Gay Athletes/Olympians
Denis C.
<dan...@freeuk.com> wrote:
> Out of curiosity, anyone know of any gay/lesbian athletes/Olympians? The
> world of sport doesn't seem to have any openly gay
> celebrities that I know of like the entertainment industry. Any opinions?
>
Go there:
<http://people.smartchat.net.au/~tonywhelan/gaysport/profiles.htm>
Profiles of some gay/lesbian/trans-sexual sportspeople
Mark Tewkesbury Canada Swimming
Amelie Mauresmo France Tennis
Ian Roberts Australia Rugby
Lisa-Marie Vizaniari Australia Athletics
Rudy Galindo USA Figure Skating
Pirinya Kiatbusaba Thailand Kickboxing
Marc Leduc Canada Boxing
Greg Louganis USA Diving
Martina Navratilova USA Tennis
Bob Paris USA Bodybuilding
David Pichler USA Diving
Billy Bean USA Baseball
David Kopay USA American Football
Justin Fashinu Britain Soccer
Billy Jean King USA Tennis
Chris Dickerson USA Bodybuilding
Peter Prijdekker Britain Swimming
Eric Anderson USA Athletics coaching
Gina Guidi USA Boxing
Dan Veatch USA Swimming
Craig Rogerson Australia Diving
Bruce Hayes USA Swimming
Muffin Spencer-Devlin USA Golf
Savoy Howe Canada Boxing
Patrick Jeffrey USA Diving
DC
--
Pour m'écrire/To e-mail me
Remplacez/Remove
"NoSpam" par/by "albatros"
Philip Smith
Denis C. <NoS...@odyssee.net> wrote in message
news:NoSpam-849410....@news.globetrotter.net...
noog...@cwcom.net
<pe...@bartonroad.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>add : Graham LeSaux UK Soccer player
Does his wife and child know about this? Or is just a bit of wishful
thinking?
Michael Owen? Who said that?
Where's the cold flannel?
John Rayment
"Denis C." wrote:
Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
BaldJohn
Paul Williams
>>add : Graham LeSaux UK Soccer player
Absolute bollox
Paul (aka Riff)
Live now
Paul Purves
<pe...@bartonroad.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> add : Graham LeSaux UK Soccer player
> Denis C. <NoS...@odyssee.net> wrote in message
> news:NoSpam-849410....@news.globetrotter.net...
> > In article <8ptdnf$9d8$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Dan"
> > <dan...@freeuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Out of curiosity, anyone know of any gay/lesbian athletes/Olympians?
> > > The
> > > world of sport doesn't seem to have any openly gay
> > > celebrities that I know of like the entertainment industry. Any
> opinions?
> > >
And don't forget most of the New Zealand Olympic equestrian team. Mark
Todd (world famous in NZ for his alleged nose candy incident), Blyth
Tait, NZ team captain and his partner Paul O'Brien.
Okay, maybe not famous or outrageously out, but well known in their home
country.
Paul
--
Cynic's Dictionary: Brain - The seat of cerebration; the source of wonder; a
two-room cottage occupied by an artist and an accountant engaged in a perpetual
tug-of-war.
John Rayment
Jamie wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 08:26:59 BST, John Rayment
> <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> said:
>
>
> >
> >Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
> >
> >BaldJohn
>
> Ian is only 17, and I think that he has other things on his mind at
> the moment, non?
Oh indeed, but he is, nevertheless, a staggeringly beautiful young man.
BaldJohn
St Mym
I think you are over-egging that particular built-like-a-brick-shithouse
pudding there John - he is impressively huge of frame for any age (let
alone 17) but "staggeringly beautiful"?
--
st mym
'Habet quisque supra domum suum Jovis barbam'
Edicts of Charlemagne
John Rayment
St Mym wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 08:48:57 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, John Rayment
> <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Jamie wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 08:26:59 BST, John Rayment
> >> <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> said:
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
> >> >
> >> >BaldJohn
> >>
> >> Ian is only 17, and I think that he has other things on his mind at
> >> the moment, non?
> >
> >Oh indeed, but he is, nevertheless, a staggeringly beautiful young man.
>
> I think you are over-egging that particular built-like-a-brick-shithouse
> pudding there John - he is impressively huge of frame for any age (let
> alone 17) but "staggeringly beautiful"?
Funnily enough, 'tis his face I like - the lycra-clad rest of him is
(swoon) nice, too, of course...
BaldJohn
Paul Williams
I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
Martin
> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
--
Martin ICQ 48819192
Dream like you'll live forever; live like you'll die tomorrow
St Mym
mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
>> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
>> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
>
>You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
>
>And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
MRDA...
noog...@cwcom.net
>On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 08:26:59 BST, John Rayment
><jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> said:
>
>>
>>
>>"Denis C." wrote:
>>
>>> In article <8ptdnf$9d8$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Dan"
>>> <dan...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Out of curiosity, anyone know of any gay/lesbian athletes/Olympians? The
>>> > world of sport doesn't seem to have any openly gay
>>> > celebrities that I know of like the entertainment industry. Any opinions?
>>> >
>>>
>>Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>>
>>BaldJohn
>
>Ian is only 17, and I think that he has other things on his mind at
>the moment, non?
17 year old boys only have one thing on their mind. Their main problem
is to find something that's still warm to do it to.
Martin
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
> >> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
> >> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
> >
> >You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
> >
> >And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
>
> MRDA...
Mark Really Doesn't Agree?
Many Ribcages Discourage Appreciation?
Martin Rarely Demonstrates Aesthetisicm?
Most Radically Demonstrated by Adolescents?
Paul Williams
wrote:
>Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
>> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
>> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
>
>You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
>
>And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
inner-city starvation.
Paul Williams
wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
>mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
>>Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
>>> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
>>> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
>>
>>You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
>>
>>And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
>
>MRDA...
Mr Who ... ?
St Mym
mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
>> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>>
>> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
>> >> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
>> >> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
>> >
>> >You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
>> >
>> >And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
>>
>> MRDA...
>
>Mark Really Doesn't Agree?
>Many Ribcages Discourage Appreciation?
>Martin Rarely Demonstrates Aesthetisicm?
>Most Radically Demonstrated by Adolescents?
now I *really* thought you'd know that one....
Mandy Rice-Davis Applies
Martin
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin)
> wrote:
>
> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
> >> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
> >> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
> >
> >You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
> >
> >And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
>
> Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> inner-city starvation.
And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
Martin
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:47:12 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
> >St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> >> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
> >> >> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
> >> >> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
> >> >
> >> >You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
> >> >
> >> >And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
> >>
> >> MRDA...
> >
> >Mark Really Doesn't Agree?
> >Many Ribcages Discourage Appreciation?
> >Martin Rarely Demonstrates Aesthetisicm?
> >Most Radically Demonstrated by Adolescents?
>
> now I *really* thought you'd know that one....
I didn't, but it was fun trying to guess. :)
> Mandy Rice-Davis Applies
Applies what to whom? And do the papers know?
graham
Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-WXWE72frd4Is@localhost...
> Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin)
> > wrote:
> > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> > inner-city starvation.
>
> And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
There is a third way.
Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
And it's the one I like.
