Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman
MrChoCoColate
I don't know about you but I think that would be the worst thing the makers
of the new Spiderman movie could do. Having Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman
is like having Steven Segal in the Godfather. And talking about the
Godfather, Leo Dicap almost ended up getting a part in the new Godfather
movie that almost was until it's creator passed away. Talking about nothing,
he was offered to play Anakin Skywalker in Episode 2 of StarWars. Why is he
so famous anyways?
MrChoCoColate
contender to be the next Spiderman it received a record amount of responses,
thousands upon thousands, I think that a couple of sites have already set up
petitions against it. We'll see what happens.
MrChoCoColate wrote in message ...
Dire Wolf
Nick Cage would make a good Spidey!
Paul
"MrChoCoColate" <brai...@sprint.ca> wrote in message
news:o15n4.15342$XT4.1...@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
Helen & Bob
MrChoCoColate wrote:
> What do you think about Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman??????????
>
I am not a comic book fan. I will (99% probability) not go to the theater to
see this film. Most likely I will not rent this movie, unless I am desperate,
and its $1.00 nite.
BUT, EVEN WITH ALL OF THAT:
The thought of Little Lenny in that part makes me nauseous.
Bob ( And I thought he was fairly good in The IRON MASK".
RPP
<brai...@sprint.ca> wrote:
>What do you think about Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman??????????
I grew up in a totally different culture, so was never a comic bok
reader. But isnt the idea of a super hero somebody who is not a total
fag?
The Edge
Bill Carr
Lambs sequel?
RPP
wrote:
>
>Your statement is ignorant, firstly because you don't know anything
>about Leo's sexual habits and if he WERE gay,
Im not asserting he is gay. However he acts it, and as such projects
the effeminite image of a homosexual.
>that doesn't make him
>less of a person. Personally, I don't care for him that much, but I
>doubt you could surpass him due to your ignorance and stupidity.
>
Im not sure what you mean by surpassing him, but I could pound his
face if he came to destroy the environment I live in.
nospam KungFuGrip
wrote:
>Isn't he also going to take over Jodie Foster's role in the Silence of the
>Lambs sequel?
>
>
If Ewan Macgregor could americanize his accent a little,he would make
a pretty good spidey.He has the wiry build to play him.Not so sure he
could pull off the witty banter,tho.
"Ey,Mysterio!I'm gonna shove that fishbowl up your arse!"
--------------------------------------------
Me gusta mi reggae
Me gusta punk rock
pero la cosa que me gusta más es panochinta
Ryan O'Reilly
Spider-Man. It's not the first person I'd chose to play Spidey but if it means
that Leo isn't going to do it I am all for J.L.
MrChoCoColate wrote:
> What do you think about Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman??????????
>
Ryan O'Reilly
Dire Wolf wrote:
> Nick Cage would make a good Spidey!
>
> Paul
> "MrChoCoColate" <brai...@sprint.ca> wrote in message
> news:o15n4.15342$XT4.1...@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
Hzou Fei©
Karel Jansens
of Spiderman and star in it as well?
Would I need therapy for making such a wish?
"Hzou Fei©" <blah...@blah.net> wrote:
Karel Jansens
jansens_at_attglobal_dot_net
=======================================================
"The method employed I would gladly explain,
While I have it so clear in my head,
If I had but the time and you had but the brain -
But much yet remains to be said."
the Hunting of the Snark (Lewis Carroll)
=======================================================
Dave Leckie
That doesn't make him gay. It makes him weak. There's a difference.
I have to say, RPP, that you have in the past said things that have been
somewhat reasonable. However, I think too many people take offense if
you say something is "fag"-like. I don't know why you seem to think
that Leonardo acts homosexual, because as far as I'm concerned, there is
no "homosexual" or "heterosexual" way of acting other than either going
out with those of the same sex or of the opposite sex. I wear bright
clothing. Does this make me gay? Christ, I wear pink T-shirts all the
time... am I a homosexual? Because if I am, I think my girlfriend might
like to know that...
I'd ask you to define what you mean by "he acts like it", but I'll tell
you no matter what you tell me is wrong, because there is no way to "act
like" a "fag". Unless, of course, you prefer the company of the same
sex. Leonardo DiCaprio has never in my knowledge done that, so anything
you say would be something a "fag" would do would either be wrong, or
wouldn't apply to Dicaprio.
