|
|
 |
FlyinACE |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 5:58 AM We all know that loveline realy is not as cool to listen to without Adam, but Andy Dick sure brings the level of enjoyment back up, almost equal to that when Adam is there. I thought last nights show was actually pretty funny. —FlyinACE |
|
|
|
|
j4k3 |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 5:59 AM Thanks, FlyinACE. And because of your recommendation, I'll now download the show... —j4k3 |
|
|
|
|
Cracked |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 6:03 AM Everybody has an opinion. He bores me. I don't think he is funny or interesting. He's also bordering on pedaphilia the way he talks about "young boys" -comes off as an out of control druggy pervert. —Cracked |
|
|
|
|
puck71 |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 8:22 AM He didn't mention that at all last night, did he? May have helped that he was sober. —puck71 |
|
|
|
|
Jeremy |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 8:32 AM
Edited Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 8:32 AM Andy's faggot-sounding voice annoys the shit out of me. I have nothing against gays, but I can't stand the way they talk. —Jeremy |
|
|
|
|
Trig |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 9:15 AM Not all gay guys talk like that (not all blacks like watermelon, Koreans eat dog, or women bake pies). Calling it "faggot-sounding" is like saying, "I have nothing against ni**ers" ;) —Trig |
|
|
|
|
Danny Gallie |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 9:16 AM isn't the hatred of the way "they" talk, in essence, a problem with gays? —Danny Gallie |
|
|
|
|
puck71 |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 9:57 AM Sounds to me like he has a problem with gays, but only those gays that talk "like a gay guy" which is probably like 1% of all gay guys. —puck71 |
|
|
|
|
Jeremy |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 10:50 AM I have a problem with the way a stereotypical gay guy talks. If a gay guy doesn't talk like that, then I have no problem with him at all. If he does, then the only problem I have with him is the way he talks, not the fact that he's gay. —Jeremy |
|
|
|
|
puck71 |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 11:05 AM That's an understandable position...I also don't like that particular mode of speech, especially when STRAIGHT guys talk that way! —puck71 |
|
|
|
|
Joy |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 3:08 PM Jeremy writes: "I have a problem with the way a stereotypical gay guy talks. If a gay guy doesn't talk like that, then I have no problem with him at all. If he does, then the only problem I have with him is the way he talks, not the fact that he's gay." I don't usually question anything on this board; I'm just here for fun. But I really do need to ask you, Jeremy, WHY you have a problem with the way someone would talk. WHY does it bother you? Why do you care? Today I dealt with (or tried to deal with---I hope I was effective) a 15 year-old boy who has been cutting his arms because he hates being gay. He did not choose his sexual orientation, and he has spent the past few years knowing that people who don't even know him, who've never even spoken to him, hate him irrationally and want to deny him the most basic human needs just because of the way he walks, talks, etc. And he's not even what I would call an obvious gay person...he looks like the typical teenage boy. But he apparently came out to a few friends, and word gets around, and now he has to deal with hate. Why? I'm not singling you out, Jeremy, but you brought this on yourself, and I think there are a lot of people (maybe not on this generally open-minded and intelligent board, but...) who feel the same way you do. So I am wondering...what really is your problem with the stereotypical gay way of talking? Does the stereotypical gay way of walking, dressing, etc., bother you, too? What are you afraid of? "Learn to respect what you don't understand." - Amy Ray —Joy |
|
|
|
|
Jeremy |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 3:30 PM Oh shit, the Politically Correct police have come by to yell at me! Am I not allowed to be annoyed by the way someone talks? The only thing that it has to do with being gay is that it's a stereotype. I don't care if the person is straight, gay, bi, whatever. The reason it annoys me is because I have to listen to it, not because it's associated with being gay. I don't care about how stereotypical gays walk or dress. It's not my style, but who cares? You're just going off on the word "gay", when what I'm saying really has nothing to do with sexuality at all. —Jeremy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joy |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 4:20 PM Okay, fine. As I said, I generally stay out of these threads, and I was just asking you to clarify, and you did, so I'm done. —Joy |
