Author Topic: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION  (Read 38771 times)

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #90 on: May 02, 2015, 03:23:13 pm »
I would have thought that in male-to-female surgery, the prostate would have been one of the organs to "go," especially if the surgery involved creation of a vagina (I have read somewhere of that being done). But maybe not?  ???

Apparently removing it is unnecessary. And I don't think I need to tell most guys how complicated the surgery is. So it is usually left in place. Besides, the hormone therapy makes it shrink. The vaginoplasty creates a space that runs between the prostate and the rectum. Supposedly the prostate then becomes the "G spot." But I don't see how that works because most men aren't wired for prostate orgasms.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #91 on: May 02, 2015, 03:35:21 pm »
I believe every single member of the LGBT community has a moral obligation to be an activist for LGBT rights at least to the degree their ability and circumstance permit them to be.

I disagree. And you could replace "LGBT" with black, Jewish, latino, etc. and I would still disagree. No member of any group owes anything to the group as a whole. They might have a moral obligation to individuals such as their parents, colleagues, educators, and neighbors who have helped them along the way, but that is up to the individual to decide.

Do I wish more young black men would conduct themselves in a way that they would take advantage of the opportunities that Martin Luther King, Jr., Medgar Evers, and the other Civil Rights leaders helped to create for us? You bet I do. But I don't think these young black men are morally obligated to do so. However, I do think that young black men have a moral obligation to themselves to build their characters in ways that would allow them to take advantage of those opportunities. Likewise, I think that young sexual minorities have a moral obligation to themselves to build their characters in ways that will allow them to succeed and thrive.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline x-man

  • Moderator
  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 318
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #92 on: May 02, 2015, 03:46:04 pm »
I assume when you say "role model," you mean a sexual minority who can be an example for young sexual minorities, as opposed to role models in general...right?

Milo, could you explain this in a little more detail?  I'm not sure I get what you're driving at.
Happiness is the lasting pleasure of the mind grasping the intelligible order of reality.      --Leibniz

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #93 on: May 02, 2015, 04:00:50 pm »
Milo, could you explain this in a little more detail?  I'm not sure I get what you're driving at.

As I grew up, there were certain black men that were role models in my life who helped me understand what it means to be a black man. And there were other role models who were neither black nor men who helped me understand other aspects of life.

See what I mean?
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline CellarDweller

  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • ********
  • Posts: 41,780
  • A city boy's mentality, with a cowboy's soul.
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #94 on: May 02, 2015, 05:07:48 pm »
I assume when you say "role model," you mean a sexual minority who can be an example for young sexual minorities, as opposed to role models in general...right?


correct


Tell him when l come up to him and ask to play the record, l'm gonna say: ''Voulez-vous jouer ce disque?''
'Voulez-vous, will you kiss my dick?'
Will you play my record? One-track mind!

Offline Front-Ranger

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,788
  • Brokeback got us good.
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #95 on: May 02, 2015, 07:53:03 pm »
If I had a dollar for every time someone said that to me-

Me too!
"chewing gum and duct tape"

Offline x-man

  • Moderator
  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 318
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #96 on: May 03, 2015, 12:28:22 am »
The direction this thread has taken in response to my provocative posting and the dramatic responses to it raise a few questions—2 of which are: Does a member of the LGBT community (or any oppressed minority for that matter) owe anything to the community at large?  And, why is x-man so obsessed by this question—to the point of seeming to suggest that anyone who does not see it my way is morally wrong?  I'd like to leave the first question for later, but I would like to address the second one now.

The answer to it I only fully realized not all that long ago, and it is one I have never told anyone else.  I mean it, no one.  So here it is.

 I am almost possessed by the guilt I feel because I remained HIV negative while so many around me fell.  It certainly was not because I was the posterboy for safe sex.  Given my behaviour I should have become positive early on.  I should have.  I was lucky to an extent I did not deserve, and for which I find myself apologizing still.  In the early 80's I was in graduate school;  I had heard of AIDS and that the catcher was more at risk than the pitcher, but that was about all I knew.  I screwed around, but as a lone wolf rather than a part of any community.  My time was occupied with school; I was on a full scholarship and didn't risk fucking up.  I was oblivious to what was happening in the gay community.  Then I was off to Morocco and then to Asia to teach.  At least in my earlier years teaching, HIV wasn't seen to be much of a problem, and it sure didn't make the news where I was.  I was not sexually active in Korea, but I was in Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco and especially Thailand.  By the time I was spending a lot of time in Thailand  the HIV rate had gotten alarming.  Still I payed no attention.

You have to understand that before I returned to Canada in 1994 I had never touched a condom in my life.  It went completely against my whole understanding of what sex was all about.  At my doctor's insistence I got tested immediately upon my return.  A tense week of waiting, but Negative.  My unearned luck was holding.  My dedication to barebacking was not based on the difference in feeling between flesh and flesh versus flesh against latex.  To me the question was always that as human beings we are condemned to alienation from each other because our centres of consciousness are separate and that alienation can never be overcome—it is the price we pay for individuality.  Bees, ants, and some herd animals seem to have overcome this alienation to some extent, but at a price humanity would not pay.  In sex we come as close as possible to unity, but on the most fundamental level we are not successful.  But we try.  For me the essence of sex always centred on holding or being held, bodies pressing against each other, one person inside the other, indeed for a few moments literally glued together.  For the pitcher this is a sensation; to the catcher it is a realization—the closeness, the cries from deep within you, the sweat, the surrender, the coming together (pun intended).  I found transcendence in touch.   For me this would be just about gone with a condom in play.  

