Make-Over Spells (was Gay-No-More Spell?)
lorax666
nature, nurture, or magic? :> I know of no spell already
written for this purpose, though I imagine one would be
fairly easy to construct.
the question of whether there *are* spells for changing
what may be innate or hard-wired facets of our character
or bodies is probably one of the more confusing and
difficult aspects of magical work to understand. it is
akin to asking if there is a recipe for Icelandic lasagne
or something equally unusual. one can *always* make up
a recipe if one has the interest, and in the same way
one can always come up with a spell for any purpose.
the more important question to ask is whether spells
can have long-term affects of the type you are describing.
weight-reduction spells, for example, or, 'glamour' spells
such as are portrayed in the film "The Craft" will *not*
work as *depicted* in the films (immediate, external change
that everyone can see and accompanied by sparkles and
amazement). however, magic *may* be able to provide fuel
to actions taken by the recipient or target of the spell
to achieve the exact conditions desired. that is, they can
become SUPPLEMENTAL for incentive and followthrough, quite
possibly adding to one's ordinary results.
for objectives like dieting or changing one's appearance,
this may be a valuable supplement to obtain, especially
for one used to magical methods. fortitude in adhering
to one's diet and exercise, for example, may be essential.
it is fairly commonly suggested that a great deal of what
constitutes charm and beauty, grace and handsomeness is
a result of confidence, self-assuredness, and carriage.
therefore some kind of spell which assists with these
may supply the perfect complement to adjustments one may
seek to make to change one's appearance and behaviours
to a new repertoire.
but how far can spells take us? if they are an ADJUNCT
in many cases to ordinary activities, then can we really
say that a spell will 'change my sex' if I desire it?
sex is such a personal and quite possibly in-dwelling
aspect of human behaviour that to have any chance of
achieving the kind of thing you are asking would require
taking serious steps in other areas of life, not just
relying on the spell to carry it through.
if you have friends, family, or acquaintances, for example,
who adamantly identify you with your sexual preferences
or identity, then part of taking control of that and making
the changes you desire may include changing your social
ties, your 'favourite haunts', and may require a complete
revision of your social circles. this is as true for those
who want to change their eating and exercising habits as
it is for those who wish to affect other lifestyle changes
with deep roots. how we surround ourselves, what we do to
intentionally condition ourselves, matters greatly to our
overall composition and composure.
give it time and I'm sure there will be written spells for
all manner of personal transitions. I was part of a ritual,
both in construction and participation, for example, with
one of my kindred who decided to change from male to
female, and sought to consecrate this action within a
ceremonial and initiatory spell. I think it is safe to say
that we were all quite satisfied with the result, and the
spell supported the decision and added energy to continue
and complete the transitional process.
where matters of sexual preference are concerned, we are
talking about some ability to affect deep drives of DESIRE.
asking about a spell to change desires indicates a conflict
on your part (or whoever may wish to use such a spell). so
part of the challenge you're up against is that you don't
indicate to me you have a clear resolve behind your intent,
and are looking for an easy way out of what may be a very
difficult situation. this more than a great many other
factors will undermine any spell that you find which has
as its goal that which you seek.
if you don't find a spell like what you want right away,
and I haven't seen many of them so it wouldn't surprise
me, then consider doing a bit of research as to the exact
science or art of spellcrafting and CREATING YOUR OWN.
not only will this be an education (perhaps more than you
truly want), but it will attune whatever spell you do
create to your particular character and situation --
something that picking up some spell online will rarely,
if ever, allow.
for discussion of spellcrafting, and spell archives, you
can consult the forums:
news:alt.paranormal.spells.hexes.magic
news:alt.lucky.w
news:alt.magick
news:alt.witchcraft
and news:alt.occult.methods
to which this is being cross-posted and rebroadcast.
there are also probably many Yahoo email groups at
groups.yahoo.com that will afford conversation on
the subject. don't be surprised if you receive a number
of attempts to persuade you NOT to cast a spell of this
sort, in part because there is a heavy emphasis on
accepting yourself as you are in the witchy and
spellcrafting community (something especially valuable
to women due to the forces both religious and mercantile
vying for attention and an affect on women's self-images),
and in part because there is a contingent who believes
that spells for anything other than mystical or religious
purposes (rather than vanity or enrichment or vengeance)
is somehow morally reprehensible.
casting lines before a pearl,
Das Uber Bitch
That's what religion does for a person..........