|
|
|
|
Adam is God |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 6:14 PM Is it just cities 97 here in Minneapolis that played best of episodes for Tuesdays show??(1 day delay so I heard it last night.) I thought 311 was going to be on? —Adam is God |
|
|
|
|
dr ipod |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 6:23 PM Best Of was on Sunday night. Monday's guest was Missi Pyle from Soul Plane & Dodgeball
Tuesday was Nick Hexum from 311
Wednesday was Andy Dick —dr ipod |
|
|
|
|
everybody has warts |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 7:04 PM yeah, i hate queer eye for the straight guy type gays too. it has nothing to do with their sexuality. i dont care who or how they fuck. i hate their affected behavior. its the same reason i hate joan rivers. they're bitches. examples of gay guys that dont bother me: richard hatch from survivor or the gay guy on real world new orleans. "hello i'd like a large pepporoooniii?" also, andy dick doesnt bother me. —everybody has warts |
|
|
|
|
everybody has warts |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 7:08 PM to clarify: i dont actually "hate" them, i find them annoying. dont flip the word hate around on me, we all use it like that. "i hate my loud neighbor" "i hate avril lavigne" "i hate stryker" etc. —everybody has warts |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 7:34 PM Yeah, just to add to what Jeremy said -- the "gay voice" which he takes issue with has nothing to do whatsoever with the act of being homosexual -- He would also take issue with any straight male, straight female, straight dog, etc. who spoke with that particular affect. Although the "gay voice" doesn't bother me personally, I can understand why someone might be put off by it, in that it's purely affect -- a relatively conscious decision to speak in a certain manner. While homosexuality may be biological, the "gay voice" most certainly is not -- meaning, there's nothing in a gay man's genes that would cause him to over-enunciate or speak with a lisp or just generally talk in a melodramatic fashion. (...must fight urge to make joke about "stuff in gay man's jeans...) The "gay voice" is a little agressive in the sense that it serves as a means of forcing one's sexuality on the world -- It's the gay equivalent to the "macho man" who speaks in an overtly "rugged" manner and always crushes your hand with an overpowering hand shake. Ultimately it represents a fear of being rejected by society and serves as a function of over-compensation. The "gay voice" forces the mantra of "We're here. We're queer. Get used to it.", down the throats of all unsuspecting bystanders, many of whom already support or take no issue with the gay life style, and hence feel irritated being pressured to accept something that they already accept. I think Jeremy would probably agree that he falls into this category, yes? —steve |
|
|
|
|
Jeremy |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 7:45 PM Yes steve. Great post, as always. —Jeremy |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Thursday, June 3, 2004 at 9:30 PM Thanks buddy. —steve |
|
|
|
|
superhew |
+ |
Friday, June 4, 2004 at 12:36 PM yeah adam is god, i heard that too, so i downloaded the episode from puck on the dc hub. i am so sick of that best of episode too, kelly osbourne is so stupid. they play that same best of atleast 20 times a year. its stupid.. —superhew |
|
|
|
|
puck71 |
+ |
Friday, June 4, 2004 at 4:32 PM That's not the best of I heard this week... —puck71 |
|
|
|
|
wmansir |
+ |
Friday, June 4, 2004 at 5:30 PM Back on topic... I avoid Stryker shows like the plauge, but I downloaded this show because I figured Andy Dick should make it entertaining. So far it's an OK show, but even thinking of the lost potential (Adam and Andy put on a good show together) makes me miss Adam even more. —wmansir |
|
|
|
|
superhew |
+ |
Friday, June 4, 2004 at 7:50 PM puck, i know its not the one you heard, because the station here played a shitty best of episode, and everywhere else played the stryker/drew episode that was recorded the night before. —superhew |
|
|
|
|
puck71 |
+ |
Friday, June 4, 2004 at 10:25 PM Ah, I don't envy you. —puck71 |
|
|
|
|
Pan Pan |
+ |
