Just How Many Poets Are NOT Queer, Anyway?

I’m going back through a lot of poetry these days for some reason, mostly native English language stuff. I find it annoying that so many of these guys were queer! It seems like just about all of my favorite poets were a bunch of queers, or often bisexuals. I mean, I still love these guys and all, but it’s sort of deflating to my image of these dudes.

It’s rather distressing because I like poetry. I went back reading the poets of centuries past and this same fagginess seems to creep up yet, even though back in those days this was a definite no-no. Novelists seem to be less queer, but there’s a fair amount of fagginess there too. Being a novelist is definitely a straighter occupation.

I don’t even want to go into playrights. When I was living in Los Angeles in the early 1980’s, I got into the theater scene a bit, and it was gay as Hell. The guys of course, but quite a few of the women too. You can actually do all right in these scenes if you’re a good-looking, masculine straight guy. The women are a bunch of frustrated fag hag types, often sort of bi, but you know how women are, they say they hate macho guys, but they just can’t resist the bad boy in the scruffed up leather jacket even though they sort of hate him, macho pig that he is.

Anyway, in these scenes, and in Hollywood and places like that in general, you can clean up in you have good game, good looks, or some combination. There are all sorts of single women there who are pretty frustrated. Most of the guys are either married or queer, and there aren’t many single guys to go around. You’re hot property, if you don’t mind being surrounded by hungry queers and bi guys (these latter are everywhere in those gay neighborhoods) lusting after you all the time. Actually, that is pretty annoying right there!

Anyway, brings me back to my original question. What is it about literary writing that turns guys queer, or seems fit mostly for queers? One could argue that writing poems is a pretty faggy thing to do, and that makes sense. It’s not exactly tackle football. But that begs the question of why so many of these literary women, especially the poets, are a bunch of lesbians! I mean, if poetry is feminizing, why aren’t female poets these swaying, coquettish Southern belle types afraid to get their hands dirty?

Either that or just being a poet attracts weirdos and misfits in general, sexual and otherwise. That’s about the only sense I could make of it.

Another thing I noticed is that most all of these guys are depressed. Many were manic-depressive, and alcoholism seems to be epidemic among poets in the last century anyway. Pretty similar with novelists. Lots of depressives, lots of boozers. Many were suicides in one way or another. It’s starting to make me depressed just reading about all these guys.

Why? Is writing depressing? Is depression good for the creative spirit? How could it be, as it’s so enfeebling?

One reason I got into journalism is that journalists are fairly sane types. They had a reputation, at least at city papers, for being squares. Some were sort of eccentrics, but they worked hard, often all night. They drank, but they also worked. They were sort of these hard-bitten types. They were either family men or straight bachelors, but city room journalism isn’t a very faggy job. It’s kind of macho, actually. Check out any old Hollywood movie where they show the newsroom guys.

I still don’t see why you practically have to be queer to be a poet. Poetry is kind of cool. Anyway, it’s a good way to get chicks, cuz a lot of women are romantic, and a lot of them love writers and even poets. At least that’s been my experience anyway. C’mon guys! Crank out those poems! Chicks dig em!

54 thoughts on “Just How Many Poets Are NOT Queer, Anyway?”

  1. Because there is no money whatsoever to be made writing poetry, so only a person with no dependents can make it an important part of their life.

  2. The gay writer Bruce Benderson has written about the overlap between gays, hustlers, prostitutes, bohemians, drug addicts and petty criminals in the urban underclass with the ‘culture of poverty’ and an outsider identity being the social glue. This is all in the pre-gay lib/rights/marriage days and before the injection of bourgeois “family values” into every crevice of society from Reagan on.

    As for the “why are most creative types homos?” question, I don’t really have an answer. Though there is the theory of [male] homosexuals as a culture creating class from antiquity on. Check out James O’Meara’s blog:

    http://jamesjomeara.blogspot.com/

    And the late Alisdair Clarke’s blog for more:

    http://aryanfuturism.blogspot.com/

  3. i was here to mention two authors of poetry who are not gay. charles bukowski for one. mencius moldbug (http://bit.ly/6ZRYwc) is another. sorry to mention him but i am kinda gay for him. i know both of these examples (especially the 2nd) could be dismissed as not real poets. oh well.

    you know…after i read through your post i was thinking…in a way, gays are hyper-masculine. i mean…those guys REALLY think with their dicks. their attitude towards fashion and esthetics makes them come off as almost Nazi. lastly, a lot of fags will bang chicks and i bet lots of them get to bang more chicks than straight guys.