"lorax666" <naga...@yronwode.com> wrote in message
news:Vu1c8.1221$hb6....@typhoon.sonic.net...
Cornflake__Girl
sense.
-Girl
Alan O'Brien
They cross their legs like women do. (If I cross my legs it is below the
knee.)
They normally don't have much body hair, except a triangle around the pubes.
There are other things.
Alan
"Cornflake__Girl" <pag...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:3c754d1a$0$89924$2c3e...@news.voyager.net...
Blazin' Tommy D.
strapped to debt, kept under control &c.
CI
Cornflake__Girl <pag...@voyager.net> wrote in article
<3c754d1a$0$89924$2c3e...@news.voyager.net>...
> I thought being gay was all psychological?
BTD: Nawh, you like someone, you get closer, maybe make-out, &c.
At least, it makes more
> sense.
BTD: Yeah Gay makes more sense. That's why Conservatives invented AIDS.
>
> -Girl
BTD
Jo
You guys are freakin' morons...yeesh!
Blazin' Tommy D.
Jo <xmojo...@yahoo.com> wrote in article
<f58f6ab.02022...@posting.google.com>...
Bruce Burhans
"Blazin' Tommy D." <td...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:01c1bb17$3abf44e0$d8865f18@federalist...
> Everyone is Gay, we've been conditioned to be heterosexual to
multiply, be
> strapped to debt, kept under control &c.
> CI
>
On the mark, this lad is............
Breeding is big business; once you have kids, everyone can mind
yours............Overpopulation keeps the cost of labor down and the
poor too busy and too desperate to organize.
` Unfortunately, the main thing that keeps the poor where they are,
is that they all would give their right arms to *be* the rich oppressors
they claim to hate...............
Bruce<+>
Blazin' Tommy D.
but surely
that's only in YOUR world, BB:)
Bruce Burhans <bbur...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<rHdd8.5771$0C1.5...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
Bruce Burhans
> O
> but surely
> that's only in YOUR world, BB:)
I forgot. And it's so *obvious* that your from Mars...
Bet you actually believe that George Washington cut down a cherry tree
and said "I cannot tell a lie."
But he certainly lied to King George, whom he swore a blood oath of
loyalty to, now didin't he?
What could a nation founded by a traitor possibly come to?
Bruce<+>
Tom
"Cornflake__Girl" <pag...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:3c754d1a$0$89924$2c3e...@news.voyager.net...
> makes more sense.
Don't fall for that old, illusory mind-body split. Psychology and
physiology affect one another. Neither rules completely.
Tom
"Alan O'Brien" <alane...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Wkcd8.2250$766....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> They cross their legs like women do. (If I cross my legs it is
> below the knee.)
> They normally don't have much body hair, except a triangle around the
pubes.
> There are other things.
You can spot idiots physically, too. They make ridiculous
overgeneralizations based largely on their own fantasies. Like this idiot
has.
Blazin' Tommy D.
but don't you love to rub the inside of your thighs together when you walk?
O
But do your knees get tangled
O
There go my elbows drooping again
correct me -e -e
:)
Tom <danto...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<x%ed8.164$h66....@news.uswest.net>...
Blazin' Tommy D.
CI
Bruce Burhans <bbur...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<kVed8.6305$ZC3.5...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>
> "Blazin' Tommy D." <td...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:01c1bb22$c2f98860$d8865f18@federalist...
> > O
> > but surely
> > that's only in YOUR world, BB:)
>
> I forgot. And it's so *obvious* that your from Mars...
> Bet you actually believe that George Washington cut down a cherry tree
> and said "I cannot tell a lie."
> But he certainly lied to King George, whom he swore a blood oath of
> loyalty to, now didin't he?
> What could a nation founded by a traitor possibly come to?
BTD: Jeffersonian bosh
Renfield
> They cross their legs like women do. (If I cross my legs it is below the
> knee.)
I have not seen any gay men cross their legs, and I have seen plenty.
> They normally don't have much body hair, except a triangle around the pubes.
> There are other things.
This is a phallacy.