Saturday, June 5, 2004 at 5:15 AM Why, stevie sweetie, Pan Pan might think that comment was directed at yours truly! While I have no doubt that some of my brethren (me!) might enjoy flaunting it and shocking the straights, the solemn fact is that our swishiness just IS the way many of us ARE! Talking "that way" is as natural to us as breathing. You might just as well ask Adam (or Jeremy) to stop with all his snarky wise-guy attitude and never mention tits again! To do so would be to deny an essential component of our deepest identities. I'm sure that the Taliban don't "have a problem" with women: they just don't want to have to see all those females parading about the streets with their curvy figures visible. (That reminds me of the time I met my girl friend's new husband, a strict Muslim from Algeria. She was furious with me that I offended him by not "acting straight" in front of her prudish new Lord and Master. To hell with that! We've come too far to be pushed back into the closet. Let Pan Pan be Pan Pan!) —Pan Pan |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Sunday, June 6, 2004 at 1:18 AM Aw baby, you know I love you. ;) In all seriousness, my only point was that it's an affect that isn't present through out the entire life -- meaning, if you were to study any of the "Queer Eye" guys at age three or four, they weren't speaking with a lisp, walking around calling each other "girlfriend" and sashaying their hips -- although their feelings were probably "gay" at that age, their outward mannerisms and affects would've probably been similar to those of their heterosexual peer group -- But again, I reemphasize, I don't care either way -- It's all good. —steve |
|
|
|
|
Saffeau |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 12:00 AM That's a poor line of argument, steve. If you were to study any of the Queer Eye guys at age three, none of them would be over four feet tall or need to shave, either. So what? Ever hear of growth and development? Anyway, I've been a "tomboy" all my life, ever since I could walk and talk, and was always teased and ridiculed for it. And I bet a lot of gay men were considered "sissies" at a very early age. I like the way you give your little one-line pro forma disclaimer that gay speech doesn't bother you, and then go on to spend the next ten lines of your post telling us why it's so annoying and reading all sorts of imaginary intentions into it. Ever consider that maybe gays are not really trying to force a gay rights agenda down your throat (no pun intended) by merely walking and talking in your presence? Like Pan Pan said, are we supposed to infer an aggressive homophobic agenda in Adam's gruff tone and beer-brute antics? No? Then why the double standard, steve? It's just another sign of how much farther we GLBTs still have to go, when comparatively progressive guys like you think we're getting too uppity for the straight world. —Saffeau |
|
|
|
|
Adam's Crows |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 3:33 AM
Edited Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 4:22 AM "...it's an affect that isn't present through out the entire life..." —steve Not speaking of the exaggerated frolicking in leather g-strings and chaps crowd, part of growing into an adult involves adopting certain behaviors reflecting the people we wish to emulate. There is a playful getting into character that the average child experiences -pretending- that is also a tool used in developing who we eventually become as adults. But there are limits and most people cannot convincingly disguise their true nature. Most of us do not have great talents for acting or impersonating beyond obvious play. Some people will understand and see through it. Others will misinterpret and read too much into behaviors. The masculine "tomboy" girls and feminine "sissy" boys mentioned have this energy from birth. Sometimes it gets stronger or weaker at later stages in life. It doesn't automatically mean anyone is gay. There are plenty of gays that have no stereotypical signs. Whether straight or gay, kids teased for gay mannerisms would drop the mannerisms if they could to save their lives. Most are dealing with the consequences long before entering a stage when it could be a choice. As for the frolicking in leather and pierced nipple leashes, I suspect it is more frustration and resentment behind the "we're here and queer" fuck you than a demonstration of acceptance and embracing it. —Adam's Crows |
|
|
|
|
Pan Pan |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 5:41 AM Who would have thought poor silly little Andy Dick would occasion such a confused outpouring among the normally sensible Loveline fans? Between Saffy and AC, one might triangulate a sensible position for 21st-century America on the subject of gay people. Sure, the leather-harness-and-scrotum-chokechain crowd are "acting out" when we parade our fabulous selves during our little gay pride marches (and don't knock such delightful spectacles until you've marched a mile in Pan Pan's stiletto-heeled ostrich-skin boots)...but asking us to mind our mannerisms and just "blend in" with the hetero masses is downright offensive. Blend in...or what? The nail that sticks out gets hammered down? Mmmmmmmm...Pan Pan's nail is perpetually sticking out and would like to do some hammering of its own! Hey, I'VE got an idea: Why don't you straight guys blend in with US? Try it...swivel your hips a bit, flutter your hands, and for goodness sake put a little more inflection