    1. Some queers do bang chicks for sure. The weird thing is that chicks love queers for some idiot reason, so it seems like queers have a lot of chicks around them sometimes. Since chicks love these guys, I guess they have a lot of opportunities to have sex with women. I knew this guy once who was bisexual, and he used to tell me about it. I think he was mostly into guys like a lot of those guys, but he was also into women. He said women never cared anything about him until he made some money and started driving a Mercedes, then they were all over him.

      I’ve often thought of gays as super-masculine, and in some ways they are, but if you spend a lot of time around them like I have, you notice how that’s not really true.

      Bukowski was definitely a poet.

      Even literary criticism is quite gay. I don’t get it. It would make sense since books and reading isn’t a very masculine thing to be into, except that so many literary women are lesbians or bi. So books and reading are feminine activities, why are the women so gay and bi? Doesn’t add up.

    2. I don’t think these women like them in any sexual way. Most women find the idea of a man boinking another man in the ass to be gross. They just view them as a novelty. Gays tend to have flamboyant and sociable personalities like you pointed out and this is entertaining to women, yet women feel safe around them because they know these guys aren’t trying to get in their panties.

    3. RL:”It would make sense since books and reading isn’t a very masculine thing to be into”

      That is an absurd statement which is skewed by degenerate postmodern views shaped by corrupt Jewish pop culture and the mass media. Try to tell that to the Hindu priests in India, the Buddhist monks in Tibet, the Muslim Imams, the Jewish Talmudists, the Christian mystics, etc who spend hours each day absorbed in complex textual study.

      In the very recent past, reading/writing/literacy were exclusively in the male domain in nearly all cultures worldwide. In fact, only a male religious or priestly caste could read, write, and access religious texts – everyone else was of course often illiterate and dependent on the male religious class for access to their culture’s sacred writings.

      Even in the most ‘progressive’ Western nations like England/France/Germany/etc, upper-class women (much less the lower classes) didn’t even start reading or writing to any extent until the post-Enlightenment or even the post-Industrial Revolution Eras.

      Read my last comment on this thread — modern history (‘literacy for all!’) is a massive anomaly compared to how we humans organized literacy in the past, which was a completely male-dominated area of culture and still is in very many (most?) nations.

  4. I think FrankBD hit it on the head. Plus these days when there’s no difference between poetry and prose, what makes it poetry? Some professor or magazine editor says so. You suck their cocks and they call you a poet – I imagine it works something like that.
    As to older poets, they usually had a classical education at boarding schools; in puberty they were locked up in all-male institutions reading about Greek bent-shots.
    Having said all that ( flippantly I should point out), I don’t think the evidence supports the view that poetry has historically been a homosexual activity. In fact, many poets have been quite powerful men in other fields. It used to be considered a sort-of ’rounding off’ of character, I think. Off the top of my head, I can only think of Rimbaud and Verlaine who were possibly bi, Byron was a bit that way (correct me if I’m wrong) but a ladies man too, Walt Whitman of course, and the Beats – in fact it seems to be more an American thing. You might well ask why homosexuality has raised its profile in the USA . Heg?

    1. Yeah, I was going through some Scottish and Irish poets the other day and most of them were straight. Weird…

      I used to take a lot of lit classes and I would just about be the only male student in the whole room! Women love to read lit. And most women who read lit are just basic, ordinary, straight females.

      They tend to be somewhat average or conservative though – not your real wild woman types, more like the type of chick who likes to read books. I remember most of them thought I was an asshole degenerate weirdo for being a dope smoker.

      You can definitely meet chicks in Lit classes though! There’s no competition!

  5. i think that hard-science and mathematics are the most masculine areas of study. that women do not see it this way is a tragedy, and an indictment of women. given his goldman sachs ties i hate him, but larry summers was spot-on in saying that the lack of women in math & science is due to their lack of geniuses.

    i view literature and the rest of the humanities as hiding places for the men that cannot compete in math & science. or the men who are fags.

    i majored in anthropology, minored in computer science. i’d have double majored but did not even know what computer science was until my junior year of college. mainly because i went astray in my last year or two of high school and stopped taking math classes. it’s something i regret.

    1. Yeah most mathematicians and scientists are not queer at all. That’s very interesting, because these are the most masculine disciplines. It implies that the more masculinized the brain, the less homosexual the guy is likely to be.

      A lot of these guys are pretty nerdy, especially the computer and math dudes, but that’s more a case of a brain that is so masculinized that even straight women are repelled by it because an extrememly masculinized brain finds it hard to act in the (feminine) way that is required if one is going to make good connections with other people.

