# New fashion mag aimed towards STRAIGHT men!?????



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

This thread is not written with the intention to offend any human

Every magazine I read, at least in the USA is targeted towards "fabulous" men. I have learned that "fabulous" is the AAAC euphemism for men who are not strictly heterosexual. And I will admitt that most fashion fabulous men are dressed fabuously and with that being said, what about the rest of us heteros who buy clothes?

I bet there is a market for hetero fashion, where the men's clothing models aren't pre-pubescent 22 year olds looking like they want you to be their sugar daddy.

I don't want a magazine filled with surgically augmented air brushed bimbos, gadgets and gizmos, sports cars I can't afford, and pure crap advice on how to pick up women that want nothing more than my social security number.

It be nice to see real hetero men of all shapes and sizes in different suit combos casual and buziness fashions.

maybe call the magazine:
"Hetero." Men's fashion for Men. 
Is it politically correct for hetero men to have their own magazine? I don't care! I don't even care if the models are gay, just don't pose and look at me like youre affection is available for a price. Even better, airbrush the faces off and replace them with a drawn faces or heck a smiley faces for that matter.

Let the magazine be about the fashion, not the model! Just think how much cheaper it would be to find models who don't have to have "pretty faces" I think this would also allow the men to picture themselves in the clothes and think about how they would look in that suit rather than how good that model dude looks in it.
I would divide the magazine into several sections: Each section would have its own sub-section for matching shirts, ties, shoes, etc.
sections: Black-Tie, Exec Business, Casual Business, Dress Casual, Athletic Wear, Underwear, and of course some small articles about men's health, grooming tips, gadgets, and stories submitted by readers.
I would charge more for the magazine, so it could contain less advertising and more info.
There's so much that could be done. I'm completely secure in my heteroness, but I'd like to open up a men's fashion magazine and not feel like I'm looking at well dressed men modeling softcore gay porn. I don't care who writes or edits the magazine I just want the fashion and the models targeted towards hetero men.

Remember, I did not write this to offend anyone, only to ask If I was the only man who felt this way. I believe I placed the thread in the proper area. Please forgive me if I have not and please move my thread to a more proper place.

I Am Legend.


----------



## Herr Walther (Jan 4, 2008)

While I agree with your sentiments, what used to pass for 'normal' or 'mainstream' in the United States has become un-PC.

If it pertains to heterosexual males or females in the US, we're automatically descriminating against gays, lesbians, blacks, (yes BLACKS. Not African-Americans unless they have just been naturalized from Africa, and unless you would like to call me a European-American on a daily basis) and any other cultural, ethnic, sexual, or other group you can imagine.

There will be someone to speak out for them because they haven't been included. That, in the US, is automatically labled as descrimination in the United States.

Start a magazine called Hetro-Man or some such title and see how many bleeding hearts come knocking on your door because you excluded 'everyone' else.

Gay magazines, television programs, etc, are fine, as are BET, and other racial targeted audiences. Just try starting anything like that for the rest of us and see how far you would get before the ranting, bad press, and television interviews would start.

That may not be what anyone here wanted to hear, but that is the way it is in this day and age.


----------



## EAP (Jan 19, 2007)

Have you read or are you aware of Classic Style Magazine?

https://classicstylemag.com/

It's available at Barnes and Noble (and perhaps other newsstands), with the next issue due February. An excellent read and resource that has no agenda other than classic style.

Also, I believe the frustration is perhaps more fundamentally the unwanted moral portrayals, standards and agendas embedded within current magazines, all of which have absolutely zero correlation to style. When I had airlines miles expiring and was forced to convert them into subscriptions, I chose the WSJ and GQ, remembering the latter from the 80's. Lo and behold the first issue arrives in the mailbox and on the cover was "10 ways to have an office affair" or some such rot. My wife immediately questioned why in the world I had chosen the magazine. I was pissed that GQ put me into that situation, and without even having removed the cellophane. The remaining issues went directly into the tip.

Perhaps what's more telling is that GQ and the like have had to resort to this to sell magazines. Evidently their style content (or lack thereof) has become so poor it's no longer sufficient rationale to purchase.

At least this vacuum has produced Classic Style Magazine. Its cover reads "Best Shoe Shine". My wishes on its success.


----------



## brioni007 (Dec 3, 2007)

*You sound like an angry man.*

I don't think that you reserve the right to tell people how to racially identify themselves. I personally find your remarks insulting, however you are entitled to your opinion. BET is owned by Viacom, a company where the majority of owners and happen to be a race other than BLACK. So it's not about gay, black or hetro. It's about people who enjoy clothing from all walks of life. What does sexual orientation have to do with the enjoyment, of style, taste and decorum? I thought I would ask you because you seem to be an expert on race sexual preference. You don't choose your race or sexual preference, however we can choose to respect others regardless.



Herr Walther said:


> While I agree with your sentiments, what used to pass for 'normal' or 'mainstream' in the United States has become un-PC.
> 
> If it pertains to heterosexual males or females in the US, we're automatically descriminating against gays, lesbians, blacks, (yes BLACKS. Not African-Americans unless they have just been naturalized from Africa, and unless you would like to call me a European-American on a daily basis) and any other cultural, ethnic, sexual, or other group you can imagine.
> 
> ...


----------



## Herr Walther (Jan 4, 2008)

GQ is not was it has been in the past. I pick up the latest copy at my barber while waiting and find it hard to believe some the the topics I see.

Anymore, it's not about dressing well, or how to conduct yourself, but how to cheat on your wife and get away with it, or the latest teen fashions that a 45 yrar old wouldn't be caught dead wearing at his own funeral. 

I don't need to see the latest ads for a 'Unisex' cologne or unisex anything featuring models that weigh 90 lbs and are younger than my son in a suposedly mature men's fashion magazine.