in your flat, monotonal speech patterns. You're driving Pan Pan CRAZY with your oafish, affected behavior! —Pan Pan |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 3:36 PM Holy fuck Saffeau! Are you high?!? First of all, my post was merely a half-assed attempt to explain what SOMEONE ELSE was thinking. It in no way represented my personal beliefs -- it was nothing more than a bunch of disjointed theories thrown out while I was watching "In a Fix" on TLC, which you unfortunately seemed to take as some anti-gay agenda trying to pass itself off as liberal tolerance. What you don't seem to understand is that I DON'T GIVE A FUCK! Human beings are nothing but one of millions of species of animals on a small planet in a small solar system revolving around a small star in the middle of a small galaxy which is one of infinite others -- I don't give a fuck about their stupid fucking mating rituals! -- Gay? -- Straight? -- I DON'T FUCKING CARE! How 'bout taking that chip off your shoulder? How 'bout realizing that everyone's not out to get you? How 'bout realizing that people (and yes, I'm talking about myself here) aren't judging you? Lighten up baby doll. You're putting off people who'd like to be your friend. —steve |
|
|
|
|
superhew |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 4:06 PM angry, angry, people... ...good times though! —superhew |
|
|
|
|
Saffeau |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 8:12 PM Methinks steve doth protest too much. Hmmm. —Saffeau |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 9:22 PM That's my point exactly Saff -- How do you know I'm not gay? I could very well be gay, but you'd never know 'cause you never gave me a chance. You looked at my post and thought, "Oh, here's another one of them who doesn't approve of our lifestyle.", when that simply wasn't the case. If you go back and re-read my post you'll find that there's not one single statement that can be construed as anti-homosexual. My only desire was to point out that the now infamous "gay voice" was psychological as opposed to being physiological. Insisting the gay voice is a physiological trait is as ricockulous as insisting a British accent is a physiological trait -- they're both learned cultural behaviours. Secondly, to address this statement: " ...are we supposed to infer an aggressive homophobic agenda in Adam's gruff tone and beer-brute antics? No? Then why the double standard, steve?" This statement was made apparently without reading one of my previous posts where I said, "The "gay voice" is a little agressive in the sense that it serves as a means of forcing one's sexuality on the world -- It's the gay equivalent to the "macho man" who speaks in an overtly "rugged" manner and always crushes your hand with an overpowering hand shake." Both serve as an unconscious means of conveying one's sexuality without coming right out and saying, "I like guys.", or "I like girls." This is neither a bad thing nor a good thing -- it simply is. Lastly, I'd like to say that although I do apologize for the tone of my previous response to you (bad day at work, etc.), I still stand by my original statement which is:
Man's desire to suck cock = Physiological
Man's desire to talk like Liberace = Psychological Now please -- enough of this chatter! Pan Pan and I are trying to dance to this Abba record! —steve |
|
|
|
|
Saffeau |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 9:36 PM
Edited Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 9:38 PM To quote the late, not-so-great Ronald Reagan: There you go again. The "gay voice" is a little aggressive in the sense that it serves as a means of FORCING one's sexuality on the world.... So merely by talking in a "gay voice" homosexual men are forcing their sexuality on you? My, how rude of them. And by talking in a black accent, them uppity niggras are forcing their darky attitudes on you? And those fucking Brits, why the hell don't they stop sounding so damn pompous and just talk like us regular American folks? Anyone who doesn't sound exactly like me and my friends is forcing some kind of agenda on me. Oh, I'm bored with your phony broadmindedness. You can redeem yourself by actually dancing with Pan Pan. —Saffeau |
|
|
|
|
Logo Lou |
+ |
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 at 10:02 PM Pan Pan... Vin Diesel. Gayer than Andy Dick, right? —Logo Lou |
|
|
|
|
Pan Pan |
+ |
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 at 6:21 AM I don't know about GAYER...but Pan Pan just might be able to persuade dear dear dear dear Vin to take a walk on the wild side. Mmmmmmmmmm...that comically butch name, that buff bod, those meltingly lovely puppydog eyes! Ooops. Pan Pan just stained his panties. —Pan Pan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logo Lou |
+ |
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 at 8:22 AM Oh, I don't think you'd need to do much persuading... —Logo Lou |