      This also implies that the biggest womanizers, ladies men and players and not the most masculine guys out there. A lot of the ones I knew were kind of androgynous, though they weren’t gay at all. It’s as if their androgyny enabled them to be mentally ambidextrous enough to connect to the opposite sex well.

    2. I was always impressed by guys who were into science and mathematics, because when I was very young these subjects intimidated me. I am still impressed by them, especially mathematicians.

      Mathematics is taught very poorly in this country, in my opinion. It’s hard for young people to appreciate it the way it’s usually presented.

    3. randy:”i view literature and the rest of the humanities as hiding places for the men that cannot compete in math & science. or the men who are fags. i majored in anthropology, minored in computer science.”

      That is pretty funny man, you just insulted yourself in a way because modern anthropology, especially as it is currently taught in almost all Western unis, is a ‘social science’ or a ‘soft science,’ meaning it is little better than sociology or popular psychology, while ‘computer science’ isn’t real hard science either because it is all just rote memorization unless you are in to the really high level programming and math.

  6. also…getting back to fags being hyper-masculine…i don’t know if you’ve heard about this but there’s some science that shows high levels of testosterone in the womb leads to homosexuality in males, and that when a woman gives birth to a male…if she has male children afterwards they are more likely to be homosexual. so in this sense it really is a hypermasculine condition on a hormonal level.

    i hope you would click that link and read that poem. he is definitely your intellectual enemy so if you cannot bear to read it i understand, but goddamn he writes a tight poem, and there’s a reference to the gasoline filled tire necklace used to murder people in places like south africa and brazil. the name for that torture escapes me right now. i think you’ll have a good, evil, laugh at it if you would just read it,..given the snuff vids you’ve posted. it’s a lot easier to laugh at in poem form anyway.

  7. to lafayette…i think gays have raised their profile in the US because they are a strong lobby, right up there with jews, aarp, finance, and the nra. plus they (the men at least) are well dressed and attractive people. everybody is a sucker for good-looks. i’m not saying there is a velvet mafia, but…

    also, if i am right and gays are actually hyper-masculine…well the aggression that comes with masculinity would propel that person up the ladder of power.

    1. A lot of queers are pretty nice people. It’s straight, masculine men who have a reputation for being mean and ornery. Also, queers, like women, are very, very sociable. You see them at work with a bunch of women and they are chatting away and joking all day and the straight guy is sulking in the corner.

      Also, a lot of straight guys, especially poorer and working class ones, don’t care about looks or hygiene. I notice a lot of working class guys smell bad. Either they don’t wash their clothes, or they don’t bathe, or they just get too smelly and dirty after even a day at work. Working class and poor guys care nothing about clothes. They wear old, torn, dirty, stained discolored clothing all the time. Even poor and working class women do this.

      I’m no fag, but I have to admit that that’s disgusting. I’m always smelling my clothes to see if they need washing and I’m always smelling myself to see how I smell. I carry deodorant around with me and even use it in public. If I have a spot on my clothes I head for the nearest bathroom and try to get it out with water or even soap and water. I don’t like wrinkles in my clothing.

      Queers are definitely power driven, but a lot of those guys are closeted.

      Plus they work very well in offices. I know working class guys who used to call guys who worked in offices “office-fags.” It’s not true but I know what they mean. The culture of the office is feminized. Masculine behavior is stamped out very quickly and really masculine guys pile up complaints about em real quick.

      These guys also called scholars or shoolheads “school-fags.” Sadly, there’s some truth to that too, but I never met many queers at school. Even in the Lit Department, there weren’t many, but there were hardly any guys there anyway…Seems to me that schoolhead guys are more nerds than queers.

    2. Yeah, that is the weird thing about a lot of gays I have met – there is sometimes a hypermasculine element to their personality, as in they are outgoing, talkative, aggressive, overbearing, etc, but their general mannerisms are often effeminate, their voices especially are often laughably feminine, this gay lisp or something like that, and their whole body language is similar to females. And they are all about immaculate hygiene and expensive clothes and spiffy haircuts and dumb womanish shit like that.

      Yeah, that study about homosexuality and fraternal birth order is very interesting, seems there is definitely something to it scientifically – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_birth_order_and_male_sexual_orientation – apparently it is very strong effect: “The fraternal birth order effect is the strongest known predictor of sexual orientation. According to several studies, each older brother increases a man’s odds of developing a homosexual sexual orientation by 28%–48%.”