-Geist
Blazin' Tommy D.
Renfield <barb...@yahoo.com> wrote in article
<ca6e731a.02022...@posting.google.com>...
Bruce Burhans
"Renfield" <barb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ca6e731a.02022...@posting.google.com...
:-) :-) :-)
Bruce<+>
Kurt Kurosawa
> > hello is there a spell for someone to stop being gay?
>
> nature, nurture, or magic? :> I know of no spell already
> written for this purpose, though I imagine one would be
> fairly easy to construct.
Can't figure out if the questioner is speaking of changing themselves or
another, which kinda makes a big difference in many ways.
Someone elsewhere in the thread spoke of forcing people to go against their
nature. I know two people who "willed" themselves hetero. There were facets
of it you could call force, I guess, but with them it seemed more a
re-balancing act of existing habits/perceptions/desires somewhat akin to
adjusting one's life to eat differently (which is a pretty radical thing
from what I've seen).
Tom
"Kurt Kurosawa" <kurt-k...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:eKid8.2290$jC3....@news1.east.cox.net...
>
> Someone elsewhere in the thread spoke of forcing people to
> go against their nature. I know two people who "willed"
> themselves hetero. There were facets of it you could call
> force, I guess, but with them it seemed more a re-balancing
> act of existing habits/perceptions/desires somewhat akin to
> adjusting one's life to eat differently (which is a pretty radical
> thing from what I've seen).
I don't know what kinds of efforts were involved with those two people who
"willed themselves hetero", but Douglas Haldeman's 1999 review of research
on the outcomes of sexual orientation conversions through various therapy
models shows that it is apparently successful in only 30% of the cases
reported. Of course, among the more religion-based conversion methods, a
person who remains celibate thereafter is considered a "success". Many
other studies claiming successful conversion have serious methodological
flaws. So, it appears that only a small percentage of homosexuals who
would even consider such an ordeal really do manage to actually become
"hetero".
A more solid, but still somewhat shaky, study of outcomes was presented in
a paper at the 2001 APA Convention by Dr. Ariel Shidlo and Dr. Michael
Schroeder. It collected a group of 202 homosexuals who agreed to
participate after responding to invitations over the Internet or through
direct mail to groups advocating conversion therapy. Most of the
participants (178, or 88%) reported that efforts to change their sexual
orientation had failed. Only 6 (3%) achieved what the researchers
considered a heterosexual shift. They also reported that many respondents
said that they were harmed by the attempt to change.
Taliszanna
> > hello is there a spell for someone to stop being gay?
>
> nature, nurture, or magic? :> I know of no spell already
> written for this purpose, though I imagine one would be
> fairly easy to construct.
>
Although this is a public document (unless I'm mistaken), I still
thought I'd mention that I've passed this response on to another forum--
one of the Yahoo! groups: SaskaMoon (which is for pagans, students of
magic/k, and those of alternative spirituality who live in my province
here in Canada). Thank you for your insight. :)
-Talis
Alan O'Brien
news:ca6e731a.02022...@posting.google.com...
> I have not seen any gay men cross their legs, and I have seen plenty.
So you have never seen any gay men cross their legs?
What that means is essentially the same as I am saying; that gay men have
physical differences.
If you agree that men occasionally cross their legs,
and you say you have never seen any gay man cross his legs,
ergo, men who cross their legs are not gay.
So you are saying that gay men are physically different.
Thanks
Alan
Das Uber Bitch
stupid..........
"Alan O'Brien" <alane...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Wkcd8.2250$766....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
Tom
"Das Uber Bitch" <castir...@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:3c765755$1...@newsa.ev1.net...
> I truly hope that was sarcastic, and you aren't actually that
> stupid..........
>
> "Alan O'Brien" <alane...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:Wkcd8.2250$766....@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > No. You can spot gay men physically.
> > They cross their legs like women do.
Unfortunately, he really is that stupid.
Blazin' Tommy D.
belly which has hindered his range of movement inter alia causing atrophy
of his gluteals and sartorious - some men can't cross knee over knee for
that reason.
Tom <danto...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<9cwd8.53$PG.6...@news.uswest.net>...
lastassasin
Your not saying they are physically different, but their physical actions
are different.
Your saying that the physiological differences can be evident.
