LOL badquestion, but...

Like I said, it's all about different aesthetic values. If you work out, that doesn't mean you'll end up like guys/'babes' up there.

Nick Auger:




Antek:

If you're not gay, I'm not here.

You're one seriously homophobic mofo. I don't find these guys sexually attractive (nor any others), I just use their bodies as my goal as far as lifting weights goes -> I think their bodies are great (from the aesthetic view) and considering their frames are as big as mine, I can probably achieve that size/definition. I mean, what is your problem? Are you a closet homosexual or something? Not comfortable with your sexual orientation? Can't you say "I want a psychique like guy over there" without feeling homosexual?

Dude everything you post has something to do with guys or their bodies. It's not my homophobia, it's your closet homosexuality. It's been going on ever since you joined, remember the Joey Graham thing?

I'm a heterosexual who has no prejudices against gay&lesbians and I would be perfectly comfortable if I were one, which I'm not. Body and athleticism mean a lot for me and it's just your homophobia calling me gay, because I admire other people's bodies and athletic ability. It doesn't turn me on, it makes me jealous and makes me work even harder. What is the difference between someone admiring other's shooting ability and someone admiring one's body? Both were achieved via hard work, both are essential for basketball, it's you who link one of them with sex.

Stop trying to defend yourself Liberace. The sooner you accept it the sooner you can be open and free.

What exactly was that? A joke? An intelligent response to the things I wrote? Don't accuse other people, if you don't have things sorted out with yourself.

Aren't you just doing the exact same thing I'm supposedly doing? I've got plenty sorted out with myself, I have more gay friends then you will ever meet... trust me, I know when someone's a bit fruity when I see it.

If you were truely comfortable with your sexuality and happy with your admiration of the male body, wouldn't the logical response be something like "I don't give a shit what you think, I know I'm not gay and that's all that matters" as opposed to constantly coming up with justifications and getting defensive?

Anyways sorry for offending you, here's a peace offering:



Countdown to Dweaver ultimately getting involved in someone elses business yet again and defending his little mate, now started...

If you were truely comfortable with your sexuality and happy with your admiration of the male body, wouldn't the logical response be something like "I don't give a shit what you think, I know I'm not gay and that's all that matters" as opposed to constantly coming up with justifications and getting defensive?

Someone said, 'homophobia'?

If you're going to interfere in other peoples discussions, at least make some sense.

If you're going to interfere in other peoples discussions, at least make some sense.

Sorry, I'll leave you two alone, then. If that's they way you prefer it , at least.

He is a very attractive man

I'm not trying to defend myself, I'm trying to attack you . And it's true, I really don't care what you think, I'm just making an observation here - what is wrong with admiration of male body? Greeks did it (bad example, because bi/homosexuallity was a regular there) and so did the Romans. Once again, I'm not defending myself, I'm trying to understand why is saying that some guy's body is great and wishing that I had a body like that myself (and working for it) is supposed to automatically be a sign of homosexuality? You're saying that all bodybuilders are gays just because they worship male body.

bad example, because bi/homosexuallity was a regular there

Misinformation will not get you far. They found one ancient jug of two ancient Greek homos, and now every classic era Greek was bisexual?

You're saying that all bodybuilders are gays just because they worship male body.

It doen't matter whether they are straight or not. Just don't voice your concerns to their face.

What the hell is so funny? Are you on some drugs that make you laugh at everything?

What the hell is so funny? Are you on some drugs that make you laugh at everything?

No. It's the raw eggs and tuna. It's one of teh side-effects, along with Turrette's and flatulence. But don't tell anyone.

bad example, because bi/homosexuallity was a regular there

Misinformation will not get you far. They found one ancient jug of two ancient Greek homos, and now every classic era Greek was bisexual?

As far as I know, homosexuality was socially acceptable in Greek culture and there are many known cases of bisexuality between warriors (Patroclus&Achilles (Illiad) are good example of bisexuality between Greeks in fiction).

As far as I know, homosexuality was socially acceptable in Greek culture and there are many known cases of bisexuality between warriors (Patroclus&Achilles (Illiad) are good example of bisexuality between Greeks in fiction).

Depends on your sourcesof reading and information. Patroclus and Achilles? First time I ever heard that one. There is nothing in the original Homer's text that even insinuates something like that.

Here's something for you, Wiki lovah:

The relationship of Achilles and Patroclus
It is important to note, before reading the rest of this section, that the Ancient Mediterranean world had vastly different attitudes toward gender and sexuality than those found in twenty-first century America or Europe. To wit, there was no term or concept of homosexuality. In addition, much of what is known about ancient Greek sexual practices and beliefs is based on writers and artists who lived about 200 years after Homer's epics were created; it is unknown how much these practices and attitudes changed from the time Homer's epics were originally sung and the time that these later writers and artists recorded their work. In addition, most modern scholars tend to either hold up the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus as the first model of homosexual love in literature or assert that it was an entirely non-physical relationship. Both positions usually reflect the speaker's position in contemporary culture wars.