  8. as to why women in lit are lesbian/bi…well…women are far more fluid in sexuality and often use sex as a means to an end. men are not like that…men need sex or else somebody is gonna get shot.

    i think lots of lesbians are just unattractive and it’s preferable to just be with another women instead of getting with a man that’s in the bottom 50%.

  9. i am real sure that bukowski called poetry faggy, and i wonder if he didn’t get a handjob from a buddy of his once in a while. of course, he was drunk when it happened, so that doesn’t count.

  10. A scientifically plausible reason that men are more visual and mathematical, while women are more verbal, is that women have more connectors between the two halves of their brains, so they don’t partition the logical from the subjective as much as men. This makes them better writers and caregivers, but worse mathematicians, pilots and chess players.

    One piece of research I wish I could cite found that the siblings of male homosexuals showed generally more feminine traits than average. Their sisters, for example, were less likely to have played high school sports and had more children than expected given their socio-economic conditions. This might explain why male homosexuality didn’t evolve out of the population — it’s driven by a genetic trait that encourages greater reproductivity. Explaining the genetic existence of lesbianism is less of an historical problem, because until fairly recent times women didn’t have the choice not avoid marriage (to a man) and having children with him.

  11. Many of you don’t listen to rap, but some of the best contemporary poetry comes from rappers. None of the good rappers are gay.

    During the pre-islamic times, and even during it, poetry was used by the Arabian tribes as a sort of war ritual. The poets of the tribe would esssentially battle the other tribes poets and then the two tribes would go at it. Sometimes they would even end hostilities if one of the poets was deemed witty and had both armies laughing.

    So I don’t know poets don’t have to be gay. Poets can be smooth as shit. Females love that.

    1. Hey, that’s really interesting, thx. Especially the part about the poets in wartime. Seems like back 200 yrs ago and prior, few English poets were gay. Of course, homosexuality was really illegal, so it was hard to be queer. But the big poets were all married, family men, or at least they liked women. They were often pillars of society and to be frank, it was an aristocratic thing. Most people were working all day and night just to scrape together enough to survive, so no one had any time to be a writer. The only people who could do that were the rich. So if you were a writer or poet, it just mean that you were a a wealthy aristocrat. Nothing queer about it.

  12. Poetry was integral to a lot of pre-literate societies for obvious reasons – a way of remembering stuff. But this ‘war poetry’ was common in all ‘heroic’ societies I can think of – the Mycenean and earlier Greeks, the dark age German and Celts. I think the custom of preceding hostilities with an exchange of insults from the tribal poets was common to all of them.

    And yes, Pope, Milton and many of the others had successful careers. I think it was admiration for Roman ways, where successful statesmen or generals often turned out verse in their later years, that led it to be seen as one of the manly accomplishments, rounding off a successful life. And as Robert notes, only the successful would have the time or be able to find an audience for their output. I think things changed in the 19th century though – Wordsworth, Keats, Shelley, Coleridge, Blake, the Romantics, don’t quite fit that earlier mould. I’m sure there are plenty of good books on this topic, but I can’t say more off the top of my head.

  13. There was a poet named David Rattray that I recommend. He wrote a sort of autobiography entitled How I became One of the Invisible. The first chapter is about a beatnik poet friend of his who was supposed to go out and get their group some Italian food and a bottle of Chianti, but returned instead with a 1930’s era right wing tract entitled “Lightning over the Treasury” all about the Federal Reserve system. Rattray’s book was published by the Semiotext(e) Native Agents series when all those titles were a flat $6. He was the last poet I got really interested in. He died. I guess he had a day job at Reader’s Digest for, like, years.

    “In order to become one of the invisible, I had to go through an ordeal known as throwing oneself in the arms of God…Some of us stayed for months, others years, many forever.” – David Rattray

    If Zen nature poetry is your sort of picnic Robert Sund is worth looking into. He’s worshipped as an
    incarnation of the retarded Bodhisattva Shih-tse throughout the Ish River Country, which is Sund’s name for the bioregion I lived in before I got bored with Buddhism.

  14. Whodares – thanks for the recommendations. Found a collection of Sund, and ‘ How I became one of the invisible’ reasonably cheap on Amazon. Didn’t find anything that seems obviously to be Rattray’s poetry though – can you name any collections?