----------



## Herr Walther (Jan 4, 2008)

*Not at all..*



brioni007 said:


> I don't think that you reserve the right to tell people how to racially identify themselves. I personally find your remarks insulting, however you are entitled to your opinion. BET is owned by Viacom, a company where the majority of owners and happen to be a race other than BLACK. So it's not about gay, black or hetro. It's about people who enjoy clothing from all walks of life. What does sexual orientation have to do with the enjoyment, of style, taste and decorum? I thought I would ask you because you seem to be an expert on race sexual preference. You don't choose your race or sexual preference, however we can choose to respect others regardless.


I am not telling anyone how to identify themselves nor am I an expert on race or gender, and at the same time, I don't expect the Government to be a reliable source to tell me how to identify people either.

But they do.

My remarks were not a reference to my personal feelings other than the fact that special interest groups should not dictate to the Government what we should say, think, or broadcast, is right or wrong if a particular group wishes to publish or broadcast something targeted at themselves.

I agree that style has no bounds among those that appreciate it for what it is, but when targeted at a particular people, whether that be lifestyle, race, ethic background, and THEN dictated by the Government for those that mentioned it and those it failed to mention and take that failed mention as a slight and then bring a descriminatory ajunct into the debate, they have lost the essence of the subject.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

brioni007 said:


> I don't think that you reserve the right to tell people how to racially identify themselves. I personally find your remarks insulting, however you are entitled to your opinion. BET is owned by Viacom, a company where the majority of owners and happen to be a race other than BLACK. So it's not about gay, black or hetro. It's about people who enjoy clothing from all walks of life. What does sexual orientation have to do with the enjoyment, of style, taste and decorum? I thought I would ask you because you seem to be an expert on race sexual preference. You don't choose your race or sexual preference, however we can choose to respect others regardless.


Brioni,
I know your words were not targeted at my post, but please try to understand how others might feel and how they may have the same amount of passion for their beliefs as you do yours.
We all have different experiences in life, so none of us will ever have the same beliefs about anything, but that shouldn't keep us from being able to understand how and why others can feel the way they do. 
let's all try to become empathetic before we become defensive.

Noone is being attacked, many of us just want a "bespoke" magazine that fulfills more than just our sartorial wants and needs.

It's no more wrong than wanting a bespoke shoe. Today's men's fashion magazines simply don't fit me comfortably.


----------



## Herr Walther (Jan 4, 2008)

A magazine needs to be created for the well-dessed gentleman nearing, and in middle age. 

What say 35-55 years of age? Notice I put myself right in the mddle there.

Did I exclude anyone? OMG, yes I did! Only about two-thirds of the country. I'm sure the decrimination police will be at my door any minute.

All kidding aside, I like your idea and I hope we see something like that soon.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Capt Ron said:


> I bet there is a market for hetero fashion, where the men's clothing models aren't pre-pubescent 22 year olds looking like they want you to be their sugar daddy.
> 
> I don't want a magazine filled with surgically augmented air brushed bimbos, gadgets and gizmos, sports cars I can't afford, and pure crap advice on how to pick up women that want nothing more than my social security number.
> 
> It be nice to see real hetero men of all shapes and sizes in different suit combos casual and buziness fashions.



Lots of magazines cater to older people, and have photos of balding men with beer guts and hairy backs. And very, very few young people buy these magazines.

Going through the list of mainstream men's magazines (GQ, Esquire, Details etc), very few of them cater specifically to gay men. So I don't think that's a valid criticism. Instead, if I had to guess, I'd say you're probably in your late 30's or early 40's and are reaching the point where you're no longer as competitive in the target markets of these magazines. The image of young beauty has gone from something that's attainable (and therefore enjoyable) to something that's increasingly and permanently unattainable, so it becomes nothing more than an irritation.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

EAP said:


> Have you read or are you aware of Classic Style Magazine?
> 
> https://classicstylemag.com/
> 
> ...


+!...certainly the best writing on men's style that we might find on magazine racks these days!

PS: ...and, in the spirit of a public service announcement, "Hell has frozen over and the Devil himself, has been seen lacing up his iceskates!" I know this to be true because I find myself (at long last) in agreement with FrankDC...and his previous post! (winks)


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> [/SIZE][/SIZE]
> Lots of magazines cater to older people, and have photos of balding men with beer guts and hairy backs.


Stop it, you're getting me excited - :icon_smile_wink: :devil: :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Magazines like those weren't supposed to be directed towards staright or gay people.They're just magazines for fashion,that's all.


----------



## EAP (Jan 19, 2007)

FrankDC said:


> [/size][/size]...The image of young beauty has gone from something that's attainable (and therefore enjoyable) to something that's increasingly and permanently unattainable, so it becomes nothing more than an irritation.


I believe it was in the book _The Suit_ that the author Nicholas Antongiavanni (Manton?) stated that being young was no-win as if under-dressed you appear insolent, and if properly dressed presumptuous. Personally, I find that the best accessory for attaining that flawless look can often be gray hair.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

EAP said:


> I believe it was in the book _The Suit_ that the author Nicholas Antongiavanni (Manton?) stated that being young was no-win as if under-dressed you appear insolent, and if properly dressed presumptuous. Personally, I find that the best accessory for attaining that flawless look can often be gray hair.


Flawless to whom? Personally I've never known a young man who dyed his hair gray to achieve a "flawless look".


----------



## brioni007 (Dec 3, 2007)

*Trying to understand*

Capt Ron;

I try to appreciate and understand many views and perspective from people of all sorts. I have opened my mind to be inclusive of all humans regardless of their race, sexual preference, and even style chooses. So help me understand what do you mean by a hetro magazine? I consider playboy, hustler and magazine of this sort hetro. And playgirl would definitely be classified as a gay male mag. I know some might consider high fashion Mags un-masculine. I will agree with you on that matter. But I still feel like all men of the world can love and enjoy the sartorial lifestyle. There is a fine line when we start singling out certain groups. it's not a issue of being politically correct. it's an issue of respect. I have a prejudice against people who lack style. I'm working on that. I share some of your same views but I don't want to offend someone because they were born a certain way. On the other hand people can do something about understanding something about style. I understand!!