--
graham
immerse your soul in love
http://www.vendetta.demon.co.uk
Martin
>
> Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-WXWE72frd4Is@localhost...
> > Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin)
> > > wrote:
> > > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> > > inner-city starvation.
> >
> > And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> > outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
>
> There is a third way.
First NuLabour, now NuLads. :)
> Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
'Lean but wiry'?
> And it's the one I like.
It's v pleasant. 'Chunky' in my mind implies 'lots of muscle'
which I can find aesthetically appealing, but rarely erotic.
Martyn Gore
Sorry I don't think he's that good looking either and besides how would you
cope with those feet ?
but if you start talking about Russian Gymnasts (male) then that's another
story...........
martyn.
--
Please take a look at my new website
Richard G
wrote of Mandy Rice-Davis:
> Applies what to whom? And do the papers know?
"Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?"
--
Richard G
http://www.geocities.com/richardg_uk/index.html
Dire Men Are a Boy's Best Friend.
mik
"Martin" <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
> Applies what to whom? And do the papers know?
more important: what does oprah think?
mik
--
"mo' money!"?
mik
"John Rayment" <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
> Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
yuck! gimmie a russian gymnast (nemov!) any time.
mik
--
no mym, i didn't sleep with him either
mik
"Martin" <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
> And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
pfew.
mik
--
skinny man running for mr gaydar
Patrick James
> Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> > inner-city starvation.
>
> And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
But if fats love skinnies and skinnies love fats then everything will be
okay?
--
Patrick
Richard G
wrote:
> There is a third way.
> Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
> And it's the one I like.
There Is Hope. :-)
graham
> "graham" <use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
>
Doesn't have to be lean, 'though wiry is nice.
> > And it's the one I like.
>
> It's v pleasant. 'Chunky' in my mind implies 'lots of muscle'
> which I can find aesthetically appealing, but rarely erotic.
By 'chunky' I'm meaning sort of less solid than Stephen Gately and more
solid than me, if you get me.
However, it's just one of a whole range.
St Mym
mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>> Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
>> inner-city starvation.
>
>And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
>outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
you say potayto and I say potahto.....
St Mym
mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:47:12 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
>> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>>
>> >St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
>> >> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
>> >> >> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
>> >> >> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
>> >> >
>> >> >You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
>> >> >
>> >> >And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
>> >>
>> >> MRDA...
>> >
>> >Mark Really Doesn't Agree?
>> >Many Ribcages Discourage Appreciation?
>> >Martin Rarely Demonstrates Aesthetisicm?
>> >Most Radically Demonstrated by Adolescents?
>>
>> now I *really* thought you'd know that one....
>
>I didn't, but it was fun trying to guess. :)
>
>> Mandy Rice-Davis Applies
>
>Applies what to whom? And do the papers know?
har famous comment "well he would say that, wouldn't he"
St Mym
<use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-WXWE72frd4Is@localhost...
>> Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin)
>> > wrote:
>> > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
>> > inner-city starvation.
>>
>> And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
>> outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
>
>There is a third way.
yes, contented celibacy
St Mym
<m...@theMarines.com> wrote:
>
>"John Rayment" <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>
>> Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>
>yuck! gimmie a russian gymnast (nemov!) any time.
>
>mik
> no mym, i didn't sleep with him either
you are slipping!
Martin
> Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> > > inner-city starvation.
> >
> > And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> > outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
>
> But if fats love skinnies and skinnies love fats then everything will be
> okay?
No it won't; I have no desire only to be lusted after by fat
boys. :(
Martin
>
> Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-ZobDC8YoeiIz@localhost...
> > "graham" <use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
> > 'Lean but wiry'?
> Doesn't have to be lean, 'though wiry is nice.
Is non-lean wiry possible?
> > > And it's the one I like.
> > It's v pleasant. 'Chunky' in my mind implies 'lots of muscle'
> > which I can find aesthetically appealing, but rarely erotic.
> By 'chunky' I'm meaning sort of less solid than Stephen Gately and more
> solid than me, if you get me.
Not had the opportunity for a detailed check of either. :(
> However, it's just one of a whole range.
Indeed. As time goes by, my 'type' doesn't change, but I find
myself attracted more often by those who don't fit it.
Martin
>
> "Martin" <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote
> >
> > And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
> pfew.
Mik was worried I didn't fancy him?
- like, some chance.
- like, he cares?
> mik
> --
> skinny man running for mr gaydar
Where do I vote?
Martin
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:01:19 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, "graham"
> <use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-WXWE72frd4Is@localhost...
> >> Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin)
> >> > wrote:
> >> > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> >> > inner-city starvation.
> >>
> >> And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> >> outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
> >
> >There is a third way.
>
> yes, contented celibacy
I'm saving that for later. Much later. :)
Martin
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:58:06 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> >> inner-city starvation.
> >
> >And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> >outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
>
> you say potayto and I say potahto.....
Let's call the whole thing off.
Martin
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:58:07 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
> >St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:47:12 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> >> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
> >>
> >> >St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> >> >> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
> >> >>
> >> >> MRDA...
> >> >
> >> >Mark Really Doesn't Agree?
> >> >Many Ribcages Discourage Appreciation?
> >> >Martin Rarely Demonstrates Aesthetisicm?
> >> >Most Radically Demonstrated by Adolescents?
> >>
> >> now I *really* thought you'd know that one....
> >
> >I didn't, but it was fun trying to guess. :)
> >
> >> Mandy Rice-Davis Applies
> >
> >Applies what to whom? And do the papers know?
>
> har famous comment "well he would say that, wouldn't he"
Oh right.
Is the intended import that I say skinny is good because I'm
thin? If so, is the thought that I'm simply advertising my own
supposed attractiveness (the day I have to rely on my looks to
get laid I'd better go celibate, for those who haven't met me) or
that one subconsciously regards one's own physical form as the
most attractive? If so, for the record I don't hold greying hair
or teeth like tombstones in the same regard as skinny bodies. :)
Niles
mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
|Let's call the whole thing off.
You say CarMEEna, I say, CerMEYEna
Let's Karl the whole thing Orff...
--
"Dad, were you involved in the serial | Niles, Nottingham
killing scene when you were at college?" | ICQ UIN 12724766
| Work in progress:--
"Yes, son, but I didn't impale." | www.niles.org.uk/story.html
Kapitano
news:969397248.4475.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > > Skinny is horrible
> > And, IMO, fat's horrible.
> There is a third way.
>
>
There's also a forth way.
It's called 'too-dark-to-see-too-desperate-to-care'.
--
Kapitano
Today's Useful Word:-
Plim /plIm/: Swell, fill out, grow plump.
Kapitano
> 17 year old boys only have one thing on their mind.
Huh. At 17 I discovered greek philosophy.
Though come to think of it I also discovered:
* Desperate older men
* Boys who could be regarded with equal measures of contempt
and frustrated lust
* Girls who liked gay boys
* Molecular Biology and Organic Chemistry. Hmmm.
Rich
wrote:
>> There is a third way.
>> Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
>> And it's the one I like.
>
>There Is Hope. :-)
And where might we find him? ;-)
Cheers
Rich
Gordon
>
>"John Rayment" <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>
>> Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>
>yuck!