"Alan O'Brien" <alane...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6Hsd8.8121$766.2...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
Nightshade & Flat
> And the likely reason he crosses his legs at the ankle is due to a pot
> belly which has hindered his range of movement inter alia causing atrophy
> of his gluteals and sartorious - some men can't cross knee over knee for
> that reason.
Crossing knee over knee is bad for circulation. It can lead to varicose
veins and other problems.
Love & Laughter,
Nightshade
Blazin' Tommy D.
CI
Tom <danto...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<Yznd8.499$h66.1...@news.uswest.net>...
>
> "Kurt Kurosawa" <kurt-k...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:eKid8.2290$jC3....@news1.east.cox.net...
> >
> > Someone elsewhere in the thread spoke of forcing people to
> > go against their nature. I know two people who "willed"
> > themselves hetero. There were facets of it you could call
> > force, I guess, but with them it seemed more a re-balancing
> > act of existing habits/perceptions/desires somewhat akin to
> > adjusting one's life to eat differently (which is a pretty radical
> > thing from what I've seen).
>
> I don't know what kinds of efforts were involved with those two people
who
> "willed themselves hetero", but Douglas Haldeman's 1999 review of
research
> on the outcomes of sexual orientation conversions through various therapy
> models shows that it is apparently successful in only 30% of the cases
> reported. Of course, among the more religion-based conversion methods, a
> person who remains celibate thereafter is considered a "success".
BTD: This shows how bizarre the idea is in the first place. Query: why try
to "convert" someone? And convert them to what? Anyone can "mate". A Gay
man can mate with a woman whether the woman is straight or Lesbian, vice
versa. What else is there?! Also I presume celibacy, as used here, means
the person refrained from homosexual activity or does it mean all
activity:0. This man is Gay, he must be cured. Hypnotize him to have no
sexual activity at all. This man is cured. Who would applaud?
I got hypnotized to quit smoking and I was thinking, Geez, all these rest
area mens rooms, so I decided to get a group of fundamentalists in this big
room with professor such and such, master of somnambulism . . . you see
Jerry and Pat, now that it's over, it's not so bad. And Jerry I have to
tell you, you really look marvelous in that pink chiffon blouse with the
marabou pom pom cuffs, but maybe you should wear something, well, a bit
more formal next time.
Many
> other studies claiming successful conversion have serious methodological
> flaws. So, it appears that only a small percentage of homosexuals who
> would even consider such an ordeal really do manage to actually become
> "hetero".
>
> A more solid, but still somewhat shaky, study of outcomes was presented
in
> a paper at the 2001 APA Convention by Dr. Ariel Shidlo and Dr. Michael
> Schroeder. It collected a group of 202 homosexuals who agreed to
> participate after responding to invitations over the Internet or through
> direct mail to groups advocating conversion therapy. Most of the
> participants (178, or 88%) reported that efforts to change their sexual
> orientation had failed. Only 6 (3%) achieved what the researchers
> considered a heterosexual shift. They also reported that many respondents
> said that they were harmed by the attempt to change.
>
BTD: Gee I wonder why.
Blazin' Tommy D.
gut!?
Nightshade & Flat <and.e...@eatel.net> wrote in article
<z1xd8.154854$Aw2.11...@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...
Cornflake__Girl
told me. There are queens, flamers, and discreet males. I don't like the
flashy ones. The passive, discreet ones are awesome. :-)
-Girl
Blazin' Tommy D.
into civilian society
So what are your opinions on the "consumer economy"?
Do you like shopping at Wal-mart
signed,
a flaming creature
Cornflake__Girl <pag...@voyager.net> wrote in article
<3c76bfd4$0$15925$2c3e...@news.voyager.net>...
Renfield
>
> So you are saying that gay men are physically different.
> Thanks
> Alan
You are as presumptuous as you are nescient.
-Geist
lastassasin
Sounds like you are saying "don't ask, don't tell", too.
Except you like K-mart, instead of Wal-mart.
Different store, but your still selling something.
"Blazin' Tommy D." <td...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:01c1bbf0$d5c77b90$d8865f18@federalist...
lastassasin
agaisnt black-and white ideals (non-conservative shapes, also).
I can even understand an individual's rebellion agasint the grayness of a
system (through multi-color, or multi-shape).