Capt Ron said:


> Brioni,
> I know your words were not targeted at my post, but please try to understand how others might feel and how they may have the same amount of passion for their beliefs as you do yours.
> We all have different experiences in life, so none of us will ever have the same beliefs about anything, but that shouldn't keep us from being able to understand how and why others can feel the way they do.
> let's all try to become empathetic before we become defensive.
> ...


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

EAP said:


> ...Manton...stated that being young was no-win as if under-dressed you appear insolent, and if properly dressed presumptuous....


What if the subject were young and...._overdressed?  _


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Capt Ron, you ask some good questions. 

Older guys don't care to see younger guys with airbrushed makeup, so pictures of that is unfitting. Somebody else brings up Playboy, etc., that does not go over well with most wifes. And why do so many people attack heterosexual? Gay is in many other publications, does it have to be everywhere? It is sort of like buying a fishing magazine and they would then have to put football in it too. So, why is the gay comminity railroading over everybody else. And, can anybody show me the scienctific evidence that gays are born that way? Believing something because one wants it to be true doesn't make it true. Nor, following a crowd or mob make it so, either. Whatever the truth is should be pursued- not what one wants.

I think what Capt Ron wants is a magazine that even gays can read with out bringing up the gay subject or what color of skin you have, etc. Just a nice magazine for ordinary guys. Some articles could include ski trips, castle hunting, cruising the South Pacific Islands, etc.

The only problem is who has the money to start it until it pays for itself?


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

WA said:


> Capt Ron, you ask some good questions.
> 
> And, can anybody show me the scienctific evidence that gays are born that way?
> The only problem is who has the money to start it until it pays for itself?


Gay by choice or genetics doesn't matter to me. Perhaps for some it's a choice for other they are born that way. I have witnessed both and don't care either way. I have a dear friend from high school who recently "came out" and he said we all knew he was gay before he did. He just was never sure and we don't care either way. We loved him like a brother then and we love him like a brother now and we wish him all the happiness anyone could have. We are actually much more relieved for him that he came. If he gets "married' I'm sure all of his friends will be there at the ceremony and I'm sure I'll tell his partner the same thing I tell the partners of my female friends. " If you mistreat him I'll kick your ass!"

The fact still remains that men's fashion magazines are filled with ****-erotica, some subtle, some not so subtle and I'm just asking for magazines to raise the bar, stop trying to sell sex and start selling clothes.
I don't want any sexual tension in my fashion magazine **** or hetero. And I'd prefer models 30 years old and up. Heck, in the USA your not considered an adult until your at least 26 years old (by polls). The only reason to put a young man/boy in a man's suit he could never afford as a model is to push ****-erotica.
These magazines are filled with nothing but flare and are losing so much money. There's nothing "fabulous" about a lousy bottom line. The more advertisments in a magazine, the closer it is to going out of business.

Don't we have any wealthy guys on this forum? Invest in this idea, I may not make you richer, but at least you'll have respect.
We can call it... "Men's Bespoke", not that just the clothes are bespoke, but everything in the magazine is bespoke for men. The fashion portion will be for every adult semi-conservative to conservative male regardless of orientation.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

WA said:


> Capt Ron, you ask some good questions.
> 
> Older guys don't care to see younger guys with airbrushed makeup, so pictures of that is unfitting. Somebody else brings up Playboy, etc., that does not go over well with most wifes. And why do so many people attack heterosexual? Gay is in many other publications, does it have to be everywhere? It is sort of like buying a fishing magazine and they would then have to put football in it too. So, why is the gay comminity railroading over everybody else. And, can anybody show me the scienctific evidence that gays are born that way? Believing something because one wants it to be true doesn't make it true. Nor, following a crowd or mob make it so, either. Whatever the truth is should be pursued- not what one wants.
> 
> ...


WA, can you cite a few examples of where the gay community has "railroaded" over anyone (or everyone) else? Aside from one recently concluded and hugely popular TV sitcom, and an occasional same-sex couple shown buying or fixing up their house on HGTV, where else are gay people routinely represented in America's mass media?

What I think you have a problem with is not that gay people are overrepresented, but that sexual orientation has become a complete non-issue in countries like the U.S., Canada, much of Europe and Scandinavia, New Zealand, South Africa etc etc, and this list is growing every year.

I don't wish to rehash previous debates in this forum, except to say that 40+ years of formal research has shown a genetic component to sexual orientation is highly probable. This fact scares the pants off orthodox Jews, fundy Christians, Moslems etc because their entire condemnation of homosexuality depends on it being a simple behavioral/moral choice and nothing more.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> Aside from one recently concluded and hugely popular TV sitcom, and an occasional same-sex couple shown buying or fixing up their house on HGTV, where else are gay people routinely represented in America's mass media?


Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Project Runway, Top Chef, figure skating, professional dancers, etc. Do not be so quick to dismiss.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Project Runway, Top Chef, figure skating, professional dancers, etc. Do not be so quick to dismiss.


So that amounts to what, about 1/100th of one percent of all programming? The claim that the gay community is overrepresented, let alone "railroads over everyone else" is still absolutely absurd. Unless of course WA really believes _any_ representation of gay people in our media is too much (which is likely the case IMO).


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> So that amounts to what, about 1/100th of one percent of all programming?


I was making no claim, merely showing yours to be incorrect. I did that quite well and the above is merely an ad hoc rescue.


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

I honestly think that _Classic Style_, _Men's Vogue_, and _Best Life _all more or less fill the description of what's being asked for in this thread, so I'm not sure where the void lies. _Esquire _and _GQ_ strike me as pretty "straight" in their editorial content, too, although they do feature some of the pouty young models referred to (as well as picturing the clothes on well-known entertainment and media types). _Details _straddles the fence between youth appeal and gay appeal, and does so quite openly. _Men's Health_, _Men's Fitness_, and the other fitness magazines straddle the same fence, but far less openly; that is to say, they pretend to be ragingly heterocentric ("Sixty Ways to Have Hotter Sex with Her Now") while sending a quite different homocentric message in virtually all their visual content (just take a look at the covers).