Not Pieter van der Hoogenband either, who beat him?
Sorry, forgot you don't do Dutch.
I thought they both had nice Roman noses.
Come to think of it, does that nasal streamlining give one that
all-important 0.0001 second edge in the water? Must be almost as
significant as the rather disconcerting shaved armpits that PvdH was
displaying on the front page of the Volkskrant this morning.
--
Gordon
x
x
x
Susan Brace
> patric...@btinternet.REMOVEcom (Patrick James) wrote:
>
> > Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> > > > inner-city starvation.
> > >
> > > And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> > > outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
> >
> > okay?
>
> No it won't; I have no desire only to be lusted after by fat
> boys. :(
Writing off entire body types as "horrible" is very destructive. After all
the morale-boosting, confidence-building "just be yourself, be happy, be
proud" advice we give to those uncertain in their sexuality, their
lifestyle, their looks, this kind of exchange crops up and cuts it all off
at the knees.
The young, the not-so-young, the shy, the impressionable, the vulnerable may
read this conversation and think "Bwaah! I'm far too fat/skinny to leave the
house/go on a meet/go to a club". It reinforces the belief that looks are
paramount, all else is secondary. It leads to the insecure wasting their
lives in futile attempts to bulk up or slim down, and when they fail their
esteem slips ever lower.
Skinny bodies are not horrible. Fat bodies are not horrible. They are just
bodies. It's the people who inhabit them who bestow such qualities as
"horrible" upon them.
Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful, and am
grateful to be lusted after by anyone these days. Apart from the dog. I
*hate* it when he does that.
--
Susan Enlightenment Brace
http://www.sobriquet.co.uk/
Kapitano
news:mtpfss8abelnla3g2...@4ax.com...
> >> Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
> you are slipping!
Some slip, others slide. But I want to do both.
--
Kapitano (slipping and sliding)
St Mym
<su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
>Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-5d3i2Sh1FFhK@localhost...
>> patric...@btinternet.REMOVEcom (Patrick James) wrote:
>>
>> > Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
>> > > > inner-city starvation.
>> > >
>> > > And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
>> > > outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
>> >
>> > But if fats love skinnies and skinnies love fats then everything will be
>> > okay?
>>
>> No it won't; I have no desire only to be lusted after by fat
>> boys. :(
>
>Writing off entire body types as "horrible" is very destructive. After all
>the morale-boosting, confidence-building "just be yourself, be happy, be
>proud" advice we give to those uncertain in their sexuality, their
>lifestyle, their looks, this kind of exchange crops up and cuts it all off
>at the knees.
better they get the truth and construct coping mechanisms.
>Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful
and female - it is different.
St Mym
<kapi...@lineone.net> wrote:
><noog...@cwcom.net> wrote in message news:u7bfsssooosso03ra...@4ax.com...
>> 17 year old boys only have one thing on their mind.
>
> Huh. At 17 I discovered greek philosophy.
you tell 'em K
the "gay" obsession with teenagers is embarassing enough without
projecting it's own desperation onto the target as well.
Gordon
Moof
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:58:06 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >> Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> >> inner-city starvation.
> >
> >And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> >outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
>
> you say potayto and I say potahto.....
You say lee-sure, and we say lijure-yay.
You say erbs, and we say herbs, because it's got a fucking "h" in it.
Moof - who has watched too much Izzard
--
Thought Experiments Moof - who knows if he is really Giles Radford?
[Close the world, txEn eht nepO]
"Nani?" "Nandemo nai yo" -- far too many Anime series
noog...@cwcom.net
<ho...@herons.worldonline.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >> >Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>
>Sorry I don't think he's that good looking either and besides how would you
>cope with those feet ?
>
>but if you start talking about Russian Gymnasts (male) then that's another
>story...........
Or Ukranian gymnasts.........
Or even Chinese gymnasts...........
Martin
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:41:11 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, "Susan Brace"
> <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-5d3i2Sh1FFhK@localhost...
> >> patric...@btinternet.REMOVEcom (Patrick James) wrote:
> >>
> >> > Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
> >> > > > inner-city starvation.
> >> > >
> >> > > And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
> >> > > outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
> >> >
> >> > But if fats love skinnies and skinnies love fats then everything will be
> >> > okay?
> >>
> >> No it won't; I have no desire only to be lusted after by fat
> >> boys. :(
> >Writing off entire body types as "horrible" is very destructive.
There was an 'IMO' in there, and later a comment that I
increasingly find myself attracted to those not my 'type'. So if
I'm asked to describe my (physically) ideal man, he's going to be
tall, dark and slim-to-skinny. But I fall for people who aren't
any, and others will be of the shorter-is-cuter,
blonds-are-more-fun, skeletal-not-my-thing persuasion.
> >After all
> >the morale-boosting, confidence-building "just be yourself, be happy, be
> >proud" advice we give to those uncertain in their sexuality, their
> >lifestyle, their looks, this kind of exchange crops up and cuts it all off
> >at the knees.
Why? Someone said like they like 'chunky', some 'skeletal'.
We've all different tastes, and it's only at the extremes where
'body type' becomes self-abuse (anorexia or clinical obesity)
that few if any will find the look erotic, and that's probably
not a bad thing.
> better they get the truth and construct coping mechanisms.
Indeed; and they're not the only ones. I have looks that even
those who I've had good reason to believe were fond of me have
had trouble describing as anything better than 'individual' or
'interesting'. But being not exactly classically beautiful is
just a different thing to cope with to (for instance) being
strikingly good looking, very shy and worried that you're just
wanted for your looks.
> >Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful
> and female - it is different.
Definitely different - not sure if better or worse, but certainly
different.
Pete Baggett
mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
|"mik" <m...@theMarines.com> wrote:
|
|>
|> "Martin" <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote
|> >
|> > And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
|> pfew.
|
|Mik was worried I didn't fancy him?
|- like, some chance.
|- like, he cares?
|
|> mik
|> --
|> skinny man running for mr gaydar
|
|Where do I vote?
at http://gaydar.co.uk. I voted for Mik, mainly because he's stunning!
--
Pete Baggett <Wulfr...@bigfoot.com>
My Web Page:-
www.g4orx.btinternet.co.uk
(Trolleybus page www.under2wires.co.uk)
John Rayment
St Mym wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:47:12 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
> >St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:40:16 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
> >> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
> >> >> staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
> >> >> like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
> >> >
> >> >You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
> >> >
> >> >And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
> >>
> >> MRDA...
> >
> >Mark Really Doesn't Agree?
> >Many Ribcages Discourage Appreciation?
> >Martin Rarely Demonstrates Aesthetisicm?
> >Most Radically Demonstrated by Adolescents?
>
> now I *really* thought you'd know that one....
>
> Mandy Rice-Davis Applies
Applies what? Some kind of ointment?
BaldJohn
John Rayment
mik wrote:
>
> skinny man running for mr gaydar
Ah, that *is* you on there, is it? I wondered.
BaldJohn
noog...@cwcom.net
<su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful, and am
>grateful to be lusted after by anyone these days. Apart from the dog. I
>*hate* it when he does that.
