Baltimore Pride Fest 2004 Report

Jun 20, 2004 23:22

On the whole, gay men are a heck of a lot better looking than gay women.

*sulks*

Leave a comment

Comments 20

traveller June 20 2004, 21:53:09 UTC
and all other things being equal, homos have better hygeine.

*sigh*

Reply

unknownid June 21 2004, 06:53:08 UTC
and fewer mullets.

on the other hand, the leather shorts i could really do without.

Reply

traveller June 21 2004, 06:56:53 UTC
don't bother me none.

but then, i have hag-ish leanings. i think they're all so cuuuuuuuuuuute. *pinches cheeks*

Reply

unknownid June 21 2004, 07:13:25 UTC
have hag-ish leanings

i'm shocked.

i think it was that the leather shorts were on a fairly skinny arse and on top of some quite hairy legs. i can imagine them working better in other contexts/on other arses.

the dyke mullet, otoh...

*sighs self-pityingly*

Reply


splicer June 20 2004, 22:36:08 UTC
On the whole, gay men are a heck of a lot better looking than straight men, too.

I realize that our motivations may be wildly different, but I hope that you don't mind me joining you in sulking.

Reply

unknownid June 21 2004, 06:53:54 UTC
good point. i'm not sure what it means, but it's a good point.

from your point of view i should think that would be a plus, though.

Reply

splicer June 21 2004, 08:15:32 UTC
The downside is living in a city where I'm constantly surrounded by guys who are waaaay better looking than me.

Even telling myself the "ugly duckling" story where I turn out to be "pretty fly ...for a straight guy" just doesn't soothe the wounded ego.

Reply


bateleur June 21 2004, 01:19:26 UTC
Hey, I can't think of a single gay man I fancy as much as you - what are you sulking for ?

Reply

unknownid June 21 2004, 06:58:20 UTC
awww. but you didn't see all the pretty boys at Pride. believe me, they make me look like an ugly stepsister.

i bet it's all about the cleanse-tone-exfoliate.

being a straight man, that probably means nothing to you.

Reply


ericaceous June 21 2004, 06:12:56 UTC
Sometimes I think that to the extent this is true, it's because some queer women:
1. Do not read as gay and/or
2. Avoid queer events like the plague (possibly because they feel alienated from dyke culture)and/or
3. Have a different standard of attractiveness that they aspire to than the one you are using.

But yeah, to speak in broad generalizations, I'd say that many visibly gay men place a high priority on their physical attractiveness and many visibly queer women have other concerns they place far, far ahead.

Reply

unknownid June 21 2004, 07:10:13 UTC
1 and 2 are good points that i hadn't thought of.

yeah, 3 is what i'm sulking about here. i figure that "according to my standards of attractiveness" is always implied in "better looking" which is (john cleese notwithstanding) essentially subjective.

just my bad luck, i guess. OTOH, it does make gay men pretty much nature's perfect eyecandy. all mwrowr, no muss no fuss.

Reply

ericaceous June 21 2004, 07:40:09 UTC
RE: 3, sometimes it is possible to enlarge one's standards of attractiveness. SOmehow, I have started to find people attractive that I would not have a while ago. I'm not sure what that is a bout, but since it adds to my enjoyment of the world, I'm not complaining.

But yeah, perfect eyecandy gay men with no messy possibilities to muck things up is a fun side dish.

Reply

ericaceous June 21 2004, 09:32:11 UTC
Oh, and the mullet? WHY oh why is that still a popular option for some subgroups of women?

Reply


spillingvelvet June 21 2004, 07:19:03 UTC
there was a gay rights march in my little town. they closed down mainstreet for us and everything. we even got a few manyl men out of the sports bar and into the march with us.

i got a pin out of it, too. 'straight but not narrow' and am thinking of giving it to my mom cos ... erm... it doesn't really work for me anymore. lol.

Reply

unknownid June 21 2004, 07:26:44 UTC
hee. i always think of that pin as "the magic don't-hit-on-me shield."

Reply


Leave a comment

Up