frontaloadotmy
Well-known member
Now Greg
Just simma down here.
I'm not sure, but I think somewhere along the line sdlee
has made it clear that he is of the homo orientation.
Whether he is or isn't is of nominal consequence to me.
Most of the participants of AW.O are pretty direct
about what they consider their sexual , and other identities
to be. It seems to me that the question is as innocuous
as somebody stating "What age were you when you realized
you had a keen interest in antiques, cars, appliances etc.?"
Maybe a little too personal for some of us , but generally
it is frequently a topic of conversation. And given the fact that it is the Month typically, at least since the early
70's, that Contemporay Gay Culture is more enthusiastically
celebrated (or at least more publicly), on this forum it isn't
that over the top of a thread subject , speaking for myself
of course. I think the reference to infants is simply a comment relative to speculation that they may mature to
be homosexual,and some of them may even be intelligent enough
to observe a more mature human and have at least a response
of more appeal, or less appeal. It is well documented that
babies and very young children are perceived to respond in
all manner to all sorts of external stimuli. I know that by the time I was 4 or 5 I was having those kinds of notions about other males. As for sd's opening "out of the gate" statement , I think the only thing one learns about their own (or anybody elses, for that matter) "gayness"
is to be happy, or unnecessarily burdoned by it!
Just simma down here.
I'm not sure, but I think somewhere along the line sdlee
has made it clear that he is of the homo orientation.
Whether he is or isn't is of nominal consequence to me.
Most of the participants of AW.O are pretty direct
about what they consider their sexual , and other identities
to be. It seems to me that the question is as innocuous
as somebody stating "What age were you when you realized
you had a keen interest in antiques, cars, appliances etc.?"
Maybe a little too personal for some of us , but generally
it is frequently a topic of conversation. And given the fact that it is the Month typically, at least since the early
70's, that Contemporay Gay Culture is more enthusiastically
celebrated (or at least more publicly), on this forum it isn't
that over the top of a thread subject , speaking for myself
of course. I think the reference to infants is simply a comment relative to speculation that they may mature to
be homosexual,and some of them may even be intelligent enough
to observe a more mature human and have at least a response
of more appeal, or less appeal. It is well documented that
babies and very young children are perceived to respond in
all manner to all sorts of external stimuli. I know that by the time I was 4 or 5 I was having those kinds of notions about other males. As for sd's opening "out of the gate" statement , I think the only thing one learns about their own (or anybody elses, for that matter) "gayness"
is to be happy, or unnecessarily burdoned by it!