I have the same problem but sometimes you just have to take what you
can get, don't you?
Matthew Malthouse
} Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
}
} > I don't think anyone is staggeringly beautiful at 17. Potentially
} > staggeringly beautiful perhaps. Most of the 17 yos these days look
} > like refugees from Belsen - yeuk!
}
} You don't know the right 17 year olds, then. <bs>
}
} And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
And it was almost impossible to get him out of the catacombs...
Matthew
http://www.ceret.fsnet.co.uk/paris9/index.html
--
Ni bhéarfainn broim dreólín ar dhuilleog
cuillin agus is beag an puth gaoth é sin!
Matthew Malthouse
} Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote:
}
} > Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
} >
} > > inner-city starvation.
} >
} > And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
} > outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
}
} But if fats love skinnies and skinnies love fats then everything will be
} okay?
Jack Spratt...
Matthew
Matthew Malthouse
} On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:41:11 BST, "Susan Brace"
} <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
}
} >
} >grateful to be lusted after by anyone these days. Apart from the dog. I
} >*hate* it when he does that.
}
} can get, don't you?
Getting them is only moderately problematical. Keeping them however...
Matthew Malthouse
}
} at http://gaydar.co.uk. I voted for Mik, mainly because he's stunning!
<AOL> Me too. </AOL>
I only thought one other anything more than averagely attractive.
pete-d
<39c7f64b...@news.blueyonder.co.uk>:
>>There Is Hope. :-)
>And where might we find him? ;-)
Just up the road from Caergwrle...
Pete
--
Pete Denton
Live in Hope, die in Caergwrle...
John Rayment
Matthew Malthouse wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 09:16:57 BST noog...@cwcom.net wrote:
> } On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:41:11 BST, "Susan Brace"
> } <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
> }
> } >
> } >Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful, and am
> } >grateful to be lusted after by anyone these days. Apart from the dog. I
> } >*hate* it when he does that.
> }
> } I have the same problem but sometimes you just have to take what you
> } can get, don't you?
>
> Getting them is only moderately problematical. Keeping them however...
Matter of perspective.
BaldJohn
mik
"John Rayment" <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>
>> skinny man running for mr gaydar
> Ah, that *is* you on there, is it? I wondered.
uh, yeah. a friend put me in the competition.
mik
--
competing is more important than winning ... must have
been some loser who said that
mik
"Dan" <dan...@freeuk.com> wrote
>
> Out of curiosity, anyone know of any gay/lesbian athletes/
> Olympians?
how about kathy howe (sp?) who won silver for britain
in the judo today? she had my gaydar going off.
mik
--
well, she and her coach
mik
"St Mym" <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote
>>
>> yuck! gimmie a russian gymnast (nemov!) any time.
>> no mym, i didn't sleep with him either
> you are slipping!
and still waiting for nemov to slip.
mik
--
slip right in
mik
"Gordon" <gor...@chello.nl> wrote
>
> Sorry, forgot you don't do Dutch.
well, sometimes. but only on weekdays.
> Come to think of it, does that nasal streamlining
nasal streamling? where did you see that?
mik
--
feeling spoilt with the fifth dutch gold
mik
"Martin" <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
> Is non-lean wiry possible?
i don't know. those pro-bodybuilders can be huge
and wiry at the same time, but would you call that
lean?
mik
--
< 4%
John Rayment
mik wrote:
> "John Rayment" <jo...@baldy.demon.co.uk> wrote
> >>
> >> skinny man running for mr gaydar
> > Ah, that *is* you on there, is it? I wondered.
>
> uh, yeah. a friend put me in the competition.
Awww bless 'em! And good luck!
BaldJohn
Gordon
>
>"Gordon" <gor...@chello.nl> wrote
>>
>> Sorry, forgot you don't do Dutch.
>
>
>
Swimmers with Concorde/TGV shaped noses have an advantage over their
blobby/button bretheren. My theory and I'm sticking to it.
Now what about packets? Perhaps there it's a case of less is more....
In any event, I'm still baffled how a fabric can give greater
aerodynamics (aquadynamics?) than the skin it sheathes.
(Nasal streaming OTOH is what I'm suffering at the moment. Have to blame
the cold on holiday shagging I suppose.)
Gordon
>On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 23:30:30 BST, in uk.gay-lesbian-bi
>mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
>|
>|> skinny man running for mr gaydar
>|
Can't see any pointer to it there. Or do you have to register first?
Martin
Register first; registered users get a slack handful of votes to
distribute in different categories.
Susan Brace
news:v81gss4jmklerubr1...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:41:11 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, "Susan Brace"
> <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
> >Writing off entire body types as "horrible" is very destructive. After
all
> >the morale-boosting, confidence-building "just be yourself, be happy, be
> >proud" advice we give to those uncertain in their sexuality, their
> >lifestyle, their looks, this kind of exchange crops up and cuts it all
off
> >at the knees.
>
> better they get the truth and construct coping mechanisms.
>
march for acceptance of diversity in today's society again.
> >Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful
>
> and female - it is different.
>
Clarify this "it" being female is different from.
--
Susan Enlightenment Brace
http://www.sobriquet.co.uk/
Susan Brace
> St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:41:11 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, "Susan Brace"
> > <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >> boys. :(
> > >Writing off entire body types as "horrible" is very destructive.
>
> There was an 'IMO' in there, and later a comment that I
> increasingly find myself attracted to those not my 'type'. So if
> I'm asked to describe my (physically) ideal man, he's going to be
> tall, dark and slim-to-skinny. But I fall for people who aren't
> any, and others will be of the shorter-is-cuter,
> blonds-are-more-fun, skeletal-not-my-thing persuasion.
>
just as obviously, these differ and encompass the entire spectrum of
humanity. My problem was with the generalistic "skinny is horrible/fat is
horrible" conversation you were having. Comments like those really do more
damage than may immediately be apparent. It's interesting that body size is
one of the few areas left where people feel free to make the most derogatory
of comments. I would be surprised to see a post stating a distaste for
disabled people, or certain ethnic groups. I would be surprised to see a
particularly strong reaction to people with glasses/long hair/wonky
teeth/facial scars/big ears, etc. They may have preferences, yet these are
not likely to be phrased in a "long hair is horrible" manner. It would be
more likely to be a positive statement (ie, "I love short hair") rather than
in a negative way, as per my previous sentence. Yet in many instances body
size is something we can do nothing about. Yes, we can diet and exercise to
slim down or bulk up, but our basic programming has already decreed our
particular morphic design. Most people wouldn't dream of posting a comment
like "dark skin is horrible" but find condemning a fat or skinny body as
such is perfectly OK.
> > >After all
> > >the morale-boosting, confidence-building "just be yourself, be happy,
be
> > >proud" advice we give to those uncertain in their sexuality, their
> > >lifestyle, their looks, this kind of exchange crops up and cuts it all
off
> > >at the knees.
>
> Why?
See above. Yes, the conversation included some acceptance of diversity, but
absolute statements such as "fat is horrible" or "I have no desire only to
be lusted after by fat boys" do not promote the "be yourself, be proud to be
different" philosophy which is usually common to this group.