For instance, if the world feels black, then black will be the conservative
representation (conserves the feeling).
If a person feels constricted, then they may use colors to excite change.
Eventually, they begin to feel the colors, and then the colors become a
conservative gesture of the people.
Are the colors meaningful, or just flair? ("The nazis had flair. They made
the Jews wear it")
Recently, those wearing the color black have been marked as being depressed.
But, is that just because the world has gone to color, and black is defined
as abscence of white (white is made of colors).
"The clothes make the man"-
That seems to imply that the clothes have an identity, and this identity can
reshape the person's identity (man is archaic in use).
So, a fad in fashion would be an identity of clothing, and the wearer would
be proclaiming that identity.
Fashion is the art of clothing, and a fad in fashion could be like
impressionism in the art of painting.
The fad is a part of the overall art.
An artist employs methods (physical mediums manipulated through a process to
create something).
In interpretation, a group of artists' renderings can be classified as a
movement, or fad.
Fads in fashion are classified interpretations of the art.
The fad becomes an entity, and the wearer proclaims the identification of
that entity.
What I don't understand is how homosexuality implies a better knowledge of
fashion?
I can understand that homosexuals can be abreast of the changing fads,
though.
But, that homosexuals know the best fad negates the existence of fashion.
The only existence is that the fad becomes the only fashion, and those not
with the fad don't have fashion.
But, they are wearing clothes, aren't they?
By that means, only those wearing the most expensive clothes are
fashionable.
The most expensive clothes could only be worn by one person.
To make two sets would imply a method of mass production (you could make two
for the price of one).
One denotes a fashion, but two denotes a fad.
So, I don't understand how women, or homosexuals, are more fashionable?
They are just in touch with the fad, and fads change.
The art remains.
It is just a way of giving self-worth to those who once felt oppressed, by
lack of worth.
If the materials only cost $100, then the product is worth $100 dollars.
But, it took all this time to make, and to get you to buy, so my value plus
the materials is more.
Do you want equality of value for everyone?
Or, do you want to equate the overall, personal values with time?
"Blazin' Tommy D." <td...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:01c1bbdb$171182a0$d8865f18@federalist...
Das Uber Bitch
"Tom" <danto...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:9cwd8.53$PG.6...@news.uswest.net...
*sigh* I do so hate running over -- I mean, running across that sort.
>
>
>
Das Uber Bitch
is what ladies are taught to do as an alternative to leg crossing, which
weakens and de - tones the thigh muscles.
"Blazin' Tommy D." <td...@stny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:01c1bbd5$679b6570$d8865f18@federalist...
Blazin' Tommy D.
BTD: Jerry wore his pink chiffon blouse with the marabou pom pom sleeves
because it was the new him. Parvenu/noveau. Our tastes are more refined.
BTD: [Thesis statement and excerpt] -Well it's like this - another
homo/homophobe made a joke (he thought) about me having no body hair which
includes no pubic or asshole hair either and his observation that some men
walk a particular way which justifies a presumption that they are Gay. Well
once you decide to love a cock and enjoy your asshole properly you begin to
discover the various phony impositions forced onto men (or women) by the
Nazi/Conservative party and you then say to yourself, well fuck it, I don't
have to do this anymore. Because someone decides they're a cocksucker and
therefore no longer have to be fearfully self conscious about looking
otherwise, decide to loosen up, doesn't necessarily mean that they know how
to walk, that takes taste and practice. But what you might fail to
comprehend, as most men do, is that it takes class to be able to dress the
way you like, wear eye shadow, rouge, et al and confidently (e.g.) carry on
a serious conversation with a Conservative Party authority figure, such as
a Judge. Otherwise, anyone can suck a cock. But why would you expect some
dork in a man's suit with wingtips on flat feet having any inspiration or
more pertinently, taste, to design a woman's dress? He'll likely stuff her
in the same box he's in. Fashion takes inspiration (e.g.) from the freedom
allowed to a woman in manner of movement and grace that he'd perhaps have
the shit kicked out of him by one of your jack boot Nazis with "flair", if
he expressed his own freedom and Liberty in such manner and therefore does
it through fashion.
Or maybe he's Divine and does it in a John Water's film.