|
|
|
|
steve |
+ |
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 at 2:31 PM Saff -- are you even reading my posts? Where is all this crazy anger coming from? What's with the whole "forcing" notion? Didn't you even see this line? Both serve as an unconscious means of conveying one's sexuality without coming right out and saying, "I like guys.", or "I like girls." This is neither a bad thing nor a good thing -- it simply is. What's wrong babdydoll? Who hurt you? Where's your father? Is he a good guy? Do you love him? —steve |
|
|
|
|
Saffeau |
+ |
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 at 3:01 PM I'm annoyed by hypocrites and people in denial, that's all. FYI, my Dad's a good, supportive father and I get along just fine with him, thank you very much. —Saffeau |
|
|
|
|
NJC |
+ |
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 at 4:08 PM
Ever notice how people who consider themselves 'oppressed' or otherwise feel that society is out to get them always seem to find the best ways to perpetuate the very things they are complaining about?I mean it's like they are just waiting to read into someone's quote a little too much in hopes that it will be enough ammo to start a fight. THEN they get upset because they stand out in a crowd and get a (negative) reaction! I'm reminded of the old cartoon with the 2 dogs. You know, with the big one, George, and the little one that keeps jumping in his face talking to him as they are walking. What happens next? George smacks him and he flies across the room! But really, give us all a break. I'm not saying that effed-up things haven't happened that really shouldn't have, like people being killed for their beliefs or lifestyles -- but try to understand that the more you make distinction between yourselves and "everyone else", the more you alienate yourselves. The truth is there is no "everyone else". There is when you are talking about one specific topic. But change the topic and now all of a sudden YOU are with everyone else. That's life. Most of us have a lot in common with most other people. Yet at the same time there are also things about us that are very unique. That is life.
—NJC |
|
|
|
|
Adam's Crows |
+ |
Wednesday, June 9, 2004 at 11:58 PM Everyone has an opinion and an ass hole. Some don't seem to use it and are full of shit. Others have a never ending supply utilizing every orifice. BS smells like any other shit. —Adam's Crows |
|
|
|
|
Cracked |
+ |
Thursday, June 10, 2004 at 11:58 PM "Ever notice how people who consider themselves 'oppressed' or otherwise feel that society is out to get them always seem to find the best ways to perpetuate the very things they are complaining about?" —NJC Ever have a job working with the public and meet the customer who hands you their gripe? They give you something to do but unbeknownst to you it is laced with their problem waiting to explode. You unsuspectingly perform your work and they blow up at you because "you people ALWAYS get it wrong... I can't find competent people anywhere...!" Something routinely goes wrong around them. And it is everyone else's fault. You see a lot of this with "victims" of racism. They cannot conceive of anyone being oblivious to race issues. They are certain everything is race based and biased against theirs. They often make racist comments themselves. If anyone said the same words to them they would flip out. —Cracked |
|
|
|
|
Bosie |
+ |
Friday, June 11, 2004 at 3:49 AM
Edited Friday, June 11, 2004 at 3:56 AM "They cannot conceive of anyone being oblivious to race issues." That's probably what pisses them off. I used to date a black woman, and let me tell you, saying that you're color-blind didn't cut any ice with her. Many victims of racism, homophobia, etc., think that being "blind" to race/sexuality/etc. is a pussy way of being a racist or a homophobe. It isn't, necessarily. But after meeting too many hypocrites and closet racists who feign high-minded neutrality, they might think it's a bogus excuse, sort of like saying, "Why, some of my best friends are black/gay/Italian..." —Bosie |
|
|
|
|
Cracked |
+ |
Friday, June 11, 2004 at 4:38 PM
Edited Friday, June 11, 2004 at 4:43 PM I'm sure there are more of those pretending to be indifferent than are truly oblivious to it. I have plenty of things that I am preoccupied with. Race is not something I think of until it is being made an issue around me in some way that gets my attention. I've been around people making more of race than situations warranted. I am not ignorant of the problelms stirred up I just don't worry about it because I am not in the center of it. I have other concerns that usually are a priority. The hyper-politically correctness going on is because everyone has their toes stepped on in some way and everyone is trying to walk a thin line not offending anyone. —Cracked |
|