> > better they get the truth and construct coping mechanisms.
>
> Indeed; and they're not the only ones.
No, best get the self-help manuals out for all those who aren't white,
middle class, thin and beautiful.
What are we saying here - don't fight it, accept it? Don't challenge
stereotyping, cope with it? Tsk, tut, and shame on you.
> I have looks that even
> those who I've had good reason to believe were fond of me have
> had trouble describing as anything better than 'individual' or
> 'interesting'. But being not exactly classically beautiful is
> just a different thing to cope with to (for instance) being
> strikingly good looking, very shy and worried that you're just
> wanted for your looks.
>
Ye-e-es. You don't tend to get magazine articles on how to have a makeover
to tone down your striking good looks though, do you? You don't get posts in
newsgroups saying "I find the whole Martin look just horrible" or "I have no
desire to be lusted after by strikingly good looking types". Pressure od a
different sort is there, yes, but it's not the inescapable body facism that
invades every form of media I can think of. Public condemnation of an entire
body type is destructive. It lowers self esteem and leads to the very
disorders you mentioned earlier.
> > >Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful
> > and female - it is different.
>
> Definitely different - not sure if better or worse, but certainly
> different.
>
How woolly you and Mym have become! What is different and how so? You can't
just say "oh, but it's different for girls" and wander off. (Well, you can
and did, but never mind). Vaguries and a dismissive hand wave. Humpf.
Patrick James
> patric...@btinternet.REMOVEcom (Patrick James) wrote:
>
> But if fats love skinnies and skinnies love fats then everything will be
> > okay?
>
> No it won't; I have no desire only to be lusted after by fat
> boys. :(
And there I was thinking I'd thought of the cure for all the world's
ills. :-)
--
Patrick
Tom Jordaan
<ho...@herons.worldonline.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >> >Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>
>Sorry I don't think he's that good looking either and besides how would you
>cope with those feet ?
>
>but if you start talking about Russian Gymnasts (male) then that's another
>story...........
Or Japanese triathletes.
--
#1: "I'm patriotic, you're a nationalist, he's a xenophobic bigot."
One, you lock the target. Two, you bait the line. Three, you slowly
spread the net, and four you catch the man. 14/07/01 @ ShoujoCon II
St Mym
<su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
>How woolly you and Mym have become! What is different and how so? You can't
>just say "oh, but it's different for girls" and wander off. (Well, you can
>and did, but never mind). Vaguries and a dismissive hand wave. Humpf.
you are making the rather unwarranted assumption that Martin and I mean
the same thing.....
--
st mym
'Habet quisque supra domum suum Jovis barbam'
Edicts of Charlemagne
St Mym
<su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
>St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote in message
>news:v81gss4jmklerubr1...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:41:11 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, "Susan Brace"
>> <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >Writing off entire body types as "horrible" is very destructive. After
>all
>> >the morale-boosting, confidence-building "just be yourself, be happy, be
>> >proud" advice we give to those uncertain in their sexuality, their
>> >lifestyle, their looks, this kind of exchange crops up and cuts it all
>off
>> >at the knees.
>>
>> better they get the truth and construct coping mechanisms.
>>
>Hmm, yes. If we all constructed better coping mechanisms we'd never have to
>march for acceptance of diversity in today's society again.
that *is* a coping mechanism dear.
St Mym
<pe...@wulfrunian.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 23:30:30 BST, in uk.gay-lesbian-bi
>mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>
>|"mik" <m...@theMarines.com> wrote:
>|
>|>
>|> "Martin" <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote
>|> >
>|> > And skinny is good. Very skinny is better. :)
>|> pfew.
>|
>|Mik was worried I didn't fancy him?
>|- like, some chance.
>|- like, he cares?
>|
>|> mik
>|> --
>|> skinny man running for mr gaydar
>|
>|Where do I vote?
>
>at http://gaydar.co.uk. I voted for Mik, mainly because he's stunning!
"Gay Lifestyle News"
blergh
Memnoch
during the olympics a few years back...
He went on to win GOLD... but secretly the only thing he was worried about
was whether or not there was any blood in the pool (yes, he is HIV+)
His autobiography was ace...
Denis C. <NoS...@odyssee.net> wrote in message
news:NoSpam-849410....@news.globetrotter.net...
> In article <8ptdnf$9d8$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, "Dan"
> <dan...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Out of curiosity, anyone know of any gay/lesbian athletes/Olympians? The
> > world of sport doesn't seem to have any openly gay
> > celebrities that I know of like the entertainment industry. Any
opinions?
> >
>
> Go there:
> <http://people.smartchat.net.au/~tonywhelan/gaysport/profiles.htm>
>
>
> Profiles of some gay/lesbian/trans-sexual sportspeople
>
>
> Mark Tewkesbury Canada Swimming
> Amelie Mauresmo France Tennis
> Ian Roberts Australia Rugby
> Lisa-Marie Vizaniari Australia Athletics
> Rudy Galindo USA Figure Skating
> Pirinya Kiatbusaba Thailand Kickboxing
> Marc Leduc Canada Boxing
> Greg Louganis USA Diving
> Martina Navratilova USA Tennis
> Bob Paris USA Bodybuilding
> David Pichler USA Diving
> Billy Bean USA Baseball
> David Kopay USA American Football
> Justin Fashinu Britain Soccer
> Billy Jean King USA Tennis
> Chris Dickerson USA Bodybuilding
> Peter Prijdekker Britain Swimming
> Eric Anderson USA Athletics coaching
> Gina Guidi USA Boxing
> Dan Veatch USA Swimming
> Craig Rogerson Australia Diving
> Bruce Hayes USA Swimming
> Muffin Spencer-Devlin USA Golf
> Savoy Howe Canada Boxing
> Patrick Jeffrey USA Diving
>
>
> DC
>
> --
> Pour m'écrire/To e-mail me
> Remplacez/Remove
> "NoSpam" par/by "albatros"
>
OFC
St Mym wrote in message ...
>Hmm, yes. If we all constructed better coping mechanisms we'd never
>have to march for acceptance of diversity in today's society again.
that *is* a coping mechanism dear.
So how is it that I march (well, saunter elegantly more like) but I'm not
coping?
Owain
THE Adrian
>Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
>inner-city starvation.
Mmmmm - inner-city starvation
--
THE Adrian *** ICQ 43690725 ***
tel: +44 701 0701 449
fax: +44 701 0701 949
graham
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:01:19 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, "graham"
> <use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >There is a third way.
>
> yes, contented celibacy
No, that's the fourth way.
--
graham
immerse your soul in love
http://www.vendetta.demon.co.uk
graham
> "graham" <use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > "graham" <use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
> > > 'Lean but wiry'?
> > Doesn't have to be lean, 'though wiry is nice.
>
> Is non-lean wiry possible?
Um, don't know. I was very tired last night and I'm not entirely sure where
that came from. (Being tired, however, didn't stop me from reading Harry
Potter and the Prisoner of Azerbaijan 'til 2am, and was thus even more tired
when the alarm went off at 7 this morning. Damn that woman.)
> > By 'chunky' I'm meaning sort of less solid than Stephen Gately and more
> > solid than me, if you get me.