So the situation is a mixed bag. And here's a guess: all these fashion, fitness, and lifestyle magazines have done extensive marketing research and realized that the percentage of their readership that is gay is *much* higher than the percentage of gays in the general male population. Therefore, they cannot alienate them; they must appeal to those readers at least covertly. The number of straight guys who actually care about how they look and dress ("metrosexuals" or same variation) is probably rather small; and the number of them above the age of 35 is that much smaller still. Those interested straight males are a more-affluent-than-average crowd, to be sure, and are thus still desirable to advertisers despite their small numbers; but they mix demographically with the also interested gay population in difficult to separate ways. The magazines are on solid economic ground in trying to reach both audiences -- and along a spectrum of degree and honesty about intent, they do.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> I was making no claim, merely showing yours to be incorrect. I did that quite well and the above is merely an ad hoc rescue.


Oh no, here comes the emotionally retarded six year-old. Again.

I'm right. You're wrong. Nyahhh Nyahhh. Feel better now?

Between your desperate need to be right, your ranting about imaginary sock puppets, and on and on you're very close to meeting my Bozo Bin once again.

Lighten up, or up your meds. Or hopefully both.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> Oh no, here comes the emotionally retarded six year-old. Again.
> 
> I'm right. You're wrong. Nyahhh Nyahhh. Feel better now?
> 
> ...


Ah, your little delusional reality teeters again so you lash out like a thwarted two year old forced to use the toilet vs. crapping in his pants. Classic outburst in response to reality's cold fingers gripping your neurotic make believe world. Sorry Frank, you cannot crap your pants daily and think you are going to be allowed to sit at the grown up table.

Frank, pointing out the little fantasies you constantly create are just that, fantasies, is about reality orientation, something we often employ with the mentally ill and the demented. I am sorry if this causes you such discomfort but is a sure sign you should seek help.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Frank, pointing out the little fantasies you constantly create are just that, fantasies, is about reality orientation, something we often employ with the mentally ill and the demented.


We? How many voices are inside that pea brain of yours?

Adieu, adieu, parting is such sweetness.

*PLONK*


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

The primate species have many behaviors dictated by genetics, perhaps the desire to pick up a femur and bash other primate's heads in to the tune of Thus Spracht Zarathustra most familiar. Curious commonality in behavior though; Every culture displays religosity of some form from the painted caves and red ochre stained skeletons of our most ancient recognised ancestors to the great cathedrals. And it is a fact both secular and religious institutions have rules of conduct that, fairly or unfairly disenfranchise people for any number of behaviors. Is religosity a genetic trait of humankind? Or is it, unlike homosexuallity a wet street causing the rain to fall? The poster of this thread made a polite disclaimer against intent to 'gay bash' And however inartfull his post, that should have been taken at face value. But no, instead we get predicted social behavior from what is probably the rare, mutated FRANCK DC gene known only in one other creature- the pissant.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> We? How many voices are inside that pea brain of yours?
> 
> Adieu, adieu, parting is such sweetness.
> 
> *PLONK*


Is this code that you have once again gone catatonic?


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

Gentlemen,
This is not a battle between gay and straight. I believe gay men should be just as upset that fashion magazines are using sex to sell fashion.

I would be just as happy accepting money from a gay man to start a sexual orientation neutral fashion magazine. If I was gay I'd be offended to think someone could convince me into buying there clothes because of their models. Using flesh to sell is strictly for flesh monkies. We need to pull together, get control of our testosterone and ask for fashion not sexual fusion, remember fushion is cheap. Guys we all want to look better, stronger, thinner, and smarter. The majority of males who buy men's fashion magazines may be gay, but the majority of men who buy clothes are straight. Doesn't anyone else understand this?????????


----------



## brioni007 (Dec 3, 2007)

*Hornets nest*

Capt Ron;

I liked your post because it sparked a lot of debate. I think this country needs more debates with real people and their views. So I did enjoy your post. You alright with me, I truly understand want you were attempting to convey. I look forward to chatting with you.



Capt Ron said:


> Gentlemen,
> This is not a battle between gay and straight. I believe gay men should be just as upset that fashion magazines are using sex to sell fashion.
> 
> I would be just as happy accepting money from a gay man to start a sexual orientation neutral fashion magazine. If I was gay I'd be offended to think someone could convince me into buying there clothes because of their models. Using flesh to sell is strictly for flesh monkies. We need to pull together, get control of our testosterone and ask for fashion not sexual fusion, remember fushion is cheap. Guys we all want to look better, stronger, thinner, and smarter. The majority of males who buy men's fashion magazines may be gay, but the majority of men who buy clothes are straight. Doesn't anyone else understand this?????????


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

Capt Ron said:


> Guys we all want to look better, stronger, thinner, and smarter.


Nope, sorry, they don't. Look around you, for Pete's sake.



> The majority of males who buy men's fashion magazines may be gay, but the majority of men who buy clothes are straight. Doesn't anyone else understand this?????????


What clothes? Dockers? Believe me, those magazines have spent small fortunes determining who buys the clothing they depict. They know who they are selling to. The bottom line is that, although straight men may outnumber gay men 20 to 1, when it comes to matters of self-presentation, the numbers skew very differently. Straight men who really care about self-presentation are as much of a minority among the general male population as gay men are among the same population. Sorry to tell you this! You are a minority member. You are not Joe Average. You are not "normal." Embrace that!