CI
lastassasin <COST...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in article
<dvLd8.211705$Gb1.31...@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com>...
> Okay, I can understand the idea of multi-colored (rainbow) as a rebellion
> agaisnt black-and white ideals (non-conservative shapes, also).
BTD: Then why don't you start your own thread?
> I can even understand an individual's rebellion agasint the grayness of a
> system (through multi-color, or multi-shape).
> For instance, if the world feels black, then black will be the
conservative
> representation (conserves the feeling).
BTD: Well if you're addressing my observations of the Conservative Party,
it's more like - we ARE the Conservative party. In terms of color it could
be any -viz., we're the Orange party, how can you even think we'd even
consider an RC Mc herein?
> If a person feels constricted, then they may use colors to excite change.
> Eventually, they begin to feel the colors, and then the colors become a
> conservative gesture of the people.
> Are the colors meaningful, or just flair? ("The nazis had flair. They
made
> the Jews wear it")
NTD: Well this is the first sense you've made - equating Conservatives with
Nazis.
> Recently, those wearing the color black have been marked as being
depressed.
BTD: A "tell" you have no knowledge or experience with fashion
> But, is that just because the world has gone to color, and black is
defined
> as abscence of white (white is made of colors).
BTD: I suspect you're daft.
> "The clothes make the man"-
> That seems to imply that the clothes have an identity, and this identity
can
> reshape the person's identity (man is archaic in use).
BTD: My take is somewhat in reverse. Jerry wore his pink chiffon blouse
with the marabou pom pom sleeves because it was the new him.
Parvenu/noveau. Our tastes are more refined
> So, a fad in fashion would be an identity of clothing, and the wearer
would
> be proclaiming that identity.
BTD: Where did fad come into the picture?
> Fashion is the art of clothing, and a fad in fashion could be like
> impressionism in the art of painting.
> The fad is a part of the overall art.
BTD: Well it depends. Maybe it's just the simplest thing Conservative Party
sweatshops employing slave labor can knock out
I mean pick up a copy of "International Male". Maybe it's what CNN wants
members of your plutocratic stratum to wear all that you salary allows you
to wear, what George Bush thinks it proper for you to wear, &c., &c
> An artist employs methods (physical mediums manipulated through a process
to
> create something).
> In interpretation, a group of artists' renderings can be classified as a
> movement, or fad.
BTD: Or maybe a group of people copying someone else because they have no
ideas of their own but desperately want to be hip
> Fads in fashion are classified interpretations of the art.
> The fad becomes an entity, and the wearer proclaims the identification of
> that entity.
BTD: Where doe this idea come from:
> What I don't understand is how homosexuality implies a better knowledge
of
> fashion?
BTD: Men with gender hang-ups either dress like they want to dress or dress
like the Conservative Party and members thereof expect them to dress. Wing
tips to make the feet flat and look like the incredible hulk, suits that
look like a card board box. A man's suit sleeves at the shoulder -
E-fucking -Gad what is that?! Men clothes hide their body therefore they
let their body turn to shit. They shave their face but not their legs. They
go fat and pimply. Their clumps of pubic hair stinks, they don't wash their
asshole they have shit stains in the underwear, Why? So that persons like
you would be aghast at the thought of having sex with one of these beasts
because then you could not be controlled under the various means employed
by the Conservative party to repress heterosexual couples. On the other
hand, women care for their skin, shave their legs and show them off with
skirts, open sandal pumps, &c. but cover their tits because men have been
trained to worship tits. I prefer legs and ass so why can't I wear
knickers? Why can't I wear a dress?
> I can understand that homosexuals can be abreast of the changing fads,
> though.
> But, that homosexuals know the best fad negates the existence of fashion.
BTD: Well it's like this other homophobe making a joke (he thought) about
me having no body hair which includes no pubic or asshole hair either and
his observation that some men walk a particular way and are presumed Gay.