>
> Not had the opportunity for a detailed check of either. :(
I'll lend you that video he and I made together a few years ago.
St Mym
<odot...@redhotant.com> wrote:
argh, sort out that quoting!
>St Mym wrote in message ...
no...
susan wrote:
> >Hmm, yes. If we all constructed better coping mechanisms we'd never
> >have to march for acceptance of diversity in today's society again.
I wrote
> that *is* a coping mechanism dear.
you wrote
>So how is it that I march (well, saunter elegantly more like) but I'm not
>coping?
You just haven't earned it yet baby.
Matthew Malthouse
"Gordon" <gor...@chello.nl> wrote:
} >|"mik" <m...@theMarines.com> wrote:
} >|
} >|> skinny man running for mr gaydar
} >|
} >|Where do I vote?
} >
} >at http://gaydar.co.uk.
}
} Can't see any pointer to it there. Or do you have to register first?
You do. No cost except, I expect, some ad-mail.
Matthew
--
Nos divergences sont si pures / Et nos conflits si genereux
Vivons ensemble et je te jure / Que nous serons tres malheureux
Matthew Malthouse
"Kapitano" <kapi...@lineone.net> wrote:
} graham <use...@vendetta.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
} news:969397248.4475.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
} > > > Skinny is horrible
} > > And, IMO, fat's horrible.
} > There is a third way.
} >
} > Some call it 'chunky'. Others call it 'not skeletal'.
} >
} > And it's the one I like.
}
} There's also a forth way.
} It's called 'too-dark-to-see-too-desperate-to-care'.
And "Mon dieu! That's a hand-made shirt..."
Matthew (See sig.)
Matthew Malthouse
"Susan Brace" <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
} > >Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful
} >
} > and female - it is different.
} >
}
} Clarify this "it" being female is different from.
I have no idea quite what either Mark or Martin consider different, but
agree with them in as far as I find it is.
When my aesthetic sense is engaged by the male form thin is definitely a
significant factor. It is exceedingly rare that non-thin produces a
positive response.
However considering the female form thin or otherwise is far far less
significant. On my wall there is a collection of Athena-type "it's art and
therefor not porn" post-cards. 14 images of the male centered around a
single image of the female. The woman is non-thin, and the picture very
beautiful.
There is definitely a strong link between aesthetic sense and libido. But
quite strong and in which direction it may be causative I am really
uncertain about. Additionally how much of either are genetically
influenced and how much culturally?
Matthew
Dave Hughes
>>>There Is Hope. :-)
>>And where might we find him? ;-)
>
>Just up the road from Caergwrle...
Live in Hope, die in Caergwrle :o)
D
Kapitano
> Swimmers with Concorde/TGV shaped noses have an advantage over their
> blobby/button bretheren. My theory and I'm sticking to it.
In that case, pointed swimming caps should be more aquadynamic than
those which follow the round contours of the head.
> Now what about packets? Perhaps there it's a case of less is more....
Coach to student: "I'm sorry, I can't put you in the team. You genitalia are
too large - they slow you down in the water. However, I'm going to give you
extra personal training to make up for it...just the two of us."
> In any event, I'm still baffled how a fabric can give greater
> aerodynamics (aquadynamics?) than the skin it sheathes.
Well, I suppose male genitals dangling in the water from a prone horizontal
swimmer would marginally increase drag. While those neatly packaged into
a smooth bump allow water to flow smoothly over[1].
In any case, the real reason for swimwear is obvious. If swimmers weren't
nominally covered up, the purity of the sport would be marred by people tuning
in just to look at the bodies of the competitors. And swimming attire ensures
that no one does that.
Do they :-)
> (Nasal streaming OTOH is what I'm suffering at the moment. Have to blame
> the cold on holiday shagging I suppose.)
"Sorry boss, can't come into work. I'm shagged out. No, not tierd - shagged out."
[1] I'm not enjoying writing this *at all*. Can you tell? :-)
--
Kapitano
Today's Useful Word:-
Plim /plIm/: Swell, fill out, grow plump.
Tom Jordaan
>Quoth St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net>:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 20:58:06 BST, being the year 2753 AUC,
>> mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin) wrote:
>>
>> >Paul Williams <ag...@NOSPAMholism.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> Skinny is horrible. They all look like some horrendous outbreak of
>> >> inner-city starvation.
>> >
>> >And, IMO, fat's horrible; they all look like some horrendous
>> >outbreak of mid-West couch-potato pizza and burger scoffing.
>>
>> you say potayto and I say potahto.....
>
>You say lee-sure, and we say lijure-yay.
>You say erbs, and we say herbs, because it's got a fucking "h" in it.
You forgot:
"We say bahsil, you say baysil."
>Moof - who has watched too much Izzard
*aol*
"Sudden Interest In Botany setting...."
Tom Jordaan
>On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:50:36 BST, "Martyn Gore"
><ho...@herons.worldonline.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> >> >> >Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>>
>>Sorry I don't think he's that good looking either and besides how would you
>>cope with those feet ?
>>
>>but if you start talking about Russian Gymnasts (male) then that's another
>>story...........
>
>Or Ukranian gymnasts.........
>Or even Chinese gymnasts...........
What do you mean, "even"? ^_-
noog...@cwcom.net
wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 06:49:05 BST, noog...@cwcom.net wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:50:36 BST, "Martyn Gore"
>><ho...@herons.worldonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> >> >> >Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>>>
>>>Sorry I don't think he's that good looking either and besides how would you
>>>cope with those feet ?
>>>
>>>but if you start talking about Russian Gymnasts (male) then that's another
>>>story...........
>>
>>Or Ukranian gymnasts.........
>>Or even Chinese gymnasts...........
>
>What do you mean, "even"? ^_-
Spoilt for choice :-)
Martin
> Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:LMs0Omt287po-pn2-wIqnR2XM28GJ@localhost...
> > St Mym <ne...@druidic.isles.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 00:41:11 BST, being the year 2753 AUC, "Susan Brace"
> > > <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Martin <mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > >> No it won't; I have no desire only to be lusted after by fat
> > > >> boys. :(
> > > >Writing off entire body types as "horrible" is very destructive.
> >
> > There was an 'IMO' in there, and later a comment that I
> > increasingly find myself attracted to those not my 'type'. So if
> > I'm asked to describe my (physically) ideal man, he's going to be
> > tall, dark and slim-to-skinny. But I fall for people who aren't
> > any, and others will be of the shorter-is-cuter,
> > blonds-are-more-fun, skeletal-not-my-thing persuasion.
> >
> Yes, I saw your subsequent comments. Obviously everyone has preferences, and
> just as obviously, these differ and encompass the entire spectrum of
> humanity. My problem was with the generalistic "skinny is horrible/fat is
> horrible" conversation you were having. Comments like those really do more
> damage than may immediately be apparent. It's interesting that body size is
> one of the few areas left where people feel free to make the most derogatory
> of comments. I would be surprised to see a post stating a distaste for
> disabled people, or certain ethnic groups.
Strong *preference* for ethnic groups seems OK, though (so long
as that isn't explicitly 'white', though fancying blonds seems
OK), which is only the flip side of dislike for other groups.