----------



## brioni007 (Dec 3, 2007)

*Now you made me laugh!*

Dude that was funny but loaded with good information. I have enjoyed reading post on this subject. 


topbroker said:


> Nope, sorry, they don't. Look around you, for Pete's sake.
> 
> What clothes? Dockers? Believe me, those magazines have spent small fortunes determining who buys the clothing they depict. They know who they are selling to. The bottom line is that, although straight men may outnumber gay men 20 to 1, when it comes to matters of self-presentation, the numbers skew very differently. Straight men who really care about self-presentation are as much of a minority among the general male population as gay men are among the same population. Sorry to tell you this! You are a minority member. You are not Joe Average. You are not "normal." Embrace that!


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> I don't wish to rehash previous debates in this forum, except to say that 40+ years of formal research has shown a genetic component to sexual orientation is highly probable. This fact scares the pants off orthodox Jews, fundy Christians, Moslems etc because their entire condemnation of homosexuality depends on it being a simple behavioral/moral choice and nothing more.


Believeing gay behavior is a Sociological problem doesn't make a person a gay hater. Since it is a Sociological problem then it is cureable. So, Christians have nothing to worry about. So, what do you think about it being a Sociological problem and not genetic?


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

WA it's not always a sociological problem. History is rich with military cadres of gay men. Many plains indians accepted male transvestites as women and valued them as extra hardy workers. But for reasons oftentimes lost in time or so ingrained in a culture many societies do have prohibitions against specific behaviors. Unfortunately, there is not, nor ever will be a human culture where people can 'do their own thing.' There are no hippie communes in New Mexico with Montessori raised children going through a rebellious stage by wearing Brooks Bros suits. It's a condition of Mankind, and to inform an orthodox jew he must accept gays in temple is to condemn jewish orthodoxy as much as homosexuallity. It's not fair, but it's reallity.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

topbroker said:


> Straight men who really care about self-presentation are as much of a minority among the general male population as gay men are among the same population. Sorry to tell you this! You are a minority member. You are not Joe Average. You are not "normal." Embrace that!


ok touche,
I have never been "normal". When I was a child playing with my Star Wars action figures (12" models) I used to make them different sets of clothes by hand sewing. I never though of my actions as gay-like. I only though I was making improvements to their existing wardrobe. At one time I even wanted to be an aestitician because I enjoy helping men and women look better and feel better about themselves. I teach my male friends how to buff and shine their nails, you would swear they had polish on them. The palm sides of my hands are rough from work, I can feel my own roughness when I touch my girlfriend's beautiful skin. I have been using a hand softener treatment by MK and it seems to be helping, but in the mean time I can at least have nice nails.
I have never questioned my sexual orientation. My attraction to women is something that comes from my deepest core. It's not something I have learned as a child or chosen to embrace, it's simply my primordial programming and on several occasions I have wished I would have avoided embracing that programming. 
I can look at a man and admire with envy how handsome he is. And desire his features but not him. Features like: thicker hair, taller height, slimmer waist, stronger jaw line, a butt that can hold up pants, ripped abs and a general over-all build that can wear OTR suits and model underwear! And if he's wealthy, I'd like his cash too, I could use it to start a new magazine. I don't feel gay when I say a man is handsome, I normally feel jealous...lol 
I'm open about my insecurities, I have had to deal with them all my life. I'm not perfect, but God and my girlfriend still love me with all my faults.

As a Christian I have to remind myself that Jesus died for everybody's imperfections (sins), not just mine or peoples like me. I don't know how other Christians feel and I really don't even know what a Christian is anymore by definition so I can only speak for myself. The Bible says there is only one unforgivable sin and it's not being gay, it probably has something to do with matching shoes.

Perhaps it my Libra nature that wants my masculine side to be balanced out with my feminine side. If that's the case, I have a very strong masculine side, so that would explain much of my feminine embrace.

I'm not sure what normal is today, but from what I have seen on the news it's not something I want to strive to be.


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

Very nice reply, Capt. Ron! I think we are in broad agreement. And I agree with you about "normalcy." Who needs it?


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

WA said:


> Believeing gay behavior is a Sociological problem doesn't make a person a gay hater. Since it is a Sociological problem then it is cureable. So, Christians have nothing to worry about. So, what do you think about it being a Sociological problem and not genetic?


Except that you didn't say that homosexuality or "gay behavior" is a sociological problem. Here's what you did say:

_Gay is in many other publications, does it have to be everywhere? It is sort of like buying a fishing magazine and they would then have to put football in it too. So, why is the gay comminity railroading over everybody else._

I'll be more inclined to accept these claims when I learn that heterosexuals are routinely and legally discriminated against in employment; when they are kicked out of the military if they mention their spouses or otherwise refer to their sexual orientation; are denied legal and financial recognition of their family relationships; and are barred from leadership positions in churches, the Boy Scouts, and other voluntary organizations.

Even if these claims, like "the gay community railroading over everybody else" were true, they would have nothing to do with the question of whether homosexuality is genetic or chosen. Although there have been repeated references to social and biological science research that homosexuality is innate, your only response is to say that nobody has shown you the evidence. As a successful Internet user you undoubtedly have the ability to look for such evidence if you are so inclined. Nevertheless, here is a link that discusses some of the genetic evidence as well as the implications for religious tolerance of that evidence: . Among other things, it discusses the claim that you make that if homosexuality is a sociological problem (not that I'm entirely sure what that means) it can be cured, and the fact that so-called reparative therapy, intended to "reprogram" homosexuals to heterosexuals, is virtually 100% ineffective.

Finally, following on Capt. Ron's excellent post, I'll just pose a question to you: can you recount the day that you made the decision to be heterosexual rather than homosexual? Can you describe the competing benefits and detriments of the two alternatives, how you resolved them, and what other sexual orientations you considered when making this choice? Can you imagine, from the point in your life you are at right now, changing your mind and making the opposite choice?


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

jackmccullough said:


> Except that you didn't say that homosexuality or "gay behavior" is a sociological problem. Here's what you did say:
> 
> _Gay is in many other publications, does it have to be everywhere? It is sort of like buying a fishing magazine and they would then have to put football in it too. So, why is the gay comminity railroading over everybody else._
> 
> ...