When I began working with People With Aids I finally woke up.  Virtually everyone there was HIV positive.  My boss and my editor knew I was negative, but otherwise I kept it secret.  Occasionally I was asked, but that was officially forbidden and only happened when someone wondered if I wanted to have access to some service, such as massage, that was only open to HIV positive people.  I always managed to talk around it without answering.  I was, in short, ashamed of being negative.  I had no right to be negative.  I was surrounded by positive men and a few women positive because of HIV positive boyfriends.  Antiretrovirals were on the distant horizon.  For the people I was with, HIV was a death sentence, and the main issue was how long that sentence could be delayed.  My job was to edit the news letter and write books to inform HIV positive people what lay in store for them—the various diseases and the sequence in which they usually came, and what could be done to stay as healthy as possible to delay them.  I was mandated to write for someone with an 11th grade education, a speaker of English as a second language, and with as much humour and lightness of touch as I possibly could.  This meant a lot of research on my part, a lot of learning, and the rapid realization of what those around me were going through, and how important it was to do all you could and to remain optimistic—in the face of tragedy.  I met so many brave and worthy men and women,  I should be amongst them, but so unfairly to them, I had been spared while they were doomed.  I have no right to be here, they do.  

So, you wonder why I am so obsessed?  Because I lost my chance to help out much.  Until 1994 I stood on the sidelines and watched.  You can't imagine how ashamed that makes me feel.  When I come on strong now, I am really accusing myself.  I am imploring other people to avoid my fate here.  I have no right to preach morality to anybody, but for me it was not so much a matter of cowardice but of ignorance.  For me there was no excuse for either one.
 
« Last Edit: May 21, 2015, 04:14:54 pm by x-man »
Happiness is the lasting pleasure of the mind grasping the intelligible order of reality.      --Leibniz

Offline Front-Ranger

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,788
  • Brokeback got us good.
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #97 on: May 03, 2015, 01:14:21 pm »
I think we all owe to the generations that came before us to be curious and to find out what they went through and why. It is said that those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. A certain amount of respect and understanding is called for, along with an attitude of wanting to build on the good outcomes of the past while learning from the bad outcomes.

My daughter would not call herself a feminist in any way, shape, or form. Yet, she is able to do many things that women of my mother's and even my generation could not do. She is a successful business woman and buys her own cars, equipment and property. When we bought our first house, I worked in the financial industry so I was able to get an attractive mortgage. Yet, the house deed listed my husband's name as owner along with the words "et ux" which actually means, in Latin, "and property." I threw a fit and had the escrow company change it to my name with the words, "et vir" instead. I was required to get my husband's written permission to make the change!! This is just one example of how things have changed. Depiction of women on TV has also changed...isn't there a show called VEEP now? I'm not up-to-date on the goings on in TV land, gay programs or otherwise, so I can't comment on that.
"chewing gum and duct tape"

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,116
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #98 on: May 03, 2015, 04:27:03 pm »
Katherine, was your friend--or were you--speaking hypothetically here, or from actual knowledge?

She was speaking from the experience of someone who works in medical records at a large hospital and has a degree in it.

Quote
I would have thought that in male-to-female surgery, the prostate would have been one of the organs to "go," especially if the surgery involved creation of a vagina (I have read somewhere of that being done). But maybe not?  ???

Good question. And Milo's answer sounds accurate to me. I guess I didn't think it through -- if I had I might have asked the same question or perhaps assumed that sex-change surgery just deals with the superficial parts. In any case, I thought my solution -- if you've got a body part, insurance should cover it -- seemed pretty simple, but my friend claimed it wasn't.



Offline CellarDweller

  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • ********
  • Posts: 41,780
  • A city boy's mentality, with a cowboy's soul.
Re: X-MAN AGAINST GAY TELEVISION
« Reply #99 on: May 03, 2015, 05:04:00 pm »
Apparently removing it is unnecessary. And I don't think I need to tell most guys how complicated the surgery is. So it is usually left in place. Besides, the hormone therapy makes it shrink. The vaginoplasty creates a space that runs between the prostate and the rectum. Supposedly the prostate then becomes the "G spot." But I don't see how that works because most men aren't wired for prostate orgasms.

It is my understanding that the prostate is not removed with sex-reassignment surgery.

As for it becoming the 'g-spot', I believe I read that the prostate does not serve that purpose.

The testes are removed, and most of the inside of the penis, and the skin is 'tucked' inside to make a vagina.  Apparently it's easy to do this, and a number of drag queens will 'tuck' themselves up when performing, to prevent a tell-tale bulge in the front of the dress.

Anyway, because the head of the penis is the man's most sensitive spot, that will be tucked back and become the 'clitoris'


Tell him when l come up to him and ask to play the record, l'm gonna say: ''Voulez-vous jouer ce disque?''
'Voulez-vous, will you kiss my dick?'
Will you play my record? One-track mind!