I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'd just like you to be a bit more
careful with what you say. I know people are fed up with
political-correctedness, but I do get offended to think that something
other than preffered gender has anything to do with being gay. I know
too many gay people to think that way.
--
Silliness,
Dave
Dr. Riff-Raff in training
Winner, "Most viscious list", 1999
Remove NOSPAM for e-mail
*****************************************************
* JTBretherick *
* proudly bestows upon you, *
* ____Dave Leckie_____, *
* __ _ *
* \ / | | | | | | | \ *
* \ ^ / | |\ | |\ | |_ |_/ *
* \ / \ / | | \| | \| | |\ *
* V V | | | | | |__ | \ *
* ******************************* *
* *
* MOST VISCIOUS AWARD 1999 *
* ************************ *
* *
* On the 15th Day of December, 1999 AD *
* "That others may flame." *
* *
*****************************************************
Dave Leckie
MrChoCoColate wrote:
>
> What do you think about Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman??????????
>
> I don't know about you but I think that would be the worst thing the makers
> of the new Spiderman movie could do. Having Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman
> is like having Steven Segal in the Godfather. And talking about the
> Godfather, Leo Dicap almost ended up getting a part in the new Godfather
> movie that almost was until it's creator passed away. Talking about nothing,
> he was offered to play Anakin Skywalker in Episode 2 of StarWars. Why is he
> so famous anyways?
Christ, everybody's been rumored to be the next Spiderman. I don't like
the idea of Leo. His voice is too squeaky. I like the idea of Ewan. I
prefer the idea of Bruce Campbell. I think Ben Affleck would be
horrible. A no-name would be idyllic.
Terry
Bill Carr <mrh...@toast.net> wrote in message
news:389d...@news.toast.net...
PeLo
RPP
<ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>
>> Im not sure what you mean by surpassing him, but I could pound his
>> face if he came to destroy the environment I live in.
>
>That doesn't make him gay. It makes him weak. There's a difference.
Alright, maybe he isnt gay. I may be mistaken but we dont know. He is
one of the best candidates for a future "shocking" coming out, if not
THE best. Lets wait and see. However, he is a sissy boy, that we can
agree on, and thats in no way better than being gay.
>
>I have to say, RPP, that you have in the past said things that have been
>somewhat reasonable. However, I think too many people take offense if
>you say something is "fag"-like. I don't know why you seem to think
>that Leonardo acts homosexual, because as far as I'm concerned, there is
>no "homosexual" or "heterosexual" way of acting other than either going
>out with those of the same sex or of the opposite sex. I wear bright
>clothing. Does this make me gay? Christ, I wear pink T-shirts all the
>time... am I a homosexual? Because if I am, I think my girlfriend might
>like to know that...
>
Oh come on. Are you seriously telling me there is no way of acting
gay? You cant be serious. Even you, in your ultra-PC mindset, could
NOT deny that if you saw a guy lwith a lisp in his voice, effeminite
body language (limp wrist etc), etc, would not recognize him as being
gay. Now I am fully aware that not AL gay people act this way, but
those that do ARE easily recognizable as gay.
>I'd ask you to define what you mean by "he acts like it", but I'll tell
>you no matter what you tell me is wrong, because there is no way to "act
>like" a "fag". Unless, of course, you prefer the company of the same
>sex. Leonardo DiCaprio has never in my knowledge done that, so anything
>you say would be something a "fag" would do would either be wrong, or
>wouldn't apply to Dicaprio.
>
>I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'd just like you to be a bit more
>careful with what you say. I know people are fed up with
>political-correctedness, but I do get offended to think that something
>other than preffered gender has anything to do with being gay. I know
>too many gay people to think that way.
>
I hate PC. This is why you wont ever see me conform to it. I know it
may offend a LOT of people, I have already done that on a few other
very large newsgroups, but I am not going to be a PC stooge just to
fit in. PC is highly immoral and its an evil that is being shoved down
our throats by the media and the special interests groups, and it is
the Inquisition of the late 20th, soon to be 21st century.
Sean
to rebel against. I don't know too many people who are fond of the
extremist track PCism has taken, but to wontonly disregard every
convention of polite behaviour simply because of a misguided trend, is
about as juvenile and ineffectual a form of rebellion as exists.
Rude and insulting only impresses children and defines you more
clearly than, if you were aware, you would be comfortable with.