  15. The association of poetry or ‘poesy’ with faggotry is a very recent thing in The West as some here alluded to, starting only in about the early-to-mid 20th Century in most Western nations, though it surely got its beginnings in the late 19th century with freaks like Oscar Wilde in the literary scenes of large Western cities, where Occidental cosmopolitan decadence got its start. This was also around the time when degenerate Jewish literary critics started taking over the field in some top Western cities and universities – Jews tend to corrupt everything they touch with their Freudian criticism, fag studies, deconstructionism, reversalism, feminism, anti-Europeanism, Boasianism, anti-Darwinism, etc.

    Almost all poetry of the past tended toward the masculine (unless it was outright love poetry), dealing with topics like war, lusting toward females, traveling in treacherous places, dangerous encounters with nature, weird adventures, mystical ideas, politics, and so on. This persisted for a very long time because this was how cultures remembered stories and so on, verbal/poetic recitation. Also, very many religious texts were originally not much more than poetry of course – nearly all ‘holy’ scriptures of most religions often started out as poetry.

    I was an English major in college, though I never concentrated too much on poetry or literature (more linguistics and technical writing) – but when I did get in to literature I always preferred poems about more masculine subjects like politics, war, heroism, technology, science, astronomy, chemistry, biology, the Darwinian brutality of nature, social mayhem/societal collapse, urban madness vs rural loneliness, mythology, mysticism, esoterica, etc.

    Here is a good example of some cool stuff:

    “Hawk Roosting” by Ted Hughes

    I sit in the top of the wood, my eyes closed.
    Inaction, no falsifying dream
    Between my hooked head and hooked feet:
    Or in sleep rehearse perfect kills and eat.

    The convenience of the high trees!
    The air’s buoyancy and the sun’s ray
    Are of advantage to me;
    And the earth’s face upward for my inspection.

    My feet are locked upon the rough bark.
    It took the whole of Creation
    To produce my foot, my each feather:
    Now I hold Creation in my foot

    Or fly up, and revolve it all slowly –
    I kill where I please because it is all mine.
    There is no sophistry in my body:
    My manners are tearing off heads–

    The allotment of death.
    For the one path of my flight is direct
    Through the bones of the living.
    No arguments assert my right:

    The sun is behind me.
    Nothing has changed since I began.
    My eye has permitted no change.
    I am going to keep things like this.

  16. “God is Born” by DH Lawrence

    The history of the cosmos
    is the history of the struggle of becoming.
    When the dim flux of unformed life
    struggled, convulsed back and forth upon itself,
    and broke at last into light and dark
    came into existence as light,
    came into existence as cold shadow
    then every atom of the cosmos trembled with delight.
    Behold, God is born!
    He is bright light!
    He is pitch dark and cold!

    And in the great struggle of intangible chaos
    when, at a certain point, a drop of water
    began to drip downwards
    and a breath of vapour began to wreathe up
    Lo again the shudder of bliss through all the atoms!
    Oh, God is born!
    Behold, He is born wet!
    Look, He hath movement upward! He spirals!

    And so, in the great aeons of accomplishment and debacle
    from time to time the wild crying of every electron:
    Lo! God is born!

    When sapphires cooled out of molten chaos:
    See, God is born! He is blue, he is deep blue,
    he is forever blue!
    When gold lay shining threading the cooled-off rock:
    God is born! God is born! bright yellow and ductile
    He is born.

    When the little eggy amoeba emerged out of foam and nowhere
    then all the electrons held their breath:
    Ach! Ach! Now indeed God is born! He twinkles within.

    When from a world of mosses and of ferns
    at last the narcissus lifted a tuft of five-point stars
    and dangled them in the atmosphere,
    then every molecule of creation jumped and clapped its hands:
    God is born! God is born perfumed and dangling and with a little cup!

    Throughout the aeons, as the lizard swirls his tail finer than water,
    as the peacock turns to the sun, and could not be more splendid,
    as the leopard smites the small calf with a spangled paw, perfect.
    the universe trembles: God is born! God is here!

    And when at last man stood on two legs and wondered,
    then there was a hush of suspense at the core of every electron:
    Behold, now very God is born!
    God Himself is born!

    And so we see, God is not
    until he is born.

    And also we see
    there is no end to the birth of God.