Well once you decide to love a cock and enjoy your asshole properly you
begin to discover the various phony impositions forced onto men by the
Nazi/Conservative party (as aforestated in regard to shoes for instance)
and you then say to yourself, well fuck it, I don't have to do this
anymore. So in a minute sense you have a point. Because someone decides
they're a cocksucker and therefore no longer have to walk around pretending
to be bow legged with a varsity football injury to their lower back, all
sore from practice &c, &c and decide to loosen up doesn't necessarily mean
they know how to walk, that takes class. But what you might fail to
comprehend, as most men do, is that it takes class to be able to dress the
way you like, wear eye shadow and carry on a serious conversation with a
Conservative Party authority figure such as a Judge. Otherwise, anyone can
suck a cock. But why would you expect some dork in a man's suit with
wingtips on flat feet having any inspiration or more pertinently, taste, to
design a woman's dress? If Conservative Central Control placed him in this
role he's likely place woman in the same box he's in which is essentially
what's happened already and what Bush is trying to take us back to.
Designing clothes takes inspiration from the freedom allowed to a woman in
her manner of movement and grace that he'd perhaps have the shit kicked out
of him by one of your jack boot Nazis with flair, if he expressed his own
freedom and Liberty in such manner, and therefore does it through fashion.
Everything else is JC Penny's
Or maybe he's Divine and does it in a John Water's film.
> The only existence is that the fad becomes the only fashion, and those
not
> with the fad don't have fashion.
BTD: This is an inane glop of bullshit. I can wear practically anything and
turn heads because I know allure, have taste and know the sorts of
movements that appeal to all persons.
> But, they are wearing clothes, aren't they?
> By that means, only those wearing the most expensive clothes are
> fashionable.
> The most expensive clothes could only be worn by one person.
BTD: And look like absolute shit on another
> To make two sets would imply a method of mass production (you could make
two
> for the price of one).
> One denotes a fashion, but two denotes a fad.
BTD: More inane bullshit.
> So, I don't understand how women, or homosexuals, are more fashionable?
BTD: So what are you talking about fashion or an alleged fad of
cocksucking?
> They are just in touch with the fad, and fads change.
> The art remains.
> It is just a way of giving self-worth to those who once felt oppressed,
by
> lack of worth.
> If the materials only cost $100, then the product is worth $100 dollars.
> But, it took all this time to make, and to get you to buy, so my value
plus
> the materials is more.
> Do you want equality of value for everyone?
BTD: I have no problem with egalitarianism nor a fixed monetary standard;
do you? Obviously, if people were allowed to open themselves up to sensual
expression clothes would be more interesting, there would be more fashion
designers and there would be more retailers like Victoria Secrets and new
ones extending to cross dressing and variants thereof. So in that sense, of
course. Why not?
> Or, do you want to equate the overall, personal values with time?
BTD: This statement might make sense to you but appears as absolute
nonsense to me. So what's your point? You don't like Jewish homosexual
fashion designers? Or you thought Jerry's chiffon blouse was appropriate?
Blazin' Tommy D.
usually I more or less remain like this - my knees straight with thighs
crossed from the crotch
I like my feet elevated
Otherwise I like to straddle and stretch my arms from my elbow
Sitting is really bad for me. I don't like it
Das Uber Bitch <castir...@ev1.net> wrote in article
<3c779...@newsa.ev1.net>...
Kurt Kurosawa
>
> I don't know what kinds of efforts were involved with those two people who
> "willed themselves hetero",
OK, organized religion had nothing to do with either, which may bear on the
matter, I don't know.
The lady, a childhood friend, decided one day that her messed-up
relationship with her mother the reason she was gay, and she decided that
relationship wasn't going to define her life, and whether her reasoning was
good or not, that was her final word on it. Then she overcame a variety of
tough dependency probs, got married, and settled down. I don't pry; she
hasn't said anything about that issue since she told me she decided to
switch, or shift emphasis is probably a more accurate way to express it.
The guy was logging in the rain forest in the Virgin Islands, had his left
hand cut off by a chain, decided it was a sign from God to quit being gay,
and just did it.
So I don't know anyone who fits into your statistics, people who tried
therapy. All I have are these two examples, which may be atypical, I don't
know, but they're the only personal knowledge I have of 'switchers.'
=====
I learned some totally fascinating things about the Philippines. Feminine
gay guys are termed gay. The masculine guys in their lives are not
considered gay. Masculine gay women are termed lesbians. The feminine women
in their lives are not considered lesbians. There is no gay bashing there at
all. They televise gay beauty contests on regular broadcast TV.