So, jackmccullough, you are clearly not a Christian. At the end of the website you posted above they listed some reading. I suggest that you go to some University Libararies and start going through the hundreds of book on Pyschology of every kind. Not just books on sex Pyschology. Read the old to the new. Then go out and start asking gays about there life before puberty and during puberty. I don't expect you to read everything in every book, but everything about sex in all the books. What you read on the internet and in papers and magazines are to draw your attention to them, but by passes 90+% of the subject. Your like a ship without a rudder going with the flow of the tide, whether that is good or not depends on where the tide takes you. The history of the media as the tide has shown that it is not always good. What the Christian right says does not interest me much and I rarely read anything of it.

In this world there are people that want to use you by going over your head, and they have on this subject. I also suggest you read the books on lieing in the Pyschology department in these libraries for this is well worth it for any subject. While I clearly believe God Is Who He says He Is it seems to me Pyschology backs up many of those beliefs. Sure there are plenty of Pyschologist that write against God and there is lots the Church missunderstands. What it comes down to is God gave you a brain, which you should use and stop having your hand held by who ever is holding it- that is the way God intended it. So do some more reading. And don't be guided by somebody, because if you are guided then you are not doing all of your own thinking. Don't let other people contaminate your mind.

Pyschology is still discovering cures to peoples problems is it not?

So to sume up my thoughts. Everybody at puberty becomes a heterosexual, a few turn away from it. There is a prepuberty time zone that appears gay but isn't gay at all. This prepuberty time zone is being used to decieve the unwitty. So do some carefull reading. In the past I did lots of reading.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

In a world where kids are having kids, is being born gay or choosing to be gay really that big a deal?
I don't care what you do behind closed doors with consenting adults, just please don't be a burden on society whomever you are. Can we all agree on that?
Does the biggest ****-hater really care if the homosexual, is working, paying his taxes and being a good citizen? The majority of homosexuals I have met keep good yards, clean homes, dress well, pay taxes, don't sexually harass me, and are always lending a hand if you need help. That being said and considering where I live, I wish all my neighbors were queer!
When I learned Leonardo Da Vinci was gay, it all made sense. Look how much a man can accomplish when he isn't chasing a woman!
Be a good Christian by worrying about your own soul and lead by example.
Everybody in the USA has heard about Jesus, the rest is up to them.
Jesus never tried to persuade people or talk people into believing. He spoke, if people listened, they listened if they did He moved on. And remember above all that He died for everyone's imperfections not just yours.
That's whyy ou can wish everyone a Merry Christmas, regardless of what religious beliefs a person has, Jesus loves them too. Jesus loved the ones who nailed Him to the cross and asked God to forgive them. Have any one of you every tried to love somebody you hated? I have tried and have failed over and over again. I keep trying. If God can forgive me and all I have done certainly I can forgive others or at least try. Whether youre a Christian or athiest, you can't knock the belief system of forgiveness.

One Christmas, I wrote a list of all the things I felt that people had wronged me. I built a fire in the back yard, read the list aloud and burned it.
The following year a dear friend suggested I make another list, but this time write down the things I need to forgive myself for hurting others. This list was much longer.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

jackmccullough said:


> I'll just pose a question to you: can you recount the day that you made the decision to be heterosexual rather than homosexual? Can you describe the competing benefits and detriments of the two alternatives, how you resolved them, and what other sexual orientations you considered when making this choice?


Fortunately for me I never had to choose. I have been a fool for women my whole life.
But let me think of the possible cons and pros about _choosing_ to be openly gay in the 1980's.

Be persecuted, isolated, threatened, and forced to live in fear of disappointing my friends and family.

Giving up any chance of being in a college fraternity or adult fraternal order.

Forget playing any sports, maybe I could have been a cheerleader???

Giving up the dream of the house with a white picket fence, wife, kids, dog, and friendly neighbors.

Being denied a job even though I was the MOST qualified.

Being denied the health benifits shared between legally married couples.

Losing many of my friends and loved ones to a horrific disease.

Being informed by my closest friends that I was going to eternally burn in Hell.

My only friends being men so flaming they could set wool on fire and women who look as masculine as the men I rather be drinking beer and playing football with.

Now, let's list some Pros:
I'd never have to pay for a drinks again and ....
by the time I'm 30 years old, every men's fashion magazine will come with centerfold pin-ups of well dressed boys in suits.

Anybody body still think being gay is a choice?

I wish every human could be a happy heterosexual, I truly do, but it's not possible. I just don't believe for men it's a choice. So , let's work on respecting other people's rights to happpiness without robbing others of their rights to achieve it.

For many lesbian women, that's another story. Don't confuse gay men with lesbian / bisexual women. You can't compare pears and bananas.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I thought GQ was geared towards straight men?


----------



## mack11211 (Oct 14, 2004)

Howard said:


> I thought GQ was geared towards straight men?


It sure is now.

This was not always so.

In their 50th anniversary issue, there was one bittersweet memoir of their gay days in the 70s.

In the present day, middle aged heteros are still sexy here:

https://clast.diamondagency.jp/en/?p=21


----------



## tabasco (Jul 17, 2006)

WA said:


> So do some carefull reading. In the past I did lots of reading.


Your arguments are not persuasive, your writing atrocious. While you may have done "lots of reading", do you remember anything of elementary school grammer or spelling?

This personal attack aside, and more to the point, my observations are that:
1. appearance matters, both to humans and animals
2. sexual preferance is a continuum not a duality
3. sex sells
4. all is vanity

-clothed for the moment


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I hate to tell you kids this.Magazines are geared to making money. If the only people buying magazines were a million Don Imusesq 'tired old white men' EBONY and Oprah would change their format faster than GQ ever did.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

Howard said:


> I thought GQ was geared towards straight men?