    1. Two good poems you’ve chosen there, Eman. Here’s another one:

      “Dispute of a Man with his Soul”

      Whom can I talk to today?
      Brothers are evil
      and friends of today don’t love each other.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      Hearts are greedy and every man is stealing things from his fellow.
      Kindness has vanished and rudeness has descended upon everyone.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      One is contented with evil
      and goodness is cast on the ground everywhere.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      He who should enrage a man by his ill deed
      makes everyone laugh by his evil wrongdoing.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      One steals,
      every man is robbing his fellow.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      The villain is an intimate friend
      and the brother with whom one dealt has become an enemy.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      Yesterday is not remembered,
      one does not help now the man who has given help.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      Brothers are evil
      and one turns to strangers for honesty.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      Faces are blank,
      every man has his face downcast concerning his brothers.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      Hearts have become greedy
      and there is no man’s heart on which one may rely.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      None are righteous
      and the land is left to evildoers.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      An intimate friend is lacking
      and one turns to a stranger to complain.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      None is content there,
      and he with whom one walked is no more.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      I’m laden with misery
      for lack of an intimate friend.

      Whom can I talk to today?
      The evil that stalks the earth
      it knows no end.

      Death is in my sight today,
      like a cure for a sick man,
      like going outside after confinement.

      Death is in my sight today,
      like the smell of myrrh,
      like sitting under a sail on a windy day.

      Death is in my sight today,
      like the smell of lotus flowers,
      like sitting on the shore of drunkenness.

      Death is in my sight today,
      like a path washed by rain,
      like a man’s coming home from an expedition.

      Death is in my sight today,
      like the sky’s clearing,
      like a man’s grasping thereby what he didn’t know before.

      Death is in my sight today,
      like a man’s longing to see home
      after he has spent many years in captivity.

      But he who stands yonder
      is a god who lives,
      because he punishes the evil of him who does it.

      But he who stands yonder
      stands in a barque,
      because of letting choice offerings be given to the temples.

      But he who stands yonder,
      is a wise man who cannot be turned away from appealing to Re
      according to his word.

      What my soul said to me:

      “Put whining on a peg, o my comrade, my brother! May you give offerings upon a brazier,
      in order to reach for a life as you described. Desire me here and dismiss the west! But desire to reach the west when your body is buried. I will alight when you become weary, and then we’ll make harbour together.”

      This was copied from start to finish as found in writing.

      (“yonder” = in the world of the dead; “the west” = paradise.)

      That was written nearly four thousand years ago. Isn’t it really something? And there’s not a whiff of faggotry about it.

  17. FrankBD:”women are more verbal”

    Yet history shows that men have always been the best writers, poets, novelists, playwrights, and so on in history – it isn’t even close.

    Women babble constantly and write A LOT of second-rate and non-notable literature, but most of it is entirely inconsequential; history shows that 99.999% of all notable texts – non-fiction, fiction/artistic, religious, etc – in every single culture worldwide were composed by men.

    1. “And Randy, lesbians are lesbians because women are just hotter than men.”

      Well, in general yes, but lesbians as a group aren’t hotter than *anybody.* Some of the ones out here are a good argument for eternal celibacy.

    2. Amy I don’t see any science to prove that their is a queer brain. A queer brain is probably one that has made a choice to be that way and is attuned to the right brain hemisphere. As for women being hotter than men,that is only true in it’s correct context to heterosexual males. Any other context of women being hotter than males to women is abnormal and a perversion against nature. It is totally irrelevant in the overall scheme of things, whether you or Rosie O’donnel find my wife hotter than me. Bottom line is the majority of sane, normally oriented, women find me and Robert hotter than someone of their same sex.The same way there are disgusting, fat, obnoxious guys, there are disgusting, obnoxious, fat girls and so on etc. The human male was designed for the human female and visa versa and that is why women cannot impregnate each other. Sorry to all the dykes and fags. You can act opposite all you want, it doesn’t change millions of years of biology.

    1. It’s simply not possible to turn a man into a homosexual, nor is it possible to turn a gay man into a straight man. Not after the age of 15 anyway. According to the research that I have read.

      However, women can be changed one way or the other if they want to. I guess a lot of lesbians don’t want to be straight though, and a lot of straight women don’t want to be lesbians.

      1. Took a number of women’s studies classes at UMass Amherst back in the day (I cringe to admit it now, but that’s not my point here). A LOT of the lesbians in these classes & discussion groups said they had been sexually assaulted when they were younger.

        1. My parents met at UMass Amherst in the ’80’s. Some dyke pursued my mother. She assumed by her South African accent that she she was vulnerable.

        2. Hope that situation didn’t go beyond merely awkward for your mother.
          I *was* at UMass Amherst in the (late) ’80s. Moved back to the area in recent years. Never have been pursued by lesbians. Looked over, yeah–pursued, no.

        3. Do you live in a world of stereotypes only? I wasn’t assaulted nor do I hate men. Why am I gay? Because I was coerced by satan?