RPP
>It is important to show discretion and intelligence when choosing what
>to rebel against. I don't know too many people who are fond of the
>extremist track PCism has taken, but to wontonly disregard every
>convention of polite behaviour simply because of a misguided trend, is
>about as juvenile and ineffectual a form of rebellion as exists.
Thats where you are wrong. PC must be hit all the time at every
opportunity. It is mind fascism and thought control.
Dave Leckie
Where the hell did you get that from? PC was supposed to be the exact
opposite. Personally, I am fed up with the whole re-naming of things.
However, derogatory comments, like "nigger" or "fag" or stuff like that
I personally am against. And if you want anybody to take you seriously,
I suggest that you not use terms like that. However, what I am against
is the whole "Chronically Impaired" (Retarded) or "Vertically
Challenged" (short) thing. There is to one point that PC has gone too
far. I took a class last year that involved lots of team building and
trust exercises (It was for Coast Guard training). My teachers (a
husband-wife team) would tell us from time to time with complete
sincerity that they loved each and every one of us in the class as
family. It wasn't PC, but they meant it. The fact that people
"shouldn't" do that does bug me.
However, using derogatory terms to describe something perfectly normal
(such as "fag") gives people reason to be offended and not take you
seriously.
And I find it interesting that you say that Leonardo has that whole
"lisp in his voice, effeminite body language". I've never seen him do
the whole limp-wrist thing. I understand that lots of gay men do this
intentionally. Like I said, you can try and define what is "acting"
like a "fag", but it either a) won't be true, or b) won't apply to Leo.
Something that really bugged me that you said was "However, he is a
sissy boy, that we can agree on, and thats in no way better than being
gay."
We can agree with it. Because there's nothing bad about being gay. If
you think otherwise, I believe you can fuck yourself. Gay is a
perfectly normal thing. There was some statistic I saw that said 1 out
of every 10 people are gay. Sure, being gay means you're part of a
minority, but so is being Latino, or black. There is, however, no
problem with being either of those.
Also, what does being a sissy have to do with being gay? I used to get
beat up a lot in Junior High. Does that make me gay? Because I was a
sissy in Middle School? Or was I gay then and now I'm "fixed"?
Being gay is just the same as preferring Coke over Pepsi. It's not
infectuous, nor something acquired or lost, nor does it really tell much
about the person other than what they prefer. Anybody who tells you
otherwise doesn't know the first thing about it.
Speedbyrd
>On Sat, 05 Feb 2000 22:01:21 -0800, Speedbyrd <Spee...@205.17.9.40>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Your statement is ignorant, firstly because you don't know anything
>>about Leo's sexual habits and if he WERE gay,
>
>Im not asserting he is gay. However he acts it, and as such projects
>the effeminite image of a homosexual.
>
>>that doesn't make him
>>less of a person. Personally, I don't care for him that much, but I
>>doubt you could surpass him due to your ignorance and stupidity.
>>
>
>Im not sure what you mean by surpassing him, but I could pound his
>face if he came to destroy the environment I live in.
you have some serious problems with paranoia and pent up frustration.
BTW, how did LDC 'destroy' anyone's environment? He doesn't control
WHERE his films are made. Get a grip on yourself.
The Speedbyrd® :>
______________________________________________________________
Posted via Uncensored-News.Com, http://www.uncensored-news.com
Only $8.95 A Month, - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Speedbyrd
<ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>
>
>RPP wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 05 Feb 2000 22:01:21 -0800, Speedbyrd <Spee...@205.17.9.40>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Your statement is ignorant, firstly because you don't know anything
>> >about Leo's sexual habits and if he WERE gay,
>>
>> Im not asserting he is gay. However he acts it, and as such projects
>> the effeminite image of a homosexual.
>>
>> >that doesn't make him
>> >less of a person. Personally, I don't care for him that much, but I
>> >doubt you could surpass him due to your ignorance and stupidity.
>> >
>>
>> Im not sure what you mean by surpassing him, but I could pound his
>> face if he came to destroy the environment I live in.
>
>That doesn't make him gay. It makes him weak. There's a difference.
>
>I have to say, RPP, that you have in the past said things that have been
>somewhat reasonable. However, I think too many people take offense if
>you say something is "fag"-like. I don't know why you seem to think
>that Leonardo acts homosexual, because as far as I'm concerned, there is
>no "homosexual" or "heterosexual" way of acting other than either going
>out with those of the same sex or of the opposite sex. I wear bright
>clothing. Does this make me gay? Christ, I wear pink T-shirts all the
>time... am I a homosexual? Because if I am, I think my girlfriend might
>like to know that...
