threads.

Those picture threads don't make me feel welcome or unwelcome here. What shapes my feelings towards this forum are the friendships I've made over the years. Pics are pics. People count more. It's the people who decide how often I visit, not the content.

I wish that were the case for everyone, and if there's a way I can make that so, please let me know.

[yardwork]

132. My concern over this was not the pictures, but the response to the OP from this group.

The overall effect of many of the posts in this thread, intentional or not, has been to tell those few of us who wanted to discuss this issue that we had no right to even discuss this issue. The effect, intentional or not, is to tell us to sit down and shut up. Some of the responses to Duncan Grant and Ms. Toad, in particular, were over the top. Unfortunately, this incident echoes historical divides in our community, and times when women, for instance, were told that we were not deserving of equal consideration by the gay rights movement.

The overall effect of this has been to make me feel unwelcome in the LGBT group. This has nothing to do with agreement or disagreement with the point of the OP. It has everything to do with the way that our opinions were received, and the very question of whether or not we have a right to even discuss this issue here. According to many of the posts in this thread, we had no right to even bring this up.

Again, this is not about whether or not picture threads should be posted. That is beside the point. The issue here is whether or not members of LGBT have the right to ask questions about the purpose of this group, and whether or not we have the right to bring up questions that may be minority opinions.

Like everybody here, I have a lot of stresses in my real life, some of them related to living while gay in America, others related to the everyday aspects of our lives - work, family, housing, etc. Over the years I have thought of DU as a place to relax, become better informed, laugh sometimes, make friends. The LGBT group was the refuge within the refuge for times when DU as a whole became too contentious.

To say that I am brokenhearted by many of the posts in this thread is no exaggeration. I resigned as a host because of this, and I am taking a long break from DU. I returned only to post this note as a clarification for why this will be my last post on DU for a long time.

I wish everybody well.

[stevenleser]

133. Yardwork, please dont go, I dont say it often (ever?) but I enjoy and respect your posts.

Please see my #129 below, I think you could predict very strong reactions to this kind of post. I am not saying that Duncan is at fault or that he did it intentionally or should have known better. I am just saying that taking a look at the history of the discrimination against the LGBT community and everything else, coming from a position of empathy, I would expect that this kind of post would generate a strong reaction.

Everything that happened was unfortunate but I dont think anyone seriously wanted to do anyone else wrong.

[Prism]

128. I think of this group like a neighborhood gay bar with friends.

And like one, there are people who are serious activists, people who will talk about what's on TV or happening with music, some that are quiet, some that are vocal, and some who talk about hot guys all day. I can take or leave any conversation. I'm more of a quiet observer who dips in and out of different conversations without much comment.

I don't particularly see the problem with picture threads. They're readily marked, and I rarely click on them. We have that choice. I don't see how anyone else's choice to discuss attractive men impugns on my ability to read or participate in other conversations that are more geared to my interests.

If I were going to complain about the picture threads, it'd be that they're all boring stereotypical hot guys. Hrmph. Where are the otters?!

But seriously, I've read through this thread twice now, and I'm genuinely baffled by the contentiousness this issue seems to cause. I think one of the parts about being gay I like best is how it sort of taught me to let people do as they will without any judgement or input from me.

I feel like this entire exercise was very unnecessary, IMHO. All it managed was a lot of bad feeling over something very small.

[stevenleser]

129. Hmmm, I agree with everything except the surprise at the reaction.

I've hesitated posting this, but here goes.

I would totally have predicted that someone posting what Duncan posted would have yielded a strong reaction. I know I dont have to tell anyone this here, but my reasoning would have gone that the LGBT community has faced so much discrimination and pressure to not be who you are and you have this group where you are supposed to feel totally safe to be who you are and someone comes in and essentially tells you to tone down being who you are. I got that immediately. In your places I would probably have reacted like queerart did.

I think given the nerve that such an OP was almost guaranteed to strike that the community here should be proud at how well they have handled it.

[Prism]

131. Hmm, I do see your point

I'm somewhat removed from my "Oooh, hot guys!" phase in life (I'm 33 going on 63, apparently). But, given what you've just said, I can see how there are perhaps unintentional echoes in the OP of how LGBTers are castigated for things like Pride parades and the like. It's actually a fairly deep and tricky topic, because there's a strange dueling sensibility lurking in those murky waters. The Religious Right has been hammering the LGBT community for years as sex-obsessed deviates. Except . . .

The gay male community is totally, totally, totally sex-obsessed.

So it's kind of a true charge that we get defensive about. Perhaps it's remnant cultural guilt. We both celebrate sex but simultaneously don't want to be seen that way. Or, at least, not seen as only that way. So when the sex-obsessive characteristics of the gay male culture are highlighted, it renders an almost automatic en garde reaction. (I know the rebuttal here is "But the straight male community is just as obsessed!" Yes, that's true, but I think we take it to more extreme degrees in general).

I guess by contentiousness, I meant more along the lines of how a handful of beefcake threads could trigger such an earnest objection. I honestly barely noticed them until now. I certainly knew those threads were there, but they took up almost no mental space on my end whatsoever. It was all very left field and weird to me.

[Jamastiene]

134. This thread has run its course.

At this point, this thread has several veiled personal attacks and a lot of unnecessary anger. It is best to lock this thread. This thread, as it stands, is unlikely to "produce light," but rather to "produce more heat."