          I’m sure Gay State’s Girl’s mother was in *real* trouble when the dyke identified her as vulnerable by her accent! Are you drunk? Did men pursue her because her left eye twitched and they deemed her fuckable for that reason? How did she ever elude their crafty come-ons?

        4. “”A LOT of the lesbians in these classes & discussion groups said they had been sexually assaulted when they were younger.”””

          This comes as no surprise. Children, girls especially, learn heterosexuality by observing their fathers. Since he is the first male they come in contact with, learning to trust him enables them to trust other men too. Women from broken/abusive households tend to become dysfunctional when they grow older.

        5. I did not say they *all* had been assaulted. Do you live in a world of marginal literacy?

          In all seriousness, a surprising number of personal experiences of sexual assault were related by gay women in my classes and etc. Not sure what you meant by “men who can turn women into lesbians” but it reminded me of that.

        6. More than 60% of American women were sexually abused when they were younger. More than 45% of American men were sexually abused when they were younger. http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/05_history.html If you are interested in learning about the history and culture of child sexual abuse, this is an eye opener. Main point here: heteros are more likely to have been sexually abused.

    2. Anwar,

      For someone who doesn’t “condone or agree homosexuality”, you sure do care a helluva lot. Folks who don’t condone it typically just don’t do it.

      As for history, dykes and fags have been here forever. What’re you gonna do about that? Cry in your beer all over blogs for the rest of your life? Here’s some “gay suggestion” for you: get a creative life. No wait, your “right side access” is in denial. My bad.

  18. I agree with Robert, It seems as if the literary genre is saturated with homosexuals. I do not condone or agree with Homosexuality, because I believe in a higher being and I also believe homosexuality to be counter productive to the continuation of human life full development.

    I am a person who enjoys writing, drawing, painting,scratch build modeling and the arts. I am restricted by my personal moral code to associate in these fields because fags disgust me. I believe that a lot of the creative writers are gay because they are accessing the right hemisphere of their brains, and that side is open to gay suggestion.

  19. “I’m no fag, but I have to admit that that’s disgusting. I’m always smelling my clothes to see if they need washing and I’m always smelling myself to see how I smell. I carry deodorant around with me and even use it in public. If I have a spot on my clothes I head for the nearest bathroom and try to get it out with water or even soap and water. I don’t like wrinkles in my clothing.”

    Nothing faggy about that at all. The military is the most masculine institution of all, and it is all about polished boots and ironed, clean clothing, where the buttons on your shirt must align perfectly with the seam of your fly. Well, at least while on base where there’s time and clean water available. High praise: ” That is one squared-away soldier.”

    “but their general mannerisms are often effeminate, their voices especially are often laughably feminine, this gay lisp or something like that, and their whole body language is similar to females. And they are all about immaculate hygiene and expensive clothes and spiffy haircuts and dumb womanish shit like that. ”

    I’m a WOMAN and I am not anywhere near as feminine in my vocal tone/ gesturing/ stance as the stereotypical gay man. Figures. In the highest levels of achievement of every kind, the men do better. Even at being FEMININE, the men can outdo women.

  20. Amy, usually people who behave in manners that are on the outskirts of normalacy are the ones who cry in their beer over blogs. My wife is very beautiful and intelligent and we love each other. She also wouldn’t touch you or Rosie with a ten foot poll she despises lesbos.Why would I cry in my blog over you and other Rosie O’donnel clones? I feel immensley sorry for you. You cannot carry on your own genetic code with another woman you have to adopt. As for me accessing my right brain you obviously didn’t read that I dray,write,paint and scratch-build.Fags and Dykes have been here for a long time just in the minority and not from the beggininning either.

    1. Anwar,

      I should feel sorry for you, but I don’t. You choose to live in fear of anyone you decree is different from yourself (ahem), and that’s a choice I don’t pity. Moreover, the fact that you think this discussion is about your poor brainwashed wife (for she must be to agree to co-habitate with someone who thinks so narrow-mindedly) speaks *volumes* about your own insecurities. Methinks the man doth protest too much!

      Speaking of blogs, I posted one today that is most fitting for folks like yourself, though I doubt you will be able to wrap your tiny mind around any of the concepts: http://amyking.org/. Good luck!

      Amy

      p.s. You might want to try proofreading your posts (i.e. Where does a sentence end and begin? Spelling? Proper capitalization? Exactly how does one “dray”?) in an effort to come across as somewhat literate…

  21. “Just How Many Poets Are NOT Queer, Anyway?”