>
>I'd ask you to define what you mean by "he acts like it", but I'll tell
>you no matter what you tell me is wrong, because there is no way to "act
>like" a "fag". Unless, of course, you prefer the company of the same
>sex. Leonardo DiCaprio has never in my knowledge done that, so anything
>you say would be something a "fag" would do would either be wrong, or
>wouldn't apply to Dicaprio.
>
>I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'd just like you to be a bit more
>careful with what you say. I know people are fed up with
>political-correctedness, but I do get offended to think that something
>other than preffered gender has anything to do with being gay. I know
>too many gay people to think that way.
Excellent post!!! I can add nothing to it. Thank you.
Speedbyrd
>On Tue, 08 Feb 2000 15:05:15 -0800, Speedbyrd <Spee...@201.5.18.30>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 06 Feb 2000 06:09:23 GMT, le...@mail.neinc.ca (RPP) wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 05 Feb 2000 22:01:21 -0800, Speedbyrd <Spee...@205.17.9.40>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Your statement is ignorant, firstly because you don't know anything
>>>>about Leo's sexual habits and if he WERE gay,
>>>
>>>Im not asserting he is gay. However he acts it, and as such projects
>>>the effeminite image of a homosexual.
>>>
>>>>that doesn't make him
>>>>less of a person. Personally, I don't care for him that much, but I
>>>>doubt you could surpass him due to your ignorance and stupidity.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Im not sure what you mean by surpassing him, but I could pound his
>>>face if he came to destroy the environment I live in.
>>
>>
>>you have some serious problems with paranoia and pent up frustration.
>
>No, I dont.
>>
>>BTW, how did LDC 'destroy' anyone's environment? He doesn't control
>>WHERE his films are made. Get a grip on yourself.
>>
>
>You are kidding. If Leo said he would not film on a destroyed beach,
>you think they would force him? Hes not a slave of the studios.
No, they wouldn't have forced him. If they really wanted to make the
film where they did, they would have found another actor. He's not
indispensable and better certainly could have been found. It wouldn't
be the first time a major actor was overthrown in favor of a studio
decision.
Why is this whole thing such a big deal to you? Do you really hate
this guy THAT much? What did he do to you?
RPP
<ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>
>
>RPP wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 08 Feb 2000 18:04:19 GMT, gyu...@hotmail.com (Sean) wrote:
>>
>> >It is important to show discretion and intelligence when choosing what
>> >to rebel against. I don't know too many people who are fond of the
>> >extremist track PCism has taken, but to wontonly disregard every
>> >convention of polite behaviour simply because of a misguided trend, is
>> >about as juvenile and ineffectual a form of rebellion as exists.
>>
>> Thats where you are wrong. PC must be hit all the time at every
>> opportunity. It is mind fascism and thought control.
>
>Where the hell did you get that from? PC was supposed to be the exact
>opposite.
The opposite? How can any ideology that assumes to tell everyone what
thoughts are acceptable, what speech is good, what actions are
acceptable, be liberating?
>
>Something that really bugged me that you said was "However, he is a
>sissy boy, that we can agree on, and thats in no way better than being
>gay."
>
>We can agree with it. Because there's nothing bad about being gay.
Yes there is. Maybe that not PC, but there IS somthing wrong wit being
gay, a lot infact.
> If
>you think otherwise, I believe you can fuck yourself. Gay is a
>perfectly normal thing.
Is it? Exactly how is it normal?
>
>Also, what does being a sissy have to do with being gay? I used to get
>beat up a lot in Junior High. Does that make me gay? Because I was a
>sissy in Middle School? Or was I gay then and now I'm "fixed"?
>
There is a string correlation between sssiness and gayness. Ofcourse
not every sissy is gay, and not every gay is a sissy, BUT there is a
strong tendency of the two being highly correlated.
RPP
Speedbyrd
What difference does it make when it comes right down to it?
Ryan O'Reilly
wouldn't want to see him star in it. He is probably one of the best
writers/directors in all of Hollywood but his acting skills are best used in
supporting roles.
Karel Jansens wrote:
> Am I the only one who would love to see Quentin Tarantino do a version
> of Spiderman and star in it as well?
>
> Would I need therapy for making such a wish?
>
> "Hzou Fei©" <blah...@blah.net> wrote:
>
> > John Cusack...........he still looks young enough.
> >
> >
> >
> > MrChoCoColate <brai...@sprint.ca> wrote in message
> > news:o15n4.15342$XT4.1...@newscontent-01.sprint.ca...
> > > What do you think about Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman??????????
> > >
> > > I don't know about you but I think that would be the worst thing the
> > makers
> > > of the new Spiderman movie could do. Having Leonardo Dicaprio as Spiderman
> > > is like having Steven Segal in the Godfather. And talking about the
> > > Godfather, Leo Dicap almost ended up getting a part in the new Godfather
> > > movie that almost was until it's creator passed away. Talking about
> > nothing,
> > > he was offered to play Anakin Skywalker in Episode 2 of StarWars. Why is
> > he
> > > so famous anyways?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Dave Leckie
RPP wrote:
>
> On Tue, 08 Feb 2000 13:58:48 -0800, Dave Leckie
> <ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >RPP wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 08 Feb 2000 18:04:19 GMT, gyu...@hotmail.com (Sean) wrote:
> >>
> >> >It is important to show discretion and intelligence when choosing what
> >> >to rebel against. I don't know too many people who are fond of the
> >> >extremist track PCism has taken, but to wontonly disregard every
> >> >convention of polite behaviour simply because of a misguided trend, is
> >> >about as juvenile and ineffectual a form of rebellion as exists.
> >>
> >> Thats where you are wrong. PC must be hit all the time at every
> >> opportunity. It is mind fascism and thought control.
> >
> >Where the hell did you get that from? PC was supposed to be the exact
> >opposite.
>
> The opposite? How can any ideology that assumes to tell everyone what
> thoughts are acceptable, what speech is good, what actions are
> acceptable, be liberating?
>
> >
> >Something that really bugged me that you said was "However, he is a
> >sissy boy, that we can agree on, and thats in no way better than being
> >gay."
> >
> >We can agree with it. Because there's nothing bad about being gay.
>
> Yes there is. Maybe that not PC, but there IS somthing wrong wit being
> gay, a lot infact.
Like what. (Oh, and in case you're thinking this is anything other than
a rhetorical question, any answer you give me is going to be wrong.)
> > If
> >you think otherwise, I believe you can fuck yourself. Gay is a
> >perfectly normal thing.
>
> Is it? Exactly how is it normal?
Inasmuch as being gay is about as wrong as liking Pepsi over Coke.
Being gay says nothing about who a person is or what their moral beliefs
are, or what their aspect is on life. What is wrong with personal
preference?
> >Also, what does being a sissy have to do with being gay? I used to get
> >beat up a lot in Junior High. Does that make me gay? Because I was a
> >sissy in Middle School? Or was I gay then and now I'm "fixed"?
> >
>
> There is a string correlation between sssiness and gayness. Ofcourse
> not every sissy is gay, and not every gay is a sissy, BUT there is a
> strong tendency of the two being highly correlated.
What correlation? Based on what research? Yours? Do you have a PhD in
psychology? Or is this entirely based on what you _think_ gay people
_should_ be like. In that case, it's entirely heresay, and anything you
have to say about the matter is biased.
RPP
<ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>> Yes there is. Maybe that not PC, but there IS somthing wrong wit being
>> gay, a lot infact.
>
>Like what. (Oh, and in case you're thinking this is anything other than
>a rhetorical question, any answer you give me is going to be wrong.)
Maybe I should have qualified that. My fault. There is nothing wrong
with 2 pretty women having sex. There is a lot wrong with two men
doing that. Lets say sex that doesnt involve a vagina in some way is
wrong. Clear enough for you?
>>
>> Is it? Exactly how is it normal?
>
>Inasmuch as being gay is about as wrong as liking Pepsi over Coke.
Oh cmon, thats absurd.
>Being gay says nothing about who a person is or what their moral beliefs
>are,
Sure it does. It says a person is a pervert.
> or what their aspect is on life. What is wrong with personal
>preference?
>
I would say nothing. However why are they allowed to flaunt it? All
those gay pride parades. I saw one because I was in Downtown Toronto
that day without knowing there was such a thing, since where I come
from these things dont happen. I was disgusted with men in S&M
costumes etc. It was awful, disgusting, foul and flaunted it in
everyone's face. Now I know when these things happen and I makes sure
I stay away from downtown when it does. Why are they allowed to flaunt
it? Where are the straight pride parades anyway? I want to see
strippers for free, damn it. :)
>> There is a string correlation between sssiness and gayness. Ofcourse
>> not every sissy is gay, and not every gay is a sissy, BUT there is a
>> strong tendency of the two being highly correlated.
>
>What correlation?
A gay guy is easy to beat up:) Thats correlation.
>Based on what research? Yours?
Yes.
> Do you have a PhD in
>psychology?
Nope. Do I need one to know a gay is a sissy?
> Or is this entirely based on what you _think_ gay people
>_should_ be like.
Based on what I know they _are_ like.
> In that case, it's entirely heresay, and anything you
>have to say about the matter is biased.
>
Do you know the emaning of hearsay? If I am a witness to sisyness of a
gy person, thats first hand evidence, not hearsay. Consult a legal
lexicon.
RPP
wrote:
>
>Why is this whole thing such a big deal to you? Do you really hate
>this guy THAT much? What did he do to you?
>
he made Titanic. Thats enough for my etenal hate.
Speedbyrd
Oh. I thought it was something important. It's my fault not to have
realized that earlier. I'm sure he really cares about your feelings.
He's rich, you're not. He's somebody, you're not. guess you lose.
Speedbyrd
>On Wed, 09 Feb 2000 11:28:53 -0800, Dave Leckie
><ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>>> Yes there is. Maybe that not PC, but there IS somthing wrong wit being
>>> gay, a lot infact.
>>
>>Like what. (Oh, and in case you're thinking this is anything other than
>>a rhetorical question, any answer you give me is going to be wrong.)
>
>Maybe I should have qualified that. My fault. There is nothing wrong
>with 2 pretty women having sex. There is a lot wrong with two men
>doing that. Lets say sex that doesnt involve a vagina in some way is
>wrong. Clear enough for you?
No.
what do you think two women do when they have sex?
What's your obsession with this subject?
Dave Leckie
RPP wrote:
>
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2000 11:28:53 -0800, Dave Leckie
> <ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
> >> Yes there is. Maybe that not PC, but there IS somthing wrong wit being
> >> gay, a lot infact.
> >
> >Like what. (Oh, and in case you're thinking this is anything other than
> >a rhetorical question, any answer you give me is going to be wrong.)
>
> Maybe I should have qualified that. My fault. There is nothing wrong
> with 2 pretty women having sex. There is a lot wrong with two men
> doing that. Lets say sex that doesnt involve a vagina in some way is
> wrong. Clear enough for you?
Oh, it's clear. And like I said, it's wrong. If you're so
unconfortable with yourself that you can't imagine two guys having sex,
I feel sorry for you. It's too bad you're so out of touch with yourself.
> >>
> >> Is it? Exactly how is it normal?
> >
> >Inasmuch as being gay is about as wrong as liking Pepsi over Coke.
>
> Oh cmon, thats absurd.
Why is it so absurd? I would never like Coke. Never. Doesn't mean I
think that anybody who drinks it is a pervert.
> >Being gay says nothing about who a person is or what their moral beliefs
> >are,
>
> Sure it does. It says a person is a pervert.
A pervert? Why? Because they prefer company of men? What does that have
to do with perversion? Or is it because of the sex? So, that's what you
think homosexuality is all about? Sex? Well, if you think that sexuality
= sex, you have some serious problems with your english. Sexuality
involves any kind of intimacy.
And what's so evil about two men having sex? Apparently there's no
problem with women having sex. What is the evil of it? You haven't
specified it... you just said sex is bad without the vagina, yet given
no reason for it.
The answer is simple: There is no reason. Just because it doesn't apply
to you you think it's wrong, because you have this idea in your head
that you're infallible. It's these same things that started Racism,
which is the responsibility of this little thing you may have heard of
that happened in the 30's and 40's in Germany. It was called the
Holocaust.
> > or what their aspect is on life. What is wrong with personal
> >preference?
> >
>
> I would say nothing. However why are they allowed to flaunt it? All
> those gay pride parades.
When was the last time you kissed your girlfriend on the street? Or in
any other public place. If a gay person were to do that, in most
situations they would get sneered at and given bad looks by onlookers...
like they're lepers or something. Pride Parades are a way of saying
"We're gay. It's who we are. Why can't we do the same things you do in
public, just with the same sex."
> I saw one because I was in Downtown Toronto
> that day without knowing there was such a thing, since where I come
> from these things dont happen. I was disgusted with men in S&M
> costumes etc. It was awful, disgusting, foul and flaunted it in
> everyone's face. Now I know when these things happen and I makes sure
> I stay away from downtown when it does. Why are they allowed to flaunt
> it? Where are the straight pride parades anyway? I want to see
> strippers for free, damn it. :)
Why are they allowed to flaunt it? Because we live in a democracy,
bucko. People have the right to do whatever they want to as long as they
don't break any laws. I've never heard of a gay pride parade that ended
up in someone dying or getting beaten up. What I have heard of, though,
is people carving the word "fag" into gay people's chests, what is
referred to as "gay-bashing". You're allowed to be straight. Why can't
they be gay?
> >> There is a string correlation between sssiness and gayness. Ofcourse
> >> not every sissy is gay, and not every gay is a sissy, BUT there is a
> >> strong tendency of the two being highly correlated.
> >
> >What correlation?
>
> A gay guy is easy to beat up:) Thats correlation.
Wow. I'd like to see the statistics that you used to prove this
correlation.
> >Based on what research? Yours?
>
> Yes.
Ah. You've done formal research on the subject? What were your results?
Were they published? In which journal?
> > Do you have a PhD in
> >psychology?
>
> Nope. Do I need one to know a gay is a sissy?
Well, it certainly would qualify you more to make an assumption like
that.
> > Or is this entirely based on what you _think_ gay people
> >_should_ be like.
>
> Based on what I know they _are_ like.
What you "know". Again, what do you base this on? Research? What kind?
what were the results of your research? Where is it published so I can
verify this research? Because if your claim is based solely on personal
observations, here are a couple of my own of some of my gay friends:
#1: Big guy, about 6'2". Arm Wrestling champion of his high school.
#2: Another big guy. About 6'0". Star Guard of a local Basketball
team.
#3: Short one, but extremely muscular. Plays Winger on a provincial
Rugby team.
Now here are some examples of some straight friends of mine:
#1: Self proclaimed computer nerd. In Junior high, got stuffed into
lockers on a regular basis.
#2: Industrial Engineering student. Still can't stand up to a bully.
Now, all five of these examples blow this whole theory of yours that gay
people are sissies right out of the water. I've got hundreds like it to
back me up. As a matter of fact, I have yet to meet a gay person that
is a "sissy".
> > In that case, it's entirely heresay, and anything you
> >have to say about the matter is biased.
> >
>
> Do you know the emaning of hearsay? If I am a witness to sisyness of a
> gy person, thats first hand evidence, not hearsay. Consult a legal
> lexicon.
"a gay person" is different from "all gay people" or "most gay people."
I've seen more sissies that are straight than I have that are gay. And
again, you're basing all of this on what you think. You've given me one
example of a person who is both gay and a sissy, and made the assumption
that all or most gay people are like that. Unless you have some
approved evidence (such as correlary research) that is reliable and
valid, maybe then you might have a point. But you have no such
research, so your statements not only prove that you don't know what
it's about to be gay, but they also show that you couldn't prove a thing
if your life depended on it.
I know you're not going to change your mind on this issue. You're going
to give me some bullshit post about how you've seen so many things in
your life to lead you to believe it. I could care less about how you
think you justify it in your mind. I guarentee you you're not going to
justify it in mine. All the questions I've given you are rhetorical,
because I know for a fact I'm just going to get drivel and bullshit on
the topic. There's probably a good chance that the next post is going to
contain some personal flames towards me in there. I've seen your type
before. We refer to these as "trolls".
Your statements are all ignorant and sadly mistaken so far. I said at
the beginning, I didn't want this to turn into a fight. So here I am,
ending it. Don't expect me to reply to anymore posts pertaining to this
subject. I hope you learn sooner or later that there's a lot more to
life than hating people.
RPP
<ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>
>
>RPP wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 09 Feb 2000 11:28:53 -0800, Dave Leckie
>> <ebbo...@NOSPAMsilliness.8m.com> wrote:
>> >> Yes there is. Maybe that not PC, but there IS somthing wrong wit being
>> >> gay, a lot infact.
>> >
>> >Like what. (Oh, and in case you're thinking this is anything other than
>> >a rhetorical question, any answer you give me is going to be wrong.)
>>
>> Maybe I should have qualified that. My fault. There is nothing wrong
>> with 2 pretty women having sex. There is a lot wrong with two men
>> doing that. Lets say sex that doesnt involve a vagina in some way is
>> wrong. Clear enough for you?
>
>Oh, it's clear. And like I said, it's wrong. If you're so
>unconfortable with yourself that you can't imagine two guys having sex,
>I feel sorry for you. It's too bad you're so out of touch with yourself.
>
I take it you imagine 2 guys having sex quite often.
>> Sure it does. It says a person is a pervert.
>
>A pervert? Why? Because they prefer company of men? What does that have
>to do with perversion? Or is it because of the sex? So, that's what you
>think homosexuality is all about? Sex? Well, if you think that sexuality
>= sex, you have some serious problems with your english. Sexuality
>involves any kind of intimacy.
>
No its not. Its about Oscar parties, shopping and show tunes as well.
>And what's so evil about two men having sex? Apparently there's no
>problem with women having sex. What is the evil of it? You haven't
>specified it... you just said sex is bad without the vagina, yet given
>no reason for it.
Biolog is my reason.
>
>The answer is simple: There is no reason. Just because it doesn't apply
>to you you think it's wrong, because you have this idea in your head
>that you're infallible. It's these same things that started Racism,
>which is the responsibility of this little thing you may have heard of
>that happened in the 30's and 40's in Germany. It was called the
>Holocaust.
Well I dont THINK it. I know it.
And its different than racism. You cant change your sjin colours or
facial features, you CAN change your sexuality.
>> I would say nothing. However why are they allowed to flaunt it? All
>> those gay pride parades.
>
>When was the last time you kissed your girlfriend on the street?
Thats MUCH different. We dont have a parade.
>Or in
>any other public place. If a gay person were to do that, in most
>situations they would get sneered at and given bad looks by onlookers...
>like they're lepers or something.
And rightfully so.
> Pride Parades are a way of saying
>"We're gay. It's who we are. Why can't we do the same things you do in
>public, just with the same sex."
>
How can they be rpud of it anywaty? That boggles my mind. As I said,
strights dont have parades, why do homos?
>> I saw one because I was in Downtown Toronto
>> that day without knowing there was such a thing, since where I come
>> from these things dont happen. I was disgusted with men in S&M
>> costumes etc. It was awful, disgusting, foul and flaunted it in
>> everyone's face. Now I know when these things happen and I makes sure
>> I stay away from downtown when it does. Why are they allowed to flaunt
>> it? Where are the straight pride parades anyway? I want to see
>> strippers for free, damn it. :)
>
>Why are they allowed to flaunt it? Because we live in a democracy,
>bucko.
A strong case against democracy then:)
> People have the right to do whatever they want to as long as they
>don't break any laws.
Laws. Yes. Well isnt public lewdness a crime?
> I've never heard of a gay pride parade that ended
>up in someone dying or getting beaten up.
Not dying, thats bad, but being beaten up? Sounds like you are onto
something.
> What I have heard of, though,
>is people carving the word "fag" into gay people's chests, what is
>referred to as "gay-bashing".
You are making that up.
> You're allowed to be straight. Why can't
>they be gay?
>
Just because.
>> >Based on what research? Yours?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>Ah. You've done formal research on the subject? What were your results?
gayness and sissiness r=0.87.
>Were they published? In which journal?
Science of Sissiness:)
>
>#1: Big guy, about 6'2". Arm Wrestling champion of his high school.
So? Was it a sissy school?
>#2: Another big guy. About 6'0". Star Guard of a local Basketball
>team.
Basketball:) now there is a tough man's sport:)
>#3: Short one, but extremely muscular. Plays Winger on a provincial
>Rugby team.
Im sure he "plays".
>Now, all five of these examples blow this whole theory of yours that gay
>people are sissies right out of the water. I've got hundreds like it to
>back me up. As a matter of fact, I have yet to meet a gay person that
>is a "sissy".
No they dont. They are isolated incidents. a few of such examples may
reduce r from 1.00 (perfect correlation) but are not eneough to make
them statistically insignificant. Simple statistics.
>before. We refer to these as "trolls".
>
As I said, I take oride in the word troll, because invariably, people
who bring up unpopular and revolutionary ideas to newsgroups and who
go against the accepted grain in this case rabid political
correctness, are called trolls.