Quote:
Originally Posted by TrueFaith77
However, I also still think that GLAAD's equation is not spelled out (they don't say that he equates gayness to bestiality--which he does not) and, if so, they don't identify the stereotype (as you do, that gay men will have sex with anything).
|
Well, no -- he didn't equate gayness directly to bestiality, but he lumped them together. So I don't think it's a leap to say that he associates the two in his mind, at least to some degree. Of course, as has been rightfully pointed out, he also associated both to adultery and promiscuity in general. His was a rather sweeping statement of seemingly everything he deems to be a sin, although he also implied that homosexuality is at the top of the list.
“Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong. Sin becomes fine. Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there."
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrueFaith77
However, the most compelling argument Duck Dynasty guy makes is about male attraction to two different body parts. I say it's compelling because it's human. Why is it that, as a gay man, I am attracted to male buttholes but am, frankly, scared and grossed out by vaginas? He's got a point that it is illogical.
|
I suppose he has a point. But to counter that -- why is it any more illogical to be attracted to the male anus than to the female anus or vagina? I don't question my attraction to the male anatomy any more than I question the attraction of heterosexual men to the female anatomy. In the simplest of terms, "we like what we like." No logic is required.
At least he didn't question why we all like penises! Even the straightest of men should be able to understand the appeal of
those.