    Do you think that maybe the poet-fag is an american phenomenon? Look beyond modern america. I’ve never heard Pushkin was homo. There are several folkloric peoms whose creators and reciters are not homos. The persians are famous for poetry and they’re not swarming with pillow biters. Scandinavian peoples had epic poems and I don’t recall all of them being queers (before 1960). Even in the english speaking world there are people like TS Eliot and Ezra Pound who weren’t on the ream team to my knowledge. A bunch of these other “homosexuals” are actually just “homos by speculation”. Homos are always trying to say that this or that person was homo. (ie William Shakespeare, Abraham Lincoln, Leonardo Da Vinci, etc)

    My take is this is based on stupid american stereotypes and ideas, which are actually somewhat accurate for modern america. All too commonly we can see the idea that: all artists (writers, theater people, etc) are gay, all scholars are nerdy wimps, and real men do nothing but workout and crush beer cans on their head. Postmodernism and other stupid movements seem to have helped damage the arts in this respect. Just look at the depictions of weirdo artists in films like “The Big Lebowski”. That seems to be a spot on description of some people.

    1. We can always trust Wade to put things in perspective.

      Looking outside America…

      Over the last 200 years there have been a lot of Persian influenced Urdu poets who have composed powerful and eloquent poems. Famous ones would be Mirza Ghalib, Mir Taqi Mir, Faiz Ahmed Faiz, and the ever popular Allama Muhammad Iqbal. All straight and all extremely liberal.

      Urdu poetry, Like Persian, is generally composed in couplets. The 2 lines generally contain powerful ideas, insights, or merely passing thoughts.

      One of Iqbal’s most famous couplets:

      “خودی کو کر بلند اتنا کے ہر تقدیر سے پہلے
      خدا بندے سے پوچھے بتا! تیری رزا کیا ہے

      Translation:

      Empower thyself to such a degree that before the turn of fate
      God Himself asks his servant: Tell me! What is it that thou desires!

  22. You tell him, Amy. You’re showing the traits that make women great typists, if not great poets. Only joking, honest!

  23. I also don’t think Kipling was homo, and he was a great poet. I like that some of these older poets talk about topics that are un-PC today. What poetry I read is older and I’m not totally familiar with a lot of the last few decades of poetry. I can’t imagine though, that a more recent would write such and un-PC peom like this with such skill:

    The Stranger – Rudyard Kipling

    The Stranger within my gate,
    He may be true or kind,
    But he does not talk my talk–
    I cannot feel his mind.
    I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
    But not the soul behind.

    The men of my own stock,
    They may do ill or well,
    But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
    They are used to the lies I tell;
    And we do not need interpreters
    When we go to buy or sell.

    The Stranger within my gates,
    He may be evil or good,
    But I cannot tell what powers control–
    What reasons sway his mood;
    Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
    Shall repossess his blood.

    The men of my own stock,
    Bitter bad they may be,
    But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
    And see the things I see;
    And whatever I think of them and their likes
    They think of the likes of me.

    This was my father’s belief
    And this is also mine:
    Let the corn be all one sheaf–
    And the grapes be all one vine,
    Ere our children’s teeth are set on edge
    By bitter bread and wine.

    1. Moody, whimsical guy, asswipe. Kipling.

      You can’t have your cake and eat it, too. You can’t go round the world, killing and looting and building house on them strangers’ land, then have the gall to to call them “strangers”. LOL.

      Classic bi-polar, NOT self-aware Anglo colonialist porn.

      1. “Classic bi-polar, NOT self-aware Anglo colonialist porn”

        Yes, it reeks of the anglo/jewish type character, but it’s phrased in words quite beautifully.

  24. Here–poetry by Iraq veteran Brian Turner. I pasted one below, but do go to the link and read the others; they are all very good.

    http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2009/11/11/brian-turner

    “Here, Bullet”

    If a body is what you want,
    then here is bone and gristle and flesh.
    Here is the clavicle-snapped wish,
    the aorta’s opened valves, the leap
    thought makes at the synaptic gap.
    Here is the adrenaline rush you crave,
    that inexorable flight, that insane puncture
    into heat and blood. And I dare you to finish
    what you’ve started. Because here, Bullet,
    here is where I complete the word you bring
    hissing through the air, here is where I moan
    the barrel’s cold esophagus, triggering
    my tongue’s explosives for the rifling I have
    inside of me, each twist of the round
    spun deeper, because here, Bullet,
    here is where the world ends, every time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *