- Thread Locking Fluid (http://www.amazon.com/Genuine-89021297-High-Temperature-High-Strength-Thread/dp/B00BK7LPNI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1387562596&sr=8-1&keywords=thread+locking+fluid)
Anyone else have some ideas?
a new goat
an old goat
I-86NEEEENNWEWNNSNENNESEEEEEENNESEEEEESSSEEEENNNN shields? (Hey, corco.)
A POOP sign.
100 shares of a Pfangle company.
Headache relief of each mod's choice.
An inflatable blawp.
Significant others, for the most part.
A visit from ethanman62187.
A new camera
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 06:59:31 PM
Significant others, for the most part.
Honestly, I agree with Steve on that one.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2013, 09:52:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 06:59:31 PM
Significant others, for the most part.
Honestly, I agree with Steve on that one.
We only have so many women on AARoads. :pan:
Quote from: sammi on December 20, 2013, 10:03:23 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2013, 09:52:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 06:59:31 PM
Significant others, for the most part.
Honestly, I agree with Steve on that one.
We only have so many women on AARoads. :pan:
a) I did not say women, I said significant others. I will not presume sexuality.
b) To my knowledge, there are exactly two biological female road enthusiasts. There are at least 4 MTF road enthusiasts, for contrast.
c) I did not say the significant others even had to be road enthusiasts.
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 11:22:57 PM
Quote from: sammi on December 20, 2013, 10:03:23 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2013, 09:52:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 06:59:31 PM
Significant others, for the most part.
Honestly, I agree with Steve on that one.
We only have so many women on AARoads. :pan:
a) I did not say women, I said significant others. I will not presume sexuality.
b) To my knowledge, there are exactly two biological female road enthusiasts. There are at least 4 MTF road enthusiasts, for contrast.
c) I did not say the significant others even had to be road enthusiasts.
I didn't mean it like that... but this isn't exactly a serious thread.
Quote from: sammi on December 20, 2013, 08:45:04 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 20, 2013, 06:56:40 PM
An inflatable blawp.
Ooh! Isn't this the parclo guy? :P
Among other things. He was blatantly anti-Midwest and pro-California (he seemed to be especially offended that the city of Tyler, Texas shared its name with him), spelled lol as "lOl", and created a thread where he couldn't decide between two Asian women because one had larger breasts but wasn't as nice as the other. (The thread has been deleted, but still)
I only know him as the guy who really
hated loved parclos. There was so much I missed. :no:
EDIT: Apparently, even
then I'm missing some things. ><
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 20, 2013, 07:43:19 PM
A visit from ethanman62187.
This guy sounds familiar too, but I can't quite put my finger on it... :/
Actually, blawp loved parclos and hated that more cities didn't use them. And ethanman is responsible for the I-366/85 MPH meme.
Atomic powered ban hammers
A super power enabling them to turn any freeway thread into a food thread
More threads with chupacabras and zombies to moderate
Controlling interest in a major East coast paving concern
Glassphalt, truckloads and truckloads of glassphalt
A ticket to Alanland.
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 11:22:57 PM
b) To my knowledge, there are exactly two biological female road enthusiasts. There are at least 4 MTF road enthusiasts, for contrast.
I count at least 3 here. One is married to another, one is in NY, and one is in downstate IL. It's more than likely there are more.
Quote from: Brandon on December 21, 2013, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 11:22:57 PM
b) To my knowledge, there are exactly two biological female road enthusiasts. There are at least 4 MTF road enthusiasts, for contrast.
I count at least 3 here. One is married to another, one is in NY, and one is in downstate IL. It's more than likely there are more.
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
That's still more than the number of sheep here. Damn ewe.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 20, 2013, 07:43:19 PM
A visit from ethanman62187.
ethanman62187 must have esp. He has not tweeted about a visit, but he did recently post a selfie (https://twitter.com/ethanman62187).
Quote from: Grzrd on December 21, 2013, 04:01:12 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 20, 2013, 07:43:19 PM
A visit from ethanman62187.
ethanman62187 must have esp. He has not tweeted about a visit, but he did recently post a selfie (https://twitter.com/ethanman62187).
He may be unblockable, but he sure isn't unbannable.
Quote from: Takumi on December 21, 2013, 05:52:35 PM
He may be unblockable, but he sure isn't unbannable.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgatherer.wizards.com%2FHandlers%2FImage.ashx%3Fmultiverseid%3D189892%26amp%3Btype%3Dcard&hash=3b4718148bc6144662851b68afce0d698f524fd9)
Quote from: hbelkins on December 21, 2013, 01:33:39 PM
Quote from: Brandon on December 21, 2013, 09:29:06 AM
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 11:22:57 PM
b) To my knowledge, there are exactly two biological female road enthusiasts. There are at least 4 MTF road enthusiasts, for contrast.
I count at least 3 here. One is married to another, one is in NY, and one is in downstate IL. It's more than likely there are more.
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
I am one of the women of which you speak! I am married to Mike Pruett of mdroads.com. My roadgeekiness initially formed independently from Mike, unless you count the fact that much of my knowledge came from his website long before I ever met him!
Quote from: sammi on December 20, 2013, 11:31:03 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 11:22:57 PM
Quote from: sammi on December 20, 2013, 10:03:23 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on December 20, 2013, 09:52:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 20, 2013, 06:59:31 PM
Significant others, for the most part.
Honestly, I agree with Steve on that one.
We only have so many women on AARoads. :pan:
a) I did not say women, I said significant others. I will not presume sexuality.
b) To my knowledge, there are exactly two biological female road enthusiasts. There are at least 4 MTF road enthusiasts, for contrast.
c) I did not say the significant others even had to be road enthusiasts.
I didn't mean it like that... but this isn't exactly a serious thread.
It's too bad that most of my friends are already married or in committed relationships, or I'd try and set something up. I do have acquaintances and co-workers that might be good matches for the mods, but I have no idea how to arrange any of those meetings in a non-awkward way.
Quote from: Laura Bianca on December 22, 2013, 10:53:41 AM
It's too bad that most of my friends are already married or in committed relationships, or I'd try and set something up. I do have acquaintances and co-workers that might be good matches for the mods, but I have no idea how to arrange any of those meetings in a non-awkward way.
"Hey, you're single right? I have some single friends who might be interested. What do you think?" Now, you're probably limited to single mods in a 50 mile radius with that strategy, of which I believe there are 0.
My best advice when it comes to finding a significant other: don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone. It's worked for me, at least.
So did losing 50 pounds, developing a new primary hobby, and growing a beard, but those all developed from that...
Quote from: Steve on December 22, 2013, 01:47:10 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on December 22, 2013, 10:53:41 AM
It's too bad that most of my friends are already married or in committed relationships, or I'd try and set something up. I do have acquaintances and co-workers that might be good matches for the mods, but I have no idea how to arrange any of those meetings in a non-awkward way.
"Hey, you're single right? I have some single friends who might be interested. What do you think?" Now, you're probably limited to single mods in a 50 mile radius with that strategy, of which I believe there are 0.
Exactly. The distance is the buzzkill. Otherwise, I'd be able to find a way to make it work.
I actually can lay claim to having set up two relationships that led to marriage. For one of them, I invited my friend Jess to a party that my friend Josh was hosting. For the other one, I was supposed to go to a concert with my friend Megan, but when I couldn't make it, I encouraged her to invite her friend T.J. instead. Megan and T.J. sang the duet at our wedding.
Quote from: Takumi on December 22, 2013, 05:36:56 PM
My best advice when it comes to finding a significant other: don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone. It's worked for me, at least.
So did losing 50 pounds, developing a new primary hobby, and growing a beard, but those all developed from that...
Yep.
1. Don't be afraid to go out on a limb.
2. Meet potential significant others is through hobbies and things you like, whether through roadgeeking or another hobby.
3. if it's allowed and you're not worried about potential repercussions, you could always date coworkers. Or, wait until either one of you is at a different job and then date.
Quote from: formulanone on December 20, 2013, 06:56:40 PM
An inflatable blawp.
What features would the inflatable blawp have?
Quote from: Laura Bianca on December 22, 2013, 07:31:42 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 22, 2013, 01:47:10 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on December 22, 2013, 10:53:41 AM
It's too bad that most of my friends are already married or in committed relationships, or I'd try and set something up. I do have acquaintances and co-workers that might be good matches for the mods, but I have no idea how to arrange any of those meetings in a non-awkward way.
"Hey, you're single right? I have some single friends who might be interested. What do you think?" Now, you're probably limited to single mods in a 50 mile radius with that strategy, of which I believe there are 0.
Exactly. The distance is the buzzkill. Otherwise, I'd be able to find a way to make it work.
I actually can lay claim to having set up two relationships that led to marriage. For one of them, I invited my friend Jess to a party that my friend Josh was hosting. For the other one, I was supposed to go to a concert with my friend Megan, but when I couldn't make it, I encouraged her to invite her friend T.J. instead. Megan and T.J. sang the duet at our wedding.
Quote from: Takumi on December 22, 2013, 05:36:56 PM
My best advice when it comes to finding a significant other: don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone. It's worked for me, at least.
So did losing 50 pounds, developing a new primary hobby, and growing a beard, but those all developed from that...
Yep.
1. Don't be afraid to go out on a limb.
2. Meet potential significant others is through hobbies and things you like, whether through roadgeeking or another hobby.
3. if it's allowed and you're not worried about potential repercussions, you could always date coworkers. Or, wait until either one of you is at a different job and then date.
I guess it does not help that I am currently trying to look for a job. I guess that is more of a buzzkill for me for the moment than the distance itself because I am unsure of where I will end up.
Quote from: Laura Bianca on December 22, 2013, 07:31:42 PM
3. if it's allowed and you're not worried about potential repercussions, you could always date coworkers. Or, wait until either one of you is at a different job and then date.
Bolded for emphasis, because that's probably a better choice. I had a coworker ask me out last year, but I turned her down because the consequences outweighed the benefits at the time. Had I known she was transferring a month or so later (she was also military and this was her second job) I may have reacted differently, but looking back it still wouldn't have worked.
Roadgeeks afraid of driving for a purpose? I must be on the wrong forum.
Okay, admittedly I never dated outside of the twenty-mile zone, but I've heard of longer-daily-distances.
Quote from: Sanctimoniously on December 22, 2013, 08:01:11 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 20, 2013, 06:56:40 PM
An inflatable blawp.
What features would the inflatable blawp have?
Target practice with a satisfying pop.
Quote from: formulanone on December 23, 2013, 01:10:36 PM
Roadgeeks afraid of driving for a purpose? I must be on the wrong forum.
Okay, admittedly I never dated outside of the twenty-mile zone, but I've heard of longer-daily-distances.
I'm open to it- finding girls who are also open to it is where the challenge comes in
QuoteTarget practice with a satisfying pop.
Target practice with a satisfying blawp.
Quote from: formulanone on December 23, 2013, 01:10:36 PM
Roadgeeks afraid of driving for a purpose? I must be on the wrong forum.
:-D
I've done the long-distance thing before and am open to it again, especially because, in my experience, Virginia women tend to be a special kind of crazy. (All women are crazy, but there's "crazy" and there's "she becomes a sexual predator when she's off her meds". For some reason women from outside the Old Dominion seem to have less of a chance of being bat-feces insane. I'm sure I'm going to get in trouble for this entire section in parentheses, by the way.) My brother's girlfriend goes to school (VCU) in Richmond but otherwise lives in Maryland, and I know a few happy long-distance couples in the car community, so I know it can work. I think part of it is knowing the distance between you most of the time makes you cherish your time together more.
Quote from: Takumi on December 23, 2013, 11:32:27 PM"she becomes a sexual predator when she's off her meds"
And if you're the prey, the problem is?????
I'd rather not get an STD.
Quote from: Takumi on December 23, 2013, 11:32:27 PM
.... (All women are crazy, but there's "crazy" and there's "she becomes a sexual predator when she's off her meds". For some reason women from outside the Old Dominion seem to have less of a chance of being bat-feces insane. I'm sure I'm going to get in trouble for this entire section in parentheses, by the way.) ....
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcoachrandom.zzl.org%2FComics%2FSem_6%2Fmadcow.gif&hash=d4e878ce28ac7084a38ffbc89a7018b94719e680)
(If the image doesn't display, go here: http://coachrandom.zzl.org/Chronological/comic-332.xml )
Quote from: hbelkins on December 24, 2013, 01:14:59 AM
Quote from: Takumi on December 23, 2013, 11:32:27 PM"she becomes a sexual predator when she's off her meds"
And if you're the prey, the problem is?????
Sir, I dare you to say that to my face, because I will slap you down to the ground.
For the record, Pennsylvania women are the batshit insane ones. Maybe it's a Commonwealth thing. (Massachusetts did nothing to recommend itself, either.)
Quote from: hbelkins on December 21, 2013, 01:33:39 PM
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
There's a 3rd, who lives in KC but she already has a significant other.
Wait! I know a 4th in Little Rock, but she's on the periphery and has a steady fellow, already.
Quote from: Steve on December 24, 2013, 07:55:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 24, 2013, 01:14:59 AM
Quote from: Takumi on December 23, 2013, 11:32:27 PM"she becomes a sexual predator when she's off her meds"
And if you're the prey, the problem is?????
Sir, I dare you to say that to my face, because I will slap you down to the ground.
When I was single and not off the market, women were not as sexually aggressive as they seem to be today. Single guys today are in a better position to take advantage of how things have changed in the past 20 years than I was during the time period 1979 (when I graduated from high school) until 1994 (when I met the woman who became my wife).
Quote from: formulanone on December 23, 2013, 01:10:36 PM
Roadgeeks afraid of driving for a purpose? I must be on the wrong forum.
Okay, admittedly I never dated outside of the twenty-mile zone, but I've heard of longer-daily-distances.
When I met my wife, I was in college about 35 miles away, but came home on weekends to work at a bowling center (which is where we met).
I recently attended a wedding of a couple which, for all but the final few months of their engagement, lived several hundred miles apart - Georgia and Delaware.
Quote from: US71 on December 25, 2013, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 21, 2013, 01:33:39 PM
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
There's a 3rd, who lives in KC but she already has a significant other.
Wait! I know a 4th in Little Rock, but she's on the periphery and has a steady fellow, already.
There's a female member of this forum from New York state who notes her sex in her autosignature.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 27, 2013, 11:13:08 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 25, 2013, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 21, 2013, 01:33:39 PM
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
There's a 3rd, who lives in KC but she already has a significant other.
Wait! I know a 4th in Little Rock, but she's on the periphery and has a steady fellow, already.
There's a female member of this forum from New York state who notes her sex in her autosignature.
NYST?
There are probably other women on the forum who avoid the mention of their own gender on-line, just because of rants like those above.
Quote from: sammi on December 27, 2013, 11:17:52 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 27, 2013, 11:13:08 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 25, 2013, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 21, 2013, 01:33:39 PM
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
There's a 3rd, who lives in KC but she already has a significant other.
Wait! I know a 4th in Little Rock, but she's on the periphery and has a steady fellow, already.
There's a female member of this forum from New York state who notes her sex in her autosignature.
NYST?
vdeane.
Quote from: US81 on December 27, 2013, 11:59:38 AM
There are probably other women on the forum who avoid the mention of their own gender on-line, just because of rants like those above.
Are you one of them?
Quote from: Takumi on December 27, 2013, 04:53:15 PM
Quote from: US81 on December 27, 2013, 11:59:38 AM
There are probably other women on the forum who avoid the mention of their own gender on-line, just because of rants like those above.
Are you one of them?
No, but I have a daughter on the forum.
Quote from: US81 on December 27, 2013, 05:18:34 PM
No, but I have a daughter on the forum.
Would that be US181 or US281?
1941 Members
14.8:1 Male to Female Ratio
Shouldn't there be somewhere in the neighborhood of 131 female members?
Quote from: Grzrd on December 27, 2013, 05:28:43 PM
1941 Members
14.8:1 Male to Female Ratio
Shouldn't there be somewhere in the neighborhood of 131 female members?
It's probably something big:14.8:1 unidentified:male:female.
Quote from: Brandon on December 27, 2013, 12:37:47 PM
Quote from: sammi on December 27, 2013, 11:17:52 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 27, 2013, 11:13:08 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 25, 2013, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 21, 2013, 01:33:39 PM
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
There's a 3rd, who lives in KC but she already has a significant other.
Wait! I know a 4th in Little Rock, but she's on the periphery and has a steady fellow, already.
There's a female member of this forum from New York state who notes her sex in her autosignature.
NYST?
vdeane.
And we've gone in circles again.
Quote from: Steve on December 27, 2013, 06:48:14 PM
Quote from: Brandon on December 27, 2013, 12:37:47 PM
Quote from: sammi on December 27, 2013, 11:17:52 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 27, 2013, 11:13:08 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 25, 2013, 12:44:03 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 21, 2013, 01:33:39 PM
I can only think of two off the top of my head. One in Maryland (I went to her wedding) and one in the STL area.
There's a 3rd, who lives in KC but she already has a significant other.
Wait! I know a 4th in Little Rock, but she's on the periphery and has a steady fellow, already.
There's a female member of this forum from New York state who notes her sex in her autosignature.
NYST?
vdeane.
And we've gone in circles again.
Will It Go Round In Circles?
Quote from: US71 on December 27, 2013, 08:08:14 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 27, 2013, 06:48:14 PM
And we've gone in circles again.
Will It Go Round In Circles?
Good song, haven't heard it in a while.
Back on topic...sorta. There is another female member on here that I didn't see mentioned from Columbus, OH. Haven't seen her post recently though.
Quote from: NE2 on December 27, 2013, 05:28:05 PM
Quote from: US81 on December 27, 2013, 05:18:34 PM
No, but I have a daughter on the forum.
Would that be US181 or US281?
(https://fbcdn-photos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1530301_10151814520316681_109981439_n.jpg)
Quote from: signalman on December 28, 2013, 03:49:16 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 27, 2013, 08:08:14 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 27, 2013, 06:48:14 PM
And we've gone in circles again.
Will It Go Round In Circles?
Good song, haven't heard it in a while.
Back on topic...sorta. There is another female member on here that I didn't see mentioned from Columbus, OH. Haven't seen her post recently though.
EDIT: I'm realizing my posts aren't coming through with perhaps very... appropriate language. What I'm really getting at is this: In any typical context (socially, mostly), I don't care what gender you were or are, or if you have a gender at all. It's part of who you are. The only reason I would ever draw a distinction between "born" female and "transitioned/ing" is in the case when we're looking at why men become roadgeeks but not women, and the idea that there may be genetic predisposition. That's because I have to get beyond gender to the actual chromosomes themselves. It makes me uncomfortable to have to do that, but I've never been one to hide behind political correctness.
I am assuming so. I don't know anyone on this forum personally. In fact, I've never met another road enthusiast in person. Kinda sad actually. Steve is two towns over from me.
Galaxy S3
Quote from: signalman on December 28, 2013, 11:41:33 AM
I am assuming so. I don't know anyone on this forum personally. In fact, I've never met another road enthusiast in person. Kinda sad actually. Steve is two towns over from me.
Don't feel bad - I'm in the same boat. But I'm also pretty young judging by the ages displayed on the forum... Oh yeah, and I don't have my own personal vehicle yet. That explains why I don't meet people, I guess.
Quote from: Steve on December 28, 2013, 11:36:28 AM
Quote from: signalman on December 28, 2013, 03:49:16 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 27, 2013, 08:08:14 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 27, 2013, 06:48:14 PM
And we've gone in circles again.
Will It Go Round In Circles?
Good song, haven't heard it in a while.
Back on topic...sorta. There is another female member on here that I didn't see mentioned from Columbus, OH. Haven't seen her post recently though.
So... I guess most people in here think everyone who presents as female was always female. I still stick by my original assertion.
I would automatically presume that unless someone told me otherwise. Actually, the idea that someone was not always a member of a particular sex would never cross my mind unless I were told otherwise or there were some other reason to reach that conclusion. It's just not something that would ever occur to me. I don't know, maybe that's old-fashioned in today's world, but as signalman notes, many of us have never met any other forum members in person.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 28, 2013, 12:23:39 PM
Actually, the idea that someone was not always a member of a particular sex would never cross my mind unless I were told otherwise or there were some other reason to reach that conclusion. It's just not something that would ever occur to me. I don't know, maybe that's old-fashioned in today's world, but as signalman notes, many of us have never met any other forum members in person.
I agree completely, hoo. I would not assume anyone on this forum (male or female) was not born the gender that they currently are. I don't necessarily believe that it's old fashioned thinking so much as sex changes are not super common. With that said, I don't assume anyone has had one done unless someone else tells me or I have prior knowledge of the person in question.
Once upon a time, there was a thread in which some of the posters with feminine-sounding names and/or feminine avatars discussed those names or images.
I know one female member of this forum who never posts and isn't a roadgeek -- my wife.
I could use a new computer chair.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 28, 2013, 01:22:25 PM
I could use a new computer chair.
For Eastern Orthodox Christmas, maybe?
Quote from: signalman on December 28, 2013, 11:41:33 AM
I am assuming so. I don't know anyone on this forum personally. In fact, I've never met another road enthusiast in person. Kinda sad actually. Steve is two towns over from me.
Well, then that can be changed fairly easily.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 28, 2013, 12:23:39 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 28, 2013, 11:36:28 AM
Quote from: signalman on December 28, 2013, 03:49:16 AM
Quote from: US71 on December 27, 2013, 08:08:14 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 27, 2013, 06:48:14 PM
And we've gone in circles again.
Will It Go Round In Circles?
Good song, haven't heard it in a while.
Back on topic...sorta. There is another female member on here that I didn't see mentioned from Columbus, OH. Haven't seen her post recently though.
So... I guess most people in here think everyone who presents as female was always female. I still stick by my original assertion.
I would automatically presume that unless someone told me otherwise. Actually, the idea that someone was not always a member of a particular sex would never cross my mind unless I were told otherwise or there were some other reason to reach that conclusion. It's just not something that would ever occur to me. I don't know, maybe that's old-fashioned in today's world, but as signalman notes, many of us have never met any other forum members in person.
I've modified my original post because I don't like the way I was coming across. I'm not intending to start any sort of discussion or controversy on gender in any context other than "there are no female roadgeeks",
Quote from: Steve on December 28, 2013, 11:36:28 AM
The only reason I would ever draw a distinction between "born" female and "transitioned/ing" is in the case when we're looking at why men become roadgeeks but not women, and the idea that there may be genetic predisposition. That's because I have to get beyond gender to the actual chromosomes themselves. It makes me uncomfortable to have to do that, but I've never been one to hide behind political correctness.
I've wondered this myself, to be honest. I believe it has to do with sexual dimorphism.* For instance, the amygdala and hippocampus process memories differently in "born" men and women - areas that also process navigation, direction, and roads.** I wouldn't be surprised if "born" women are less likely to be into roads because their brain morphology and functionality is different in these areas, for example.
This is merely a guess, but considering that I'm bisexual, it's likely that my brain is wired more like a "born" man's brain in areas pertaining to attraction to woman and a love of roads. There's probably an overlap there. I would suspect that there are similar overlaps to explain why there is a higher percentage of roadgeeks who are LGBTQ than in the general population, and why it's more likely for "transitioned/ing" women to be into roads than "born" women.
*I am not a neurological subject matter expert! I am only going off of research that I've personally read while copy editing medical journals. While I hate linking to a wiki, this page has a brief overview of neuroscience of gender differences: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_gender_differences
**I hope I'm using the terminology correctly...no intentions to offend here.
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 01, 2014, 02:48:20 PMit's likely that my brain is wired more like a "born" man's brain in areas pertaining to attraction to woman and a love of roads. There's probably an overlap there. I would suspect that there are similar overlaps to explain why there is a higher percentage of roadgeeks who are LGBTQ than in the general population, and why it's more likely for "transitioned/ing" women to be into roads than "born" women.
how does that work? I remember someone making an offhand remark to me that 1/3 of roadgeeks are gay males, and that seems plausible to me... wouldn't the "attracted to men" part of the neuroanatomy cause them to lean against a love of roads?
I know of one other lady roadgeek here on this Fine Forum from this town I live in but there are two issues....
1. She is already spoken for
2 I think there might be considerable consternation regarding our age differences.....55 might be a bit up there for her! *LOL*
But a nice lady companion who likes hitting the road every so often (when my health will allow it again) would be heaven!
