First off, watching two gay men kiss is creepy. Secondly, nodding at us to get moving when we noticed you was a bit insulting. We weren’t in a massively obvious location for the world to see us. We weren’t grabbing at each other. I am near certain if we had been two chicks you would have done nothing. Or if we were straight couple also you probably would have done nothing. To bad for you we both had penises.
Get a grip. Times have changed and when two adult men want to kiss in the dim light on the empty street we shouldn’t get dirty looks, expected to immediately stop and leave. I also shouldn’t be restricted to only being able to do this outside of a certain bar. It’s hard enough for gay men to feel comfortable in this city showing any displays of affections. —big open queer
This article appears in Jul 10-16, 2014.
Golden opportunity missed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_pC2ToILCs
Maybe he was just watching?
Was it his alleged disgust or you were in an area where you shouldn’t have been?
Secondly, who says watching two men kissing (gay or otherwise) is creepy?
If you’re such a big open queer, why does it matter?
Sign me,
An OLD big open queer
^ he said that the cop nodded at them to get moving when they noticed, which is kinda ridiculous.
and i’m a believer in picking up vibes from people. sometimes you can just tell someone is being creepy or weird about a situation.
So the OB is a gay SET.
I’ve seen a straight couple get kicked out of a mall for dry humping, does that count?
Problem with society today is they can’t accept the new reality…if I saw Mr. Meaty kissing or hugging another man (exclude me) I’d be clapping my hands for them to have the courage and the balls (no pun) to not care what people thought? If it makes them happy and comfortable, who cares? Same applies on the other side of gender too. Get with the program people.
I was always told that you don’t know you don’t like something until you at least try it…?!
I’ve always been ‘meh’ about open displays of affection. I have no problem with any affectionate interaction unless it involves small farm animals or inanimate objects.
Mr Meaty, whoever told you that is a fool. Think about it for a second. I know I don’t like arsenic and I’m not going to try it no matter what anyone says or anything else I don’t want to eat or try.
How bout this, TTFN: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/a…
OMF – Grizzly Genitalia – pass.
Cue outraged response from Mr. Meaty in 3 – 2- 1….
Susan Musgrave, another giantess of Canada Council funded horribleness included a tender romantic love scene between some hippies and a gut-shot deer in “The Charcoal Burners”
One Can-lit course was enough for me in uni. After that it was dead white European males and nothing but.
ah but ivan, didn’t you enjoy atwoods hilarious parody of Committee for an Independent Canada ( I dated one of those weirdos ) shuffling bomb makings around Toronto in Lady Oracle?
Never read any of the great scaley lizard’s tomes. Not even when I worked at a shoppe that sold only canajun authors. We sold copies of “Outhouses of the East” and “The Town that Died” by the trailer load to tours of bus lemmings from South of 49.
I have a copy of outhouses of the east!
Regrettably it’s not just a Maritime phenomenon.
http://www.franklycollectible.com/images/d…
‘Fall on Your Knees’ by Anne Marie MacD made me think book burning wasn’t such a bad idea after all.
Everything ever written by that smarmy surfer dude who used to have the crap-ass cable access show should be pulped and donated to NSCAD’s Faculty of Papier-Mache Studies. That would make an infinitely better choyce.
Bahawhawhawhaw, Ivanski – his long flowing hippy hair looks kinda weird now that he has that wrinkly ol’ nut sack face. Jebus Crisps, Kitty, do I hear a tiny chortle from you?!
Yeah – there was always something special about dealing with local authors – they were every bit as insufferable as the Pierre Burpins and Maggie Shatwoods – but with so much less reason. The vanity press writers who sold their magnum opii out of their car trunks were the absolute worst. You had to delicately explain to them that because they had already bequeathed freebies on their friends and family, their contribution to Western culture didn’t even stand a reasonable chance of being shoplifted. Comical.
I’m not into PDA’s myself and personally they can make me uncomfortable even if I am just witnessing two people (of any shape, colour, gender, sexuality, disability..etc..). However.. I support the LGBT community. Mr. Rent-a-cop’s behavior really shouldn’t have any importance in your life, and I know how it feels to be judged but if you are secure in your self worth then no ones opinions can hurt you. Stay strong.
At least Pierre could roll a decent doobie, Ivanski. I had an ex-boyfriend who was into using ‘vanity presses’ back in the 1970s – if I recall, he had a thousand copies of his mediocre poetry mildewing in his basement.
As for Shatwood, she’s just a bobble-head with a very bad perm.
I don’t follow celebrity news ( now that’s an oxymoron in my books) because I don’t give a hoot what an actor or writer or singer thinks about world peace or lettuce.
I don’t care who they boff or what they like to eat or wear. irrelevant to me.
I want what they work at though. I love to read books, watch movies and listen to music.
so if an author is a pompous ass (and you don’t have to be a writer to be a pompous ass) I don’t care. if they think they are god’s gift to publishing I don’t care. I care about the words and pictures, can they take me away into that world and get me hooked. are they good at the craft and have enough talent and art to do it. good. the rest of their shit is their shit and nothing to do with me. that’s their personal life. I don’t want anyone else rummaging about in mine – what I think, what I like or dislike, how I feel and I don’t want anything to do with anyone else’s.
I don’t understand why so many people get involved emotionally in the minutiae of *celebrity* behaviour. it must be popular or there wouldn’t be so much of it in screaming headlines and mind numbing interviews in the media. ( and my goddamn f/b sidebars)
re two authors briefly mentioned here that have both given me hours of pleasurable or gripping reading….I don’t see what his and her hair has to do with their craft.
republic of nothing bites to the bone about not just nova scotians, but human nature anywhere. it shares my shelves next to catcher in the rye and not as a red headed step child.
and handmaids tale has no equivalent anywhere imo. anyone who says it is a vehicle for a supposed anti male philosophy of the author’s perhaps has not read it or comprehended who were the real instigators, designers and enforcers of the system.
When you personally encounter an author being beastly to both those who buy and those who purvey their scribbley-drivellys, it’s puts a little bit of passive aggressive schadenfreude on the whole boycott process.
Handmaids Tale provided me personally with a couple of decades of amusement – watching social commentators in both the media and the classroom predict the coming of the Republic of Gilead to the south of us while ignoring it’s very real manifestations in other parts of the globe. And nothing pisses off a femshevik quicker than pointing out – “Oh , Handmaids Tale. Wasn’t that the book that Pat Robertson declared to be blasphemy, and Ronald Reagan put a million dollar bounty on Atwood’s head?” No? What am I thinking of?” >; )
Flip side is, I never enjoyed anything I ever read by Timothy Findley. But he was easily one of the nicest writers I ever saw in action. He came into the store about an hour before he was scheduled to do a reading at SMU and a professor from the T.C. who had brought some of her students down for it, got to speak to him for about 30 minutes. I was manning a table later at the reading and his partner sat with me and kept making snide comments about the rat-tail that Tif was sporting at the time.
HAY – don’t have many Halifamous stories – let me enjoy the few I do have >: )
ON THE NATURE OF SEXUAL ATTRACTION: AN ONTOLOGICAL ACCOUNT
“First off, watching two gay men kissing is creepy.” big open queer
What is the issue here? Assuming that the cop was a heterosexual male, why is it “creepy” for him to watch two gay men kissing? Could it be that he was simply puzzled by the sight of two gay men kissing? But why would he be puzzled? He would be puzzled because the sight of two gay men kissing was inexplicable. But why would the sight of two gay men kissing be inexplicable?
It would be inexplicable because sexual attraction for him would normally be between a male and a female. But clearly in the present case the sexual attraction was between two males. That sexual attraction exists between two males was, for him incomprehensible. Presumably, for the two gay men kissing, it is equally incomprehensible that sexual attraction exists between a male and a female. So the question reduces to the nature of sexual attraction itself. What is it? Is it rationally explicable or is it simply glandular?
From a philosophical perspective, to say that sexual attraction is simply glandular is not intellectually satisfying. It suggests that human beings are driven by blind urges over which they not only have no control but which are not even comprehensible. This is an abdication of the powers of the intellect which, for philosophy, is that which makes human beings human. So what can philosophy say about sexual attraction in particular and the affective life generally. What is required, in other words, is an ontological account of what makes human beings human.
It is the case, at least as far as I know, that human nature is not of a piece but rather that it is a combination of the emotional and the reflective. The question then is whether or not the emotions have a reflective core, that they are explicable to some extent in terms of reasons. The usual emotions – one thinks of fear, hatred, joy, and yes, sexual attraction – are not normally the outcomes of reflection, of considered and sustained thought. They are found in the imagination rather than in reflective consciousness. But can the imagination be harnessed in the service of reflective consciousness?
But reflective consciousness by its nature requires conceptual distance to function and the emotions, when sufficiently strong, displace that necessary conceptual distance. They come to dominate the human being. We can be “carried away” by our emotions, whether personal, aesthetic or even our intellectual pursuits which themselves always have an affective dimension.
This is not to say that sexual attraction is simply a construct of reflective consciousness but there does seem to be a definite reflective element in such attraction, whether heterosexual or homosexual. It boils down to the ability to give reasons why one finds another sexually attractive. While such reasons might be idiosyncratic, relative to the individual who gives them, at least they are reasons and not just blind urges.
I’m sure the rent-a-cop could have told you all this if you had just thought to ask hm.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
Pfft. Two dudes kissing in public is about as uncommon as hot chicks farting when they think nobody is looking/listening/sniffing.
maybe he wanted to be poo pals
LOLOL!^^^
I like Butt-Slammers. I’m a Butt-Slammer! And damn good at it too guys! Just sayin…
slaaaaaaamm – peanut butter and jaa-aaaam
i prefer syrup