And body shape is controllable; the reason I'm skinny rather than
"swimmer's build" is I don't eat enough and I don't lift weights.
The reason people are overweight (whatever their genetic
predisposition) is they eat more food than they burn in exercise.
Either people are happy with their body, or they change it, or
they cope with what they have as the effort to change isn't worth
it to them.
> I would be surprised to see a
> particularly strong reaction to people with glasses/long hair/wonky
> teeth/facial scars/big ears, etc. They may have preferences, yet these are
> not likely to be phrased in a "long hair is horrible" manner.
Ask Matthew about that one. :)
>It would be
> more likely to be a positive statement (ie, "I love short hair") rather than
> in a negative way, as per my previous sentence. Yet in many instances body
> size is something we can do nothing about.
I refuse to believe that. I think a lot of people tell
themselves/others that to disguise their lack of self-discipline
in sorting it.
>Yes, we can diet and exercise to
> slim down or bulk up, but our basic programming has already decreed our
> particular morphic design.
Which just changes the emphasis of exercise - whether aerobic
fat-burning or anaerobic muscle-building is stressed. In the
days when I used to do serious gym-rattery, I saw a lot of people
with sterotyped 9-stone-weakling or couch-potato physiques
transform them. Whether you think this is laudable or not is
another argument - it's certainly possible.
> Most people wouldn't dream of posting a comment
> like "dark skin is horrible" but find condemning a fat or skinny body as
> such is perfectly OK.
I've had it made pretty clear by others that a body where you can
see every rib (and the ones on the back with a strong light) is
not something they want to experience with the lights off. :)
If it were *everyone* saying that, it might well hurt. But as
we've established, there's a diversity of tastes and some are
attracted by that which repels others.
> See above. Yes, the conversation included some acceptance of diversity, but
> absolute statements such as "fat is horrible" or "I have no desire only to
> be lusted after by fat boys" do not promote the "be yourself, be proud to be
> different" philosophy which is usually common to this group.
I think you'll find there was an 'only' between 'lusted after'
and 'by fat boys', which changes the meaning quite radically.
> > > better they get the truth and construct coping mechanisms.
> > Indeed; and they're not the only ones.
> No, best get the self-help manuals out for all those who aren't white,
> middle class, thin and beautiful.
Rather more useful than giving the impression the world's a
hug-machine, IMO. Yes people are valuable for themselves and as
individuals. But that's not most people's experience of the
world, so if there's any self help manuals going (including for
the thin-white-and-beautiful) they'd be useful.
> > I have looks that even
> > those who I've had good reason to believe were fond of me have
> > had trouble describing as anything better than 'individual' or
> > 'interesting'. But being not exactly classically beautiful is
> > just a different thing to cope with to (for instance) being
> > strikingly good looking, very shy and worried that you're just
> > wanted for your looks.
> Ye-e-es. You don't tend to get magazine articles on how to have a makeover
> to tone down your striking good looks though, do you?
No. But that doesn't mean that those people don't have problems
caused by their looks, just that they aren't the ones the media
concentrates on.
>You don't get posts in newsgroups saying "I find the whole
Martin look just horrible"
I wouldn't be very surprised if there were...
>or "I have no
> desire to be lusted after by strikingly good looking types". Pressure od a
> different sort is there, yes, but it's not the inescapable body facism that
> invades every form of media I can think of. Public condemnation of an entire
> body type is destructive. It lowers self esteem and leads to the very
> disorders you mentioned earlier.
I thought it was 'every body type that wouldn't look right on a
Milan catwalk' that was condemned implicitly by the glossy press,
which puts most of us in the same boat?
> > > >Incidentally, I'm rapidly approaching 33, am big, fat and beautiful
> > > and female - it is different.
> > Definitely different - not sure if better or worse, but certainly
> > different.
> How woolly you and Mym have become! What is different and how so? You can't
> just say "oh, but it's different for girls" and wander off. (Well, you can
> and did, but never mind). Vaguries and a dismissive hand wave. Humpf.
OK, I'll try but I haven't done lust-for-women for a good few
years now, and judging sexual attractiveness of the bodies of a
group of people one on the whole doesn't lust after is an odd
exercise.
That being said, there's certainly a straight male positive view
of women big enough to be wrapped up in - goes with the breast
size thing, I think.
Matthew Malthouse
} "Susan Brace" <su...@sobriquet.co.uk> wrote:
}
} > I would be surprised to see a
} > particularly strong reaction to people with glasses/long hair/wonky
} > teeth/facial scars/big ears, etc. They may have preferences, yet these are
} > not likely to be phrased in a "long hair is horrible" manner.
}
} Ask Matthew about that one. :)
"Long hair is ugly" is a direct quote from a post in this group.
More frequently it's been made clear (by means subtle or not) that a
person simply could *not* bring themselves to sleep with someone who
had long hair.
I was pleased to read in "Tetu" (French "Attitude" analogue) that
long-ish hair was coming back in.
Matthew
--
Ni bhéarfainn broim dreólín ar dhuilleog
cuillin agus is beag an puth gaoth é sin!
Seldolivaw
<ho...@herons.worldonline.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >> >Ah. No sign of the phworrrgeous Ian Thorpe coming out then....?
>
>Sorry I don't think he's that good looking either and besides how would you
>cope with those feet ?
>
>but if you start talking about Russian Gymnasts (male) then that's another
>story...........
I have to admit I have taken rather a lot of interest in the Olympics
this week. <JAR JAR BINKS> He-sa gotta cheekbones, misa like-ah </JAR
JAR BINKS>
And while Thorpedo is quite nice, I was much more impressed by the
other three members of the team...
Seldo.
--
Seldolivaw - www.seldo.com
uk...@seldo.com, UIN 1172379
----
"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons" -- Popular Mechanics, 1949.
Seldolivaw
wrote:
>> Swimmers with Concorde/TGV shaped noses have an advantage over their
>> blobby/button bretheren. My theory and I'm sticking to it.
Much as I'm dubious about that theory, one has to admit that Thorpe's
face really *is* shaped like the prow of a speedboat, the nose
providing a streamlined keel.
> In that case, pointed swimming caps should be more aquadynamic than
>those which follow the round contours of the head.
Possibly. Quick! To the patent office, boy wonder!
>> In any event, I'm still baffled how a fabric can give greater
>> aerodynamics (aquadynamics?) than the skin it sheathes.
Not sure if anyone has answered this question before, but the
full-body suits the Australians are wearing are the famous
"sharksuits" over which there was quite a lot of controversy about a
year ago. The material is covered in a pattern of microscopic v-shaped
indentations, which create a pattern of turbulence which apparently
reduces drag. IIRC, it wasn't developed in Australia, but their
swimming team was the first to request it as equipment for their
olympic team.
The reason it's called a "sharksuit" is because (after they developed
the fabric) it was discovered that the skin of sharks has a similar
pattern in almost identical shapes. The level of drag-reduction was in
the area of 10-15%, but keep in mind that all this information comes
from a single article I read several months ago, so it's likely to be
very inaccurate :-)
> In any case, the real reason for swimwear is obvious. If swimmers weren't
>nominally covered up, the purity of the sport would be marred by people tuning
>in just to look at the bodies of the competitors. And swimming attire ensures
>that no one does that.