Quote from: Steve on December 28, 2013, 11:36:28 AM
The only reason I would ever draw a distinction between "born" female and "transitioned/ing" is in the case when we're looking at why men become roadgeeks but not women, and the idea that there may be genetic predisposition. That's because I have to get beyond gender to the actual chromosomes themselves. It makes me uncomfortable to have to do that, but I've never been one to hide behind political correctness.
Genetic / anatomic / physiologic predisposition may play a role, but I think we also have to consider the significant differences in socialization and enculturation of boy children vis-a-vis girl children and how deeply our society encodes presumptive gender differences. Well before children are born, parents choose room decor, clothing and most certainly toys based on the gender of the infant. Cars, trains and airplanes are frequent themes for boys' toys and decor; girls get dolls, dolls and dolls but no Hot Wheels or Tonka, and at best a Barbie car, at least from most parents. The movie "Cars" has its token female characters, but it's clearly intended for an audience of boys (and a few grown roadgeeks who lurk in the shadows).
I'll bet we've lost numbers of female roadgeeks by snuffing out their interest in childhood.
Quote from: US81 on January 01, 2014, 04:16:01 PM
Well before children are born, parents choose room decor, clothing and most certainly toys based on the gender of the infant. Cars, trains and airplanes are frequent themes for boys' toys and decor; girls get dolls, dolls and dolls but no Hot Wheels or Tonka, and at best a Barbie car, at least from most parents.
...
I'll bet we've lost numbers of female roadgeeks by snuffing out their interest in childhood.
I'm not sure that's a significant factor. In families with both boys and girls, all the kids have opportunity to play with trucks or dolls as they please. On the other hand, I was one of three boys in my family. Mom got us a babydoll once, on the off chance it would bring out some nurturing instincts or something. All we did was torture it or use it as a hostage in pretend standoffs.
I feel like a girl today, so count me in. Grrrrrrl power!
Quote from: Takumi on December 22, 2013, 05:36:56 PM
My best advice when it comes to finding a significant other: don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone. It's worked for me, at least.
I met my wife in a chatroom. We were engaged in a month and married six months later. (We did talk every day but one during that time.)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 01, 2014, 03:10:42 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 01, 2014, 02:48:20 PMit's likely that my brain is wired more like a "born" man's brain in areas pertaining to attraction to woman and a love of roads. There's probably an overlap there. I would suspect that there are similar overlaps to explain why there is a higher percentage of roadgeeks who are LGBTQ than in the general population, and why it's more likely for "transitioned/ing" women to be into roads than "born" women.
how does that work? I remember someone making an offhand remark to me that 1/3 of roadgeeks are gay males, and that seems plausible to me... wouldn't the "attracted to men" part of the neuroanatomy cause them to lean against a love of roads?
Fascinatingly, no. LGBTQ people can have both male and female types of cognition - the "overlap" effect that I mentioned in my previous post (although it's more like a mosaic than an overlap). Here is an article explaining sexual orientation spatial memory differences in easy to understand English: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080103135205.htm (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080103135205.htm)
Unfortunately, I can't access the full PDF of the research (stupid $ firewall - I work for a different publisher so I can't access it) but the abstract is here: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hipo.20375/abstract (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hipo.20375/abstract)
Quote from Science Daily:
QuoteDifferences in spatial learning and memory (our ability to record and recall information about our environment) are common between men and women. It has been shown that men consistently outperform women on tasks requiring navigation and discovering hidden objects; whereas women are more successful at tests which require them to remember where those objects lie in a particular space.
Dr Rahman and his research assistant, Johanna Koerting, found that during the MWM test gay men and straight women took longer to find the hidden platform than did straight men. However, both gay and straight men spent more of their "dwelling time" in the area where the hidden platform actually was, compared to straight and lesbian women.
This might mean that sexual orientation affects the speed at which you acquire spatial information, but not necessarily your eventual memory for that spatial information.
The researchers also found that gay and straight men were similar in their performance on the Radial Arm Maze. "This suggests that sexual variation in spatial cognition is not straightforward — gay people appear to show a "˜mosaic' of performance, parts of which are male-like and other parts which are female-like," adds Rahman.
EVERYBODY has a "male side" and a "female side". Everybody. It's not something that is unique to transgenders.
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 01:10:29 PM
EVERYBODY has a "male side" and a "female side". Everybody. It's not something that is unique to transgenders.
And the biggest reason out gay & bi men act "effeminate" is they've stopped suppressing their female side as most straight men do.
Quote from: vtk on January 02, 2014, 01:21:19 PM
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 01:10:29 PM
EVERYBODY has a "male side" and a "female side". Everybody. It's not something that is unique to transgenders.
And the biggest reason out gay & bi men act "effeminate" is they've stopped suppressing their female side as most straight men do.
Suppressing? Different people express different attributes (I wouldn't call any really specifically "male" or "female" - it's society that seems to determine that) due to their genetics and experiences. It's hardly "suppressing" anything. Does a tomboy suppress her "feminine" side?
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 01:10:29 PM
EVERYBODY has a "male side" and a "female side". Everybody. It's not something that is unique to transgenders.
How do you define those sides? Does the female side manifest itself in males when they play with dolls, enjoy doing housework, get emotional, wear pink shirts or what? And does the male side manifest in females if they like to play sports, hunt and fish, like cars or what?
I wouldn't want to date a road enthusiast. Some of my hobbies are very personal, and I want to be interested in things that my old lady isn't interested in.
Quote from: Brandon on January 02, 2014, 02:32:48 PM
Quote from: vtk on January 02, 2014, 01:21:19 PM
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 01:10:29 PM
EVERYBODY has a "male side" and a "female side". Everybody. It's not something that is unique to transgenders.
And the biggest reason out gay & bi men act "effeminate" is they've stopped suppressing their female side as most straight men do.
Suppressing? Different people express different attributes (I wouldn't call any really specifically "male" or "female" - it's society that seems to determine that) due to their genetics and experiences. It's hardly "suppressing" anything. Does a tomboy suppress her "feminine" side?
Suppressing isn't the right word. I think the leanings are subconscious and can be determined by genes and environmental factors.
Alfred Kinsey's research in the mid 20th century suggested that few people are 100% straight or 100% gay - most fall somewhere in the middle.