In Classical Greece, and especially in Hellenism, the relationship of Achilles and Patroclus was often seen as pederastic. In the fifth century B.C., Aeschylus in his now-lost tragedy The Myrmidons clearly regarded the relationship as a sexual one and assigned Achilles the role of erastes or protector (since he had avenged his lover's death even though the gods told him it would cost him his own life), and Patroclus the role of eromenos. He tells of Achilles visiting Patroclus' dead body and criticizing him for letting himself be killed. In a surviving fragment of the play, Achilles speaks of a “devout union of the thighs”.

Plato wrote the Symposium about 385 BC, and by then an established tradition viewed Achilles and Patroclus as lovers. In the Symposium, Phaedrus holds the two up as an example of divinely approved lovers. He also argues that Aeschylus erred in saying that Achilles was the erastes, "for he excelled in beauty not Patroclus alone but assuredly all the other heroes, being still beardless and, moreover, much the younger, by Homer's account." However, Plato's contemporary Xenophon, in his own Symposium, had Socrates argue that Achilles and Patroclus were merely chaste and devoted comrades.

Evidence of this debate is found in a speech by an Athenian politician, Aeschines, at his trial in 345 BC. Aeschines in placing an emphasis on the importance of pederasty to the Greeks argues that though Homer does not state it explicitly, educated people should be able to read between the lines. “Although (Homer) speaks in many places of Patroclus and Achilles, he hides their love and avoids giving a name to their friendship, thinking that the exceeding greatness of their affection is manifest to such of his hearers as are educated men.” Most ancient writers followed the thinking laid out by Aeschines.

Since Homer does not use the terms “erastes” and “eromenos”, it has been argued that their relationship was not pederastic but rather egalitarian. In Homer's Ionian culture it appears homosexuality had not taken on the form it later would in pederasty. However some scholars, such as Bernard Sergent, have argued that it had, though it was not reflected in Homer. Sergent asserts that ritualized man-boy relations were widely diffused through Europe from prehistoric times.

It is impossible to designate the roles found in the Iliad between Achilles and Patroclus along pederastic lines. Achilles is the most dominant. Among the warriors in the Trojan War he has the most fame. Patroclus performs duties such as cooking, feeding and grooming the horses, and nursing yet is older than Achilles. Both also sleep with women. Nonetheless the emotion between the two is obviously intense love. Achilles is tender to Patroclus callous and arrogant towards others. Although most warriors fought for personal fame or their city-state (including Achilles), at certain junctures in the Iliad, Achilles emphasizes his relationship with Patroclus above all else. He dreams that all Greeks would die so that he and Patroclus might gain the fame of conquering Troy alone. After Patroclus dies he agonizes touching his dead body, smearing himself with ash, and fasting. It was not until his desire for revenge to kill Hector who had killed Patroclus that he would fight again; fully aware that the gods warned him it would cost him his life.

Attempts to edit the text were undertaken by Aristarchus of Samothrace in Alexandria around 200 BC. Aristarchus, who has been called “the founder of scientific scholarship”, believed that Homer did not intend the two to be lovers. However he did agree that the “we-two alone” passage did imply a love relation and argued it was a later interpolation. But the majority of ancient and modern historians have accepted the lines to be an original part.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iliad

And also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_militaries_of_ancient_Greece

most modern scholars tend to either hold up the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus as the first model of homosexual love in literature or assert that it was an entirely non-physical relationship. Both positions usually reflect the speaker's position in contemporary culture wars.

I had already read those Wiki articles. As you can see, it's always a two-sided coin with history.

Let's have a simple example.

I say Jae is gay ( I picked Jae for the rhyme...), while I know tha the is not. ( well, probably, anyways... )

You are convinved of this and repeat it to others.

Others repeat it to others, on, on, ...and on.

Next thing you know, in a year from now, as far as everybody is concerned, Jae is a cross-dresser with a fetisch for baloons (specifically a semi-popper.)


If that can happen in a year during the age of information, I'm guessing it might as well have happened in 200 years in the age of courriers-on-a-horse.


There are no solid evidence concerning homosexuality in ancient Greece. It might have been true, or it might be bogus. I know, for one, that I do not believe that was the case.

I think Dweaver's hiding something

I think Dweaver's hiding something

Yes, and I have to come clean. I hate EGGS!!!

Homos are teh gay.

What a gay thread.

Homos are teh gay.

Or teh lesbian.

damn the matrix and that muscle line by agent smith haha

what this sock talk? lol are we back in kindergarden again..

you don't like my opinions?