Personally, all of the gays I've known in adult life have been your "Type 1". One couple in particular were as married as they possibly could be, in all but law. Another (who I knew less well) had already adopted children.
In late adolescence -- when I was hanging around collegiate theatre departments -- I can retrospectively support an anecdotal argument for your "Type 2". On the other hand, that was the '70s. David Bowie's particular brand of androgynous teasing was all the rage . . . and camp is always in fashion (cf. Rocky Horror), thus the "flagrance". Also, because it was the '70s, there was the Disco Scene -- 'nuff said.
I've never known any of your "Type 3" that are gay -- but I don't get around much. People like that, in my limited socialization, typically hang around at SF conventions in desperate hope of heterosexual fulfillment. They usually find it, because there are people like that of both genders.
Flame » in reply to re: I disagreed with MA on only one occasion that I recall
re: observations
The whole thread (81 posts)
- Pussy whipped
- fun thread
- re: Characterizations
- Don't you know it's all about scoring points? The chicks don't get that.....
- It is called respect
- re: Lysistrata
- Poor Art!
- I think you're trying too hard.
- re: Pussy whipped
- One reason and one reason only...
- Even the title of your thread helps answers your own question, IMO
- I treat MaryAnne with a great deal of care, too