(I'm really enjoying the intellectual matter of this thread, btw, and how civil we are all being about what could be a touchy subject.)
iPhone
Quote from: US81 on January 01, 2014, 04:16:01 PM
Quote from: Steve on December 28, 2013, 11:36:28 AM
The only reason I would ever draw a distinction between "born" female and "transitioned/ing" is in the case when we're looking at why men become roadgeeks but not women, and the idea that there may be genetic predisposition. That's because I have to get beyond gender to the actual chromosomes themselves. It makes me uncomfortable to have to do that, but I've never been one to hide behind political correctness.
Genetic / anatomic / physiologic predisposition may play a role, but I think we also have to consider the significant differences in socialization and enculturation of boy children vis-a-vis girl children and how deeply our society encodes presumptive gender differences. Well before children are born, parents choose room decor, clothing and most certainly toys based on the gender of the infant. Cars, trains and airplanes are frequent themes for boys' toys and decor; girls get dolls, dolls and dolls but no Hot Wheels or Tonka, and at best a Barbie car, at least from most parents. The movie "Cars" has its token female characters, but it's clearly intended for an audience of boys (and a few grown roadgeeks who lurk in the shadows).
I'll bet we've lost numbers of female roadgeeks by snuffing out their interest in childhood.
I think that's a very large part of the reason why trans women are over-represented among the roadgeek population. Even when parents try to avoid having gender influence their behavior, it invariably does at least subconsciously. Transgender women deal with it all the time. People who knew them before transition often still see them as men, people who met them after transition can't believe they ever lived as men, and people who met them during transition think of them as "the transgender person I know".
Quote from: vtk on January 01, 2014, 05:12:52 PM
Quote from: US81 on January 01, 2014, 04:16:01 PM
Well before children are born, parents choose room decor, clothing and most certainly toys based on the gender of the infant. Cars, trains and airplanes are frequent themes for boys' toys and decor; girls get dolls, dolls and dolls but no Hot Wheels or Tonka, and at best a Barbie car, at least from most parents.
...
I'll bet we've lost numbers of female roadgeeks by snuffing out their interest in childhood.
I'm not sure that's a significant factor. In families with both boys and girls, all the kids have opportunity to play with trucks or dolls as they please. On the other hand, I was one of three boys in my family. Mom got us a babydoll once, on the off chance it would bring out some nurturing instincts or something. All we did was torture it or use it as a hostage in pretend standoffs.
Gender does innately shape behavior in places too... mostly due to hormones in fetal development rather than genetics, though (about the only thing the Y chromosome has been proven to do is cause the gonads to become testicles instead of ovaries). It's hard to say where the line is, though. For nearly every study claiming something's innate, there's another claiming it's socially conditioned. We do know that some things are definitely socially conditioned (like associating pink with girls) due to changing cultural norms over time, and that some is predisposed (though MRI scans, and studies involving botched circumcision and subsequent sex reassignment surgery).
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 01:50:58 AM
I feel like a girl today, so count me in. Grrrrrrl power!
It's not a day-to-day thing... more like a lifetime identity.
Quote from: Brandon on January 02, 2014, 02:32:48 PM
Quote from: vtk on January 02, 2014, 01:21:19 PM
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 01:10:29 PM
EVERYBODY has a "male side" and a "female side". Everybody. It's not something that is unique to transgenders.
And the biggest reason out gay & bi men act "effeminate" is they've stopped suppressing their female side as most straight men do.
Suppressing? Different people express different attributes (I wouldn't call any really specifically "male" or "female" - it's society that seems to determine that) due to their genetics and experiences. It's hardly "suppressing" anything. Does a tomboy suppress her "feminine" side?
Gender's a spectrum, with some people more to the male side and some more to the female side. And then there's people like me who are all over.
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 02, 2014, 03:25:15 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 02, 2014, 02:32:48 PM
Quote from: vtk on January 02, 2014, 01:21:19 PM
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 01:10:29 PM
EVERYBODY has a "male side" and a "female side". Everybody. It's not something that is unique to transgenders.
And the biggest reason out gay & bi men act "effeminate" is they've stopped suppressing their female side as most straight men do.
Suppressing? Different people express different attributes (I wouldn't call any really specifically "male" or "female" - it's society that seems to determine that) due to their genetics and experiences. It's hardly "suppressing" anything. Does a tomboy suppress her "feminine" side?
Suppressing isn't the right word. I think the leanings are subconscious and can be determined by genes and environmental factors.
Alfred Kinsey's research in the mid 20th century suggested that few people are 100% straight or 100% gay - most fall somewhere in the middle.
(I'm really enjoying the intellectual matter of this thread, btw, and how civil we are all being about what could be a touchy subject.)
I'm just saying, in America we have a prototypical "straight male" set of behaviors and traits which I think is actually more purely masculine than guys just being themselves. Men and boys who wish not to be perceived as "gay" adhere tightly to this prototype, and this adherence is so pervasive that any deviation is by contrast perceived as "effeminate", even if it's actually more natural straight male behavior.
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 02, 2014, 03:25:15 PM
Alfred Kinsey's research in the mid 20th century suggested that few people are 100% straight or 100% gay - most fall somewhere in the middle.
I would be at one of the extremes of Kinsey's research, then.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 02, 2014, 08:46:15 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 02, 2014, 03:25:15 PM
Alfred Kinsey's research in the mid 20th century suggested that few people are 100% straight or 100% gay - most fall somewhere in the middle.
I would be at one of the extremes of Kinsey's research, then.
Which extreme of being completely out of the closet or being in total denial? :bigass:
Quote from: hbelkins on January 02, 2014, 08:46:15 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 02, 2014, 03:25:15 PM
Alfred Kinsey's research in the mid 20th century suggested that few people are 100% straight or 100% gay - most fall somewhere in the middle.
I would be at one of the extremes of Kinsey's research, then.
Sounds like someone who feels a little unsure of himself. Why else state it in a forum?
There are plenty of folks who are 100% straight or 100% gay.
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 10:06:52 PM
There are plenty of folks who are 100% straight or 100% gay.
I'm not so sure I'd call it a spectrum either. It's straight, gay, or bi with consenting adults. More like a three-position switch with bi in the middle of course.
Now, an expression of one's sexuality probably is on a spectrum from ultra-macho to ultra-effeminate, but that has no real bearing on one's orientation. There's plenty of gay guys who are very macho and plenty of straight guys who are more effeminate.
Quote from: Brandon on January 02, 2014, 10:17:08 PM
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 10:06:52 PM
There are plenty of folks who are 100% straight or 100% gay.
I'm not so sure I'd call it a spectrum either. It's straight, gay, or bi with consenting adults. More like a three-position switch with bi in the middle of course.
Now, an expression of one's sexuality probably is on a spectrum from ultra-macho to ultra-effeminate, but that has no real bearing on one's orientation. There's plenty of gay guys who are very macho and plenty of straight guys who are more effeminate.
I think female sexuality is less definite than male sexuality, based on what I've heard from female friends.
Quote from: Steve on January 02, 2014, 09:58:25 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 02, 2014, 08:46:15 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 02, 2014, 03:25:15 PM
Alfred Kinsey's research in the mid 20th century suggested that few people are 100% straight or 100% gay - most fall somewhere in the middle.
I would be at one of the extremes of Kinsey's research, then.
Sounds like someone who feels a little unsure of himself. Why else state it in a forum?
I wrote that post quickly with Tapatalk and realized that I overgeneralized it, and that by doing so, changed the meaning. In Kinsey's original research, he found that "nearly 46% of the male subjects had "reacted" sexually to persons of both sexes in the course of their adult lives, and 37% had at least one homosexual experience" (quoted from Wikipedia - original source - Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, p. 656). He concluded that 10% of men were homosexual, so that leaves about 44% as heterosexual. His original scale was from 0-6, btw, but it wasn't meant to be the sort of thing where a person would always identify as a certain number. Kinsey's research was about 60 years ago...I feel like there must be something newer to explain this better.
I don't think HB is unsure of himself. I see no problem with him saying that he is straight. Most people assume I'm straight, and since I'm married to a man, I could easily hide the fact that I'm attracted to women for the rest of my life.
Quote from: Steve on January 02, 2014, 10:31:37 PM
Quote from: Brandon on January 02, 2014, 10:17:08 PM
Quote from: bugo on January 02, 2014, 10:06:52 PM
There are plenty of folks who are 100% straight or 100% gay.
I'm not so sure I'd call it a spectrum either. It's straight, gay, or bi with consenting adults. More like a three-position switch with bi in the middle of course.
Now, an expression of one's sexuality probably is on a spectrum from ultra-macho to ultra-effeminate, but that has no real bearing on one's orientation. There's plenty of gay guys who are very macho and plenty of straight guys who are more effeminate.
I think female sexuality is less definite than male sexuality, based on what I've heard from female friends.
There are different kinds and levels of attraction. I like women more than men, actually, so I would lean more to the lesbian side than the straight side. However, I love when a man is romantic more than when a woman is romantic.
Also, I think it's a huge (and dare i say damaging) stereotype that male sexuality is more black and white. Ugh, I actually heard someone say the other day that "bisexuality is the gateway drug to homosexuality". I've met many men who have told me they are bi, but they generally only come out and identify as straight or gay because of the stereotype that bi men don't exist. On the female side, coming out as bi has the awful stereotype of being a slut that will magically hook up with any threesome involving a guy and another girl (ughhhh - I've experienced this).
but I get why most bisexuals stay hidden - I really have no reason to come out, either, since I'm married to the most awesome man on the planet. I'm not going to leave him for another man or a woman. I'm not out with most people (including my family), and I'm not sure if or when that will change.
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 03, 2014, 12:55:08 AM
I don't think HB is unsure of himself. I see no problem with him saying that he is straight.
This. The way the original post was worded made reference to a vast majority in the middle with very few on one end or the other. I'm average or mainstream in a lot of ways, but if this is indeed true, I'm at an extreme.
And not to comment on any one person in particular, but I have felt for a few years that being bi, or at least saying that you are bi, is somewhat of a trendy or fashionable thing at the moment, especially among females. I would agree that there is not as much of a stigma among women as there is among men. I'm not sure if Freddie Mercury broke that stigma or reinforced it.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2014, 01:25:56 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 03, 2014, 12:55:08 AM
I don't think HB is unsure of himself. I see no problem with him saying that he is straight.
This. The way the original post was worded made reference to a vast majority in the middle with very few on one end or the other. I'm average or mainstream in a lot of ways, but if this is indeed true, I'm at an extreme.
And not to comment on any one person in particular, but I have felt for a few years that being bi, or at least saying that you are bi, is somewhat of a trendy or fashionable thing at the moment, especially among females. I would agree that there is not as much of a stigma among women as there is among men. I'm not sure if Freddie Mercury broke that stigma or reinforced it.
I think that trend has largely faded, or else it persists but is confined to a few years around the high school years. I certainly never run into such a thing. The people I know, whatever they are, they are.
Quote from: Steve on January 03, 2014, 05:58:27 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2014, 01:25:56 PM
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 03, 2014, 12:55:08 AM
I don't think HB is unsure of himself. I see no problem with him saying that he is straight.
This. The way the original post was worded made reference to a vast majority in the middle with very few on one end or the other. I'm average or mainstream in a lot of ways, but if this is indeed true, I'm at an extreme.
And not to comment on any one person in particular, but I have felt for a few years that being bi, or at least saying that you are bi, is somewhat of a trendy or fashionable thing at the moment, especially among females. I would agree that there is not as much of a stigma among women as there is among men. I'm not sure if Freddie Mercury broke that stigma or reinforced it.
I think that trend has largely faded, or else it persists but is confined to a few years around the high school years. I certainly never run into such a thing. The people I know, whatever they are, they are.
When I was in undergrad ('05-'09), there was an all girl's college across town. They had a slang term for girls who experimented with other girls while there - lesbian until graduation (LUG). The school is co-ed now, so i suspect there are much fewer lugs than there used to be.
It reminds me of this: http://www.theonion.com/articles/lesbian-identity-ends-abruptly-midjunior-year,1505/
For the record, it's completely possible for a man and woman to share one common interest. If my future significant other (I consider myself definitively a straight male) has an interest in roadgeeking but not so much in weather geeking and storm chasing (something I enjoy), great, and I would suspect she will have interest in something which I don't care about whatsoever -- that time apart is what ultimately makes a good relationship work (because let's face it, if you spend 24/7/365 with someone, it'll drive you insane). That's why we will have other friends (single AND not, male AND female) who ARE into the things we individually enjoy doing.
