Originally posted by Alliance
METROSEXUALITY????!
I have been uncomfortable with this term since I first heard it. It is a made up word that began to circulate based on the popularity of shows like Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Homosexuality, or more specifically a sexual or emotional relationship between two men, is such a threat to the masculine stereotype, that the straight guys who have no issue with homosexuals had to make up a word to justify their apathy and general concern for their appearance. So, just because a guy has no problem with gays and gives a shit about how he looks, he's metrosexual. The inclusion of the term "sexual" is out of place in this word.
As for the cause of homosexuality, and because reading over the last 250 paqges is a problem for so many people who haven't been participating in the discussion for the last two years, there are a number of studies that address the origin of homosexuality.
This thread is misleading in it's title. It presents the issue with two options; chosen or genetic. When the discussion is limited by only two choices, one of which is totally false, then you limit the ability to discuss the topic in any legitimate fashion. Which is why the discussion has gone on and off topic so many times. The 'chosen' option is totally false. bi- or homo- sexuality is not a choice.
Some studies have found biological differences that are measurable by comparing physical anatomy of gay men or women with their counterparts on the straight side of the divide. Other studies have found that unborn babies are faced with homonal differences in the womb and that effects the mental and physical development of the child before it's born. This is also supported by the fact that most gay men have older brothers, meaning that on a hormonal level the mother actually rejects the male infant simply because it's male and the female's body has a hard time dealing with the hormones being produced by the male child in the womb. Then there are studies that find that there is no "gay gene" but it is actually a symphony of genes that work together on different levels and at different times that influence the sexual orientation of the child. So, which ever of these is right...or wrong for that matter. I think that everyone should be able to agree that attraction to members of the same, or both sexes, isn't a choice. As that is the most illogical assumption I've ever heard.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I have been uncomfortable with this term since I first heard it.
That was a lot to process.
Almost nothing except for some physical things) is entirely genetic or behavioral.
I don't like the whole metro thing wither, i was just making an a$$ out of myself and xyz dumb comment about bisexuality.
Originally posted by Robtard
And why is shaving ones scrotum equal to being a desparate loser?
to actually shave one's scrotum would present 2 inconveniences:
1-irritation. i never shaved my sack ever, but common logic tells me that rough stubble in that area would not be desirable. i like to keep that area free of abrasives...but maybe thats just my own preference.
2-CUTS??? really, its not like you're shaving the side of your face. its just loose ruffled skin. how could you possibly manage shaving it without slicing up your family jewels.
and why would you want to shave your nuts? i understand trimming them, thats not very involved at all and its good for hygene to keep the hair trimmed. but SHAVING? who the **** convinced you to do that? was that your own idea or did some henpecking she-b!tch demand it? be honest.
Originally posted by PVS
to actually shave one's scrotum would present 2 inconveniences:1-irritation. i never shaved my sack ever, but common logic tells me that rough stubble in that area would not be desirable. i like to keep that area free of abrasives...but maybe thats just my own preference.
2-CUTS??? really, its not like you're shaving the side of your face. its just loose ruffled skin. how could you possibly manage shaving it without slicing up your family jewels.
and why would you want to shave your nuts? i understand trimming them, thats not very involved at all and its good for hygene to keep the hair trimmed. but SHAVING? who the **** convinced you to do that? was that your own idea or did some henpecking she-b!tch demand it? be honest.
You are wrong on both accounts, I have never had razor burn, cuts or stubble irritation; it's all in the technique.
Originally, it was just to see how it felt, Dr. Evil said in Austin Powers "There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum... It's breathtaking, I highly recommend it."
Now I have to say my wife prefers the smooth sensation when she preforms oral on me.
Originally posted by Robtard
You are wrong on both accounts, I have never had razor burn, cuts or stubble irritation; it's all in the technique.Originally, it was just to see how it felt, Dr. Evil said in Austin Powers "There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum... It's breathtaking, I highly recommend it."
Now I have to say my wife prefers the smooth sensation when she preforms oral on me.
That still doesn't mean we needed to hear about you shaving your balls.
Originally posted by Robtard
You are wrong on both accounts, I have never had razor burn, cuts or stubble irritation; it's all in the technique.Originally, it was just to see how it felt, Dr. Evil said in Austin Powers "There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum... It's breathtaking, I highly recommend it."
Now I have to say my wife prefers the smooth sensation when she preforms oral on me.
Also the cleaner it looks, the longer it looks 😉