I don't consider GQ to be a men' fashion magazine. I consider it to be more poor interviews with desperate celebrities and "hot fahion trends" and advertisements without comment. I'm a subscriber to hot is not in the male fashion world. Remember, anything that is hot, usually becomes cold before you credit card balanceis paid off.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

tabasco said:


> Your arguments are not persuasive, your writing atrocious. While you may have done "lots of reading", do you remember anything of elementary school grammer or spelling?
> 
> This personal attack aside, and more to the point, my observations are that:
> 1. appearance matters, both to humans and animals
> ...


So you would rather be wrong and look great than to be right even if you don't look so good?

If the hate card when played is right and it was played several times ten years ago, then those ideas ten years ago would still be right. So, why have they been forgotten? And, who believes in them now? The hate card does not make something right.

The latest theory doesn't sweep under the rug decades of research, and more important, observations from those who are trained to observer.

It is all right to believe in theories (who doesn't?), but remember, they are still theories and not facts.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

tabasco said:


> Your arguments are not persuasive, your writing atrocious. While you may have done "lots of reading", do you remember anything of elementary school grammer or spelling?


I think WA is using a Markov chain to do his writing. 

An example of a Markov chain from Mark V Shaney:

_Can anyone think of myself as a third sex. Yes, I am expected to have. People often get used to me knowing these things and then a cover is placed over all of them. Along the side of the $$ are spent by (or at least for ) the girls. You can't settle the issue. It seems I've forgotten what it is, but I don't. I know about violence against women, and I really doubt they will ever join together into a large number of jokes. It showed Adam, just after being created. He has a modem and an autodial routine. He calls my number 1440 times a day. So I will conclude by saying that I can well understand that she might soon have the time, it makes sense, again, to get the gist of my argument, I was in that (though it's a Republican administration). 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_V_Shaney_


----------



## Title III Guy (Mar 18, 2007)

tabasco said:


> Your arguments are not persuasive, your writing atrocious. While you may have done "lots of reading", *do you remember anything of elementary school grammer or spelling?*
> 
> 2. sexual *preferance* is a continuum not a duality


Not taking sides here (by far!), and perhaps a bit picky, I know, but it's "grammar," not "grammer." But you spelled "spelling" right! :icon_smile:

Kind regards,
T3G


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> I think WA is using a Markov chain to do his writing...


It seems like I knew that before. But, have long forgotten the name. I try not to be too wordy but, still cover a lot of territory.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Title III Guy said:


> Not taking sides here (by far!), and perhaps a bit picky, I know, but it's "grammar," not "grammer." But you spelled "spelling" right! :icon_smile:
> 
> Kind regards,
> T3G


Thanks! People do that all the time. It seems when they accuse me of something they wouldn't do the same thing.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

WA said:


> Thanks! People do that all the time. It seems when they accuse me of something they wouldn't do the same thing.


We might want to talk to Andy about incorporating an auto word check spelling/ grammar program onto the forum.

As a rule, I try not to speak any words I can not spell and I certainly dare not attempt to spell a word I can not pronounce. But.....I do have ADD, so therefore I am protected by the ADA.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

WA said:


> It seems like I knew that before. But, have long forgotten the name. I try not to be too wordy but, still cover a lot of territory.


Just joking around with you, WA. :icon_smile_big:


----------



## tabasco (Jul 17, 2006)

*Hoist on my own petard*

*Not taking sides here (by far!), and perhaps a bit picky, I know, but it's "grammar," not "grammer." But you spelled "spelling" right!*

Oh, I love it. It is so fitting, ain't it? Mebbe if I can locate this beam in me eyes blindin' me I can find even more mote-like faults...eh?

My apologies to WA for the finger pointing. Mea culpa.

That said, he can't write:

_*So you would rather be wrong and look great than to be right even if you don't look so good?*_

_*If the hate card when played is right and it was played several times ten years ago, then those ideas ten years ago would still be right. So, why have they been forgotten? And, who believes in them now? The hate card does not make something right.*_

_*The latest theory doesn't sweep under the rug decades of research, and more important, observations from those who are trained to observer. *_

_*It is all right to believe in theories (who doesn't?), but remember, they are still theories and not facts*_

Huh?

-one more time


----------



## RSS (Dec 30, 2003)

I know of few -- straight or gay -- who read or appreciate the current crop of fashion magazines such as G.Q., Esquire, etc. Of course, those I know are mid-forth-something to mid-sixty-something. 

There are magazine exceptions, such as Classic Style ... read by straight and gay friends alike ... again in the mid-forty-something to mid-sixty-something age group. 

Frankly, other than what goes on behind closed doors ... neither the gay nor straight people I know seem to be seeking things which are much different from one another. 

Perhaps this is more an issue of age, income, lifestyle (apart from sexual implications) and taste?


----------



## RSS (Dec 30, 2003)

EAP said:


> Personally, I find that the best accessory for attaining that flawless look can often be gray hair.


Perhaps I should put a different spin on my tag line? (see below)


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

> Unlike the standard men's magazine in the West like GQ, Esquire, or even Playboy, Leon has very little in the way of general-interest material, interviews with celebrities, or long-form articles. Almost 95% of the magazine is product information - with a majority of the content veering into unabashed advertorial "tie-up." All the major luxury brands are represented. For suits, the range spans from Ralph Lauren to Paul Smith to obscure Italian tailors. Few items gain attention outside of apparel - only cigars and whiskeys, but even these generally appear as accessories to a wardrobe rather than areas in which the gentleman should develop expert knowledge.


I have noticed this in almost all Japanese fashion magazines, mens' and womens': they focus on product reviews rather than b.s. material common in American magazines.

Why?

I suspect it is because Japanese magazine readers actually buy the goods and want reviews and detail focused articles, compared to that huge percentage of American magazine readers who will never buy high end clothing.

Think of American Vogue. How many women read it? Many. How many of them buy Louis Vuitton bags? Very few.

Thats not the case in Japan. Every high school girl owns one, and there are several LV boutiques in every city.

