Lewis Hamilton

Status
Not open for further replies.


Frijj said:
So what you're saying is that the wearing of a dress in absolutely no way, shape or form impacts on someone's sexuality but could help them discover it?

I wouldn't disagree but that's a far cry from what you said earlier, which certainly implied that the dress caused the sexuality
Click to expand...

No. Gay or straight are social constructs for people who have sex with different kinds if people, if anything sexuality is on a sliding scale, but I would agree ceratin personality traits do cluster, people can be on the “gay side” of a scale but have sex with women their whole lives because they reject taking certain steps that might lead them to living gay. Being more open to dressing as a women from young could break a wall.

Make sense?
 
Frijj said:
If you had an earring in the wrong ear when I was at school, you'd have got bullied for it. Mind you, you'd get bullied for pretty much anything at school, that is how kids are.

I'm not sure why the children of the 70s and 80s think being bullied at school was an experience unique to their generation mind.
Click to expand...
Hamilton needs a good braying

End of thread

Also, scherzinger and him had a suspicious lack of chemistry, a bit like Ashley Cole and Cheryl.

Scherzinger and Cole are both managed by cowell.

Anyways just leaving this here...
 
Goat Eyes said:
I know you’ve started a debate of your own here but that wasn’t the point of the thread. Everyone is going to have very different views on sexuality... People shouldn’t have to explain themselves to you.
Click to expand...

Of course, but if he posts it on a message board he might expect to be asked questions about it. He can choose not to answer, place me on ignore or just tell me to fuck off if he’s not happy about it. Fair enough?
 
Charmless Man said:
I have absolutely no opinion on it. It’s their life and I see nothing inherently wrong or right with it.

It’s in no way equivalent to encouraging them to be violent and I’ve struggled to understand your point when you’ve mentioned that.

Why won’t you answer the question, out of interest?
Click to expand...

I imagine most people envisage that their kids have a similar or better life than their own. In which case, I don't want my kids to cross dress. It's not a problem if they do, but it's not something I want.

The analogy of violence for example is a means of showing that parents have a direct influence on how their kids turn out. I try to be a good dad and steer them in what I consider to be the morally correct direction. Nowt at all wrong with that.
 
Alcoholic_Author said:
No. Gay or straight are social constructs for people who have sex with different kinds if people, if anything sexuality is on a sliding scale, but I would agree ceratin personality traits do cluster, people can be on the “gay side” of a scale but have sex with women their whole lives because they reject taking certain steps that might lead them to living gay. Being more open to dressing as a women from young could break a wall.

Make sense?
Click to expand...

I don't believe that gay and straight are social constructs. I see them as states of being, independent of society.
 
Kevj said:
I imagine most people envisage that their kids have a similar or better life than their own. In which case, I don't want my kids to cross dress. It's not a problem if they do, but it's not something I want.

The analogy of violence for example is a means of showing that parents have a direct influence on how their kids turn out. I try to be a good dad and steer them in what I consider to be the morally correct direction. Nowt at all wrong with that.
Click to expand...

And I’m wondering why you don’t want them to cross dress. What is it that you see as being wrong with it?

I don’t dispute that parents can influence their kids. Which is why I’m confused by the example - all it really serves to do is set up an equivalence between cross dressing and violence.
 
Charmless Man said:
And I’m wondering why you don’t want them to cross dress. What is it that you see as being wrong with it?

I don’t dispute that parents can influence their kids. Which is why I’m confused by the example - all it really serves to do is set up an equivalence between cross dressing and violence.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. It served as an example of how parents have influence, there is no other link other than kids as adults can be directly influenced by their parents, their actions and how they parent.

As for cross dressing, it's just a preference. I'd rather they didn't.
 
Boldoneye said:
Why are you stereotyping ' middle aged blokes' ? I thought enlightened people like you didn't do this sort of thing. Then again you may not be 'enlightened' you might just be a bellend.
Click to expand...

It's not his fault he's from the blurt generation man. He used to get medals for finishing last not mercilessly heckled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top