> Do they :-)
<changes channel quickly>
Seldo.
P.S. I wonder a subset of rubber-fetishists will emerge now,
interested in wearing the sharksuits? I understand the drag reduction
is in one direction only.
Seldolivaw
wrote:
>> It's interesting that body size is
>> one of the few areas left where people feel free to make the most derogatory
>> of comments. I would be surprised to see a post stating a distaste for
>> disabled people, or certain ethnic groups.
>...body shape is controllable; the reason I'm skinny rather than
>"swimmer's build" is I don't eat enough and I don't lift weights.
> The reason people are overweight (whatever their genetic
>predisposition) is they eat more food than they burn in exercise.
> Either people are happy with their body, or they change it, or
>they cope with what they have as the effort to change isn't worth
>it to them.
It is very easy to say that body-shape is controllable when one is
very thin.
Personally, I'm certain that some people are just naturally heavier
than others and, indeed, would look decidedly unusual if they did lose
a lot of weight. "Natural" weight and the theoretical "ideal" weight
do not necessarily coincide.
And I agree that weight is one of those facets of a person that nobody
seems to mind making negative comments about. Even if you don't agree
that it's damaging to make negative comments about stuff you dislike
instead of positive comments about stuff you prefer, you'd hardly hear
somebody who likes blondes say "I can't stand dark hair" or "dark hair
is horrible". When expressing an opinion, surely one should state what
one's opinion *is*, not what it isn't. Especially since one would make
a blonde person feel good, and the other would make a dark-haired
person feel bad. Saying "I like thin people" seems to be more
complimentary, since it would make people feel good about being thin,
rather than worrying that they are not "thin enough".
Just to confuse my position further, however, I don't believe that one
should pretend that one has no preferences about what looks good in a
partner. Obviously it's silly to be fascist about it, and to ignore
people who don't fit your ideal, but you'd be lying if you said you
had no preferences. We all know that there is a current ideal
body-shape touted by the media. However, such a shape is arbitrary and
in just the last 50 years that shape has fluctuated considerably, and
in the last 200 years it has changed an enormous amount. It will
doubtless continue to change, and one day people will be on all-fat
diets to try and reach the healthy, buxom look being touted by
_Attitude_'s May 2050 issue.
Seldo.
Stephen M Baines
<uk...@seldo.com> writes
>P.S. I wonder a subset of rubber-fetishists will emerge now,
>interested in wearing the sharksuits? I understand the drag reduction
>is in one direction only.
<shallow>
For this household, it's severely dented our enthusiasm for watching the
swimming :-( OTOH, one or two good examples who haven't gone that route
have stood out somewhat, and I look forward to the diving starting on
Friday, where I imagine they won't be wearing the shark suits.
</shallow>
--
Stephen M Baines
http://www.kitschcamppalace.org.uk/ PGP DH/DSS 0x34756A75
PGP RSA 0x8C3AFC93
Martin
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 12:42:13 BST, mar...@speedsix.demon.co.uk (Martin)
> wrote:
> >...body shape is controllable; the reason I'm skinny rather than
> >"swimmer's build" is I don't eat enough and I don't lift weights.
> > The reason people are overweight (whatever their genetic
> >predisposition) is they eat more food than they burn in exercise.
> > Either people are happy with their body, or they change it, or
> >they cope with what they have as the effort to change isn't worth
> >it to them.
>
> It is very easy to say that body-shape is controllable when one is
> very thin.
Not when you *want* to be slim-but-muscled - it is/was seriously
hard work to get weight on in the right places.
> Personally, I'm certain that some people are just naturally heavier
> than others and, indeed, would look decidedly unusual if they did lose
> a lot of weight. "Natural" weight and the theoretical "ideal" weight
> do not necessarily coincide.
Agreed, but it's an area where people practice massive
self-deception along the 'heavy bones' lines. When looking
themselves up on height/weight charts, the overweight will
disproprotionately describe themselves as 'large frame' in the
hope of creeping into the 'acceptable' range.
And similar findings come from comparing what people _say_ they
eat and then logging what they _actually_ eat.
All the research I've seen suggests that, on the whole, fatter
people eat more and exercise less than thinner people.
And, more to the point, it's true of individuals. After all,
it's not particularly useful to know how your physique responds
compared to others, but how different conditions affect ones own
body is useful.
For instance, having done it back in the far distant past, I know
that adding 8 pints of beer a day to my calorie intake and
eliminating almost all exercise will run me up to a 34' waist in
short order. And skinny boys with beer bellies really do look
vile; trust me, I saw one in a mirror for long enough.
> And I agree that weight is one of those facets of a person that nobody
> seems to mind making negative comments about. Even if you don't agree
> that it's damaging to make negative comments about stuff you dislike
> instead of positive comments about stuff you prefer, you'd hardly hear
> somebody who likes blondes say "I can't stand dark hair" or "dark hair
> is horrible". When expressing an opinion, surely one should state what
> one's opinion *is*, not what it isn't.
Even if the opinion is 'that revolts me'? What I think you're
suggesting is expressing that opinion in the positive rather than
the negative. Which is an acceptable non-confrontational speech
trick. It's as useful as saying 'it makes me feel unhappy when
our discussion end in rows' rather than 'You're always shouting
at me'.
> Especially since one would make
> a blonde person feel good, and the other would make a dark-haired
> person feel bad.
Try it; go on, say dark hair turns you off and see if it breaks
my heart. :)
To be fair it isn't parallel; people are perfectly aware that
people of all hair colours are considered 'attractive', but know
that, in general, some body shapes are considered 'attractive and
some 'not attractive'.
> Saying "I like thin people" seems to be more
> complimentary, since it would make people feel good about being thin,
> rather than worrying that they are not "thin enough".
Depends how they feel it, surely. I'm conscious that I'm wearing
trousers an inch larger than I prefer to, but I know that's
because I haven't been road running seriously for a while.
Eventually I'll do something about it.
It'd be a different matter if worrying about not being thin
enough was some form of anorexic delusion not based in real life
or experience.
> Just to confuse my position further, however, I don't believe that one
> should pretend that one has no preferences about what looks good in a
> partner. Obviously it's silly to be fascist about it, and to ignore
> people who don't fit your ideal, but you'd be lying if you said you
> had no preferences.
Indeed. Ideals are fun for fantasy and pinups; the reality of
who we fall for is another matter.
> We all know that there is a current ideal
> body-shape touted by the media. However, such a shape is arbitrary and
> in just the last 50 years that shape has fluctuated considerably, and
> in the last 200 years it has changed an enormous amount.
True to an extent, if you're comparing catwalk models and
pre-Raphaelite buxom women. But the media these days also
includes a substantial 'health' sector, which is promoting
fitness, diet and body fat levels backed by research science,
which is unlikely to change radically.
> It will
> doubtless continue to change, and one day people will be on all-fat
> diets to try and reach the healthy, buxom look being touted by
> _Attitude_'s May 2050 issue.
Let's hope not; the NHS has enough heart disease to deal with as
it is.