You can say that for any major brand, and even for high end mens clothing. Bespoke shoes? Where are the most beautiful ones made? No, not England. Japan. Why? There is a bigger market for them there.

The Japanese magazine reader actually spends money on the goods that the fashion magazines are pushing, and therefore, needs more focused reviews and more style articles. And, as statistics show, he's also probably not gay.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Capt Ron said:


> I don't consider GQ to be a men' fashion magazine. I consider it to be more poor interviews with desperate celebrities and "hot fahion trends" and advertisements without comment. I'm a subscriber to hot is not in the male fashion world. Remember, anything that is hot, usually becomes cold before you credit card balanceis paid off.


So if a gay guy wants to read gay,they should read Playgirl.


----------



## Capt Ron (Dec 28, 2007)

Howard said:


> So if a gay guy wants to read gay,they should read Playgirl.


Howie, I'm no grammar expert and my posts are filled with faults, but please at least take the time to match your pronouns sing/plural.

Now, my official rebuttal: 
I'm not familiar with the contents of Playgirl magazine, but if it's anything like Playboy I don't think any human, gay or straight should be subjected to such crap writing or air brushed photography.

I'm opposed to images of the human body being portrayed in any manner for erotic or pornographic purposes.
The only reasons statues are carved naked is because clothing is too difficult to chisel. Same with brush painting clothing I'm told also.

Gay men have all men's fashion magazines to admire. Surely you can admire the handsomeness of a straight man as assuredly I can the beauty of a lesbian. Why should they be limited to Playgirl? Isn't that a magazine for girls anyways? Maybe that's the problem, gay men are reading magazines designed to give relationship advice about straight men. Wow, that must get complicated! I'm more familiar with the complications of lesbian relationships than gay. 
When it comes to love, we're all screwed!
There's no middle road with love, just try to enjoy the bumps!


----------



## weckl (Jun 28, 2003)

You seem to be equating "gay" with showing thin male models, which isn't accurate, since men's magazines have always done that (though I know what you're trying to say). 

The bigger issue is the dumbing down of Esquire and GQ (in particular) to compete with the idiotic likes of Maxim. Also, they're not really fashion magazines, in the sense that they cater far too much to their advertisers to provide their readers with real info on quality clothes. If you only read Esquire, you'd think Armani made the best suits on earth, and you wouldn't even know what "bespoke" or "MTM" meant. So they completely misrepresent the industry.

I'm 35, and I grew out of Esquire when I was in my 20s. It's all kind of silly now...


----------



## topbroker (Jul 30, 2006)

weckl said:


> You seem to be equating "gay" with showing thin male models, which isn't accurate, since men's magazines have always done that (though I know what you're trying to say).
> 
> The bigger issue is the dumbing down of Esquire and GQ (in particular) to compete with the idiotic likes of Maxim. Also, they're not really fashion magazines, in the sense that they cater far too much to their advertisers to provide their readers with real info on quality clothes. If you only read Esquire, you'd think Armani made the best suits on earth, and you wouldn't even know what "bespoke" or "MTM" meant. So they completely misrepresent the industry.
> 
> I'm 35, and I grew out of Esquire when I was in my 20s. It's all kind of silly now...


Great _Onion _headline: "_Maxim_: Magazine Correctly Judged By Its Cover."


----------



## DMAllen (Jun 9, 2007)

*I agree with you Capt Ron*

I am gay and I completely agree with Capt Ron. If I want to look at pictures of men's clothing, I shouldn't be forced to look at 22 year old boy toys that are drenched with sexuality. Frankly, those images make me uncomfortable to look at and I wonder to myself who is buying this stuff and how has what I would consider an inappropriate use of sexuality become the norm for showing men's clothing?

I am right there with you guy. I too would like a heterosexual men's magazine for clothing as long as it doesnt have half naked women all over it, which GQ tried back many years ago to make sure people didnt think of it as a gay magazine. (It has been so long since I have looked at GQ, I dont know what they are doing now).

Thanks for the thread.


----------



## Bog (May 13, 2007)

```
Sexuality Types by Magazine and Year

                              Sexuality type %
Magazine            Heterosexual  Ambiguous  Unknown

Sports Illustrated
  Total                 50.0        16.7       33.3
  1987                  57.1        28.6       14.3
  1997                  40.0         0.0       60.0

Popular Mechanics
  Total                 25.0         0.0       75.0
  1987                  50.0         0.0       50.0
  1997                   0.0         0.0      100.0

Men's Health
  Total                 18.2         0.0       81.8
  1987                  25.0         0.0       75.0
  1997                  15.5         0.0       84.5

GQ
  Total                 23.6         9.0       67.4
  1987                  24.4        16.7       59.0
  1997                  22.7         0.0       77.3

Business Week
  Total                 80.0        20.0        0.0
  1987                  66.7        33.3        0.0
  1997                 100.0         0.0        0.0
Table IV
```



> In recent years, sexualized images of men, or the "erotic male," have proliferated in men's magazines. In these images, the erotic male represents a physical and sexual ideal, whereby an attractive, muscular man is placed on display. Such imagery is undoubtedly in part a response to the economic trends over the last 50 years, but it is also a product of cultural changes in American society.
> 
> In 1984 major firms began actively to pursue the "gay dollar" because manufacturers believed that gay consumers were young and robust with a large discretionary income, upscale tastes, and strong brand loyalty (Alsop, 1999b; Elliott, 1992b; "Gay Press Looks to Madison Ave.," 1990; Harris, 1984; Rothman, 1999; Swisher, 1993). (4) Advertisers' interest was in part spurred by surveys done by The Advocate in the late 1970s, which indicated almost three fourths of its readership were between the ages of 20 and 40 and earned incomes well above the national median (Clark, 1995).
> 
> ...


Eroticizing men: cultural influences on advertising and male objectification
Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, Feb, 2002 by Deana A. Rohlinger


----------