Quote from: Brandon on January 02, 2014, 10:17:08 PM
I'm not so sure I'd call it a spectrum either. It's straight, gay, or bi with consenting adults. More like a three-position switch with bi in the middle of course.
Except that bi does not necessarily mean equal desire for men and women. You can be bisexual and prefer one gender while being attracted to some degree to both. Or you can be sexually attracted to both but only emotionally attracted (i.e., interested in having a serious relationship) with one.
As for being 100% straight, I would tend to think that's more of a macho insistence than a common reality. I'm not going to kid myself or anyone else, I'm proudly 98% straight. :P
Although I do wonder if spending years in a committed serious relationship doesn't move some people closer to 100% simply by virtue of them becoming emotionally attached specifically to their significant other.
Quote from: Steve on January 02, 2014, 10:31:37 PM
I think female sexuality is less definite than male sexuality, based on what I've heard from female friends.
This is because women are generally less physical and more emotional about such things. I.e., a greater percent of a woman's attraction to someone (compared to a man's) is to the person, not to their body.
Quote from: Steve on January 03, 2014, 05:58:27 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 03, 2014, 01:25:56 PM
And not to comment on any one person in particular, but I have felt for a few years that being bi, or at least saying that you are bi, is somewhat of a trendy or fashionable thing at the moment, especially among females. I would agree that there is not as much of a stigma among women as there is among men. I'm not sure if Freddie Mercury broke that stigma or reinforced it.
I think that trend has largely faded, or else it persists but is confined to a few years around the high school years. I certainly never run into such a thing. The people I know, whatever they are, they are.
Could also be that more people feel comfortable identifying as bi or gay in recent years, so it seems like there are more people doing so than you remember in the past (i.e. the number of bisexual people is the same, they're just not as quiet about it anymore).
Quote from: Laura Bianca on January 03, 2014, 12:55:08 AMI wrote that post quickly with Tapatalk and realized that I overgeneralized it, and that by doing so, changed the meaning. In Kinsey's original research, he found that "nearly 46% of the male subjects had "reacted" sexually to persons of both sexes in the course of their adult lives, and 37% had at least one homosexual experience" (quoted from Wikipedia - original source - Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, p. 656). He concluded that 10% of men were homosexual, so that leaves about 44% as heterosexual.
It should be worth pointing out that this study, while the groundbreaking first one in the field, is seen as statistically bunkum due to the sample self-selecting to take part in the study*. This is shown most clearly overestimating the number of homosexuals (which is shown to be something like 3%, rather than 10%).
The findings like the scale are relatively reliable science. The figures of how many people are in those boxes aren't.
*and also being from a population (the area around the college where he worked) with a reputation for 'deviancy', IIRC.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 03, 2014, 09:22:01 PM
Except that bi does not necessarily mean equal desire for men and women. You can be bisexual and prefer one gender while being attracted to some degree to both. Or you can be sexually attracted to both but only emotionally attracted (i.e., interested in having a serious relationship) with one.
As for being 100% straight, I would tend to think that's more of a macho insistence than a common reality. I'm not going to kid myself or anyone else, I'm proudly 98% straight. :P
Although I do wonder if spending years in a committed serious relationship doesn't move some people closer to 100% simply by virtue of them becoming emotionally attached specifically to their significant other.
indeed. I'm about 95% straight. hey, David Bowie is hot; this is a universal fact! I don't think (even if I weren't in a relationship) I'd act on any attractions I felt towards men, but I am completely okay with acknowledging that some of them are pretty damn attractive.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 08, 2014, 01:30:35 PM
indeed. I'm about 95% straight. hey, David Bowie is hot; this is a universal fact! I don't think (even if I weren't in a relationship) I'd act on any attractions I felt towards men, but I am completely okay with acknowledging that some of them are pretty damn attractive.
I am probably the world's worst judge of male attractiveness. I can look at a male and think, "He fell out of an ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down, and when he landed the tree fell on top of him," but I can't look at a male and think, "He's a handsome chap."
Why does Tapatalk crash when entering this (and only this) thread? Have we asked too much of it?
[/wrong sub-forum but not really the wrong sub-forum]
^ I had another thread where Tapatalk crashed, but I can't remember which thread it was.
This is a very interesting discussion about sexuality and road geeks. I too have noticed a higher concentration of LBGTQ people that partake in our hobby, but I haven't thought much about it before. I think there are other female road geeks out there, but they just don't know it yet because they have not sought such a community as of yet. However, I still think there will always be more guys than girls. I have also noticed that more than a few people that are road geeks also tend to have a mild case of Asperger's. I do wonder if there is a reason for all of this, or it just happens to be this way.
I have also thought that someone can be part gay and part straight on a spectrum of 0 (homosexual) to 100 (heterosexual). Some people are attracted to certain attributes of men but at the same time may be attracted to other attributes of women. There are also plenty of people that probably are close to 0 or 100, but I also feel that it is very possible to be somewhere in the middle. I do wonder if there is a test out there that could give you that score.
Quote from: formulanone on January 08, 2014, 02:43:18 PM
Why does Tapatalk crash when entering this (and only this) thread? Have we asked too much of it?
[/wrong sub-forum but not really the wrong sub-forum]
Might be the ridiculously long topic title...
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 08, 2014, 03:44:32 PM
^ I had another thread where Tapatalk crashed, but I can't remember which thread it was.
This is a very interesting discussion about sexuality and road geeks. I too have noticed a higher concentration of LBGTQ people that partake in our hobby, but I haven't thought much about it before. I think there are other female road geeks out there, but they just don't know it yet because they have not sought such a community as of yet. However, I still think there will always be more guys than girls. I have also noticed that more than a few people that are road geeks also tend to have a mild case of Asperger's. I do wonder if there is a reason for all of this, or it just happens to be this way.
I have also thought that someone can be part gay and part straight on a spectrum of 0 (homosexual) to 100 (heterosexual). Some people are attracted to certain attributes of men but at the same time may be attracted to other attributes of women. There are also plenty of people that probably are close to 0 or 100, but I also feel that it is very possible to be somewhere in the middle. I do wonder if there is a test out there that could give you that score.
Call me an asshole, but I believe any significant increase in a minority population among roadgeeks is completely coincidental. The fact that I'm bi does
not have anything to do with my interest in roads. As for the aspergers/autism thing, I believe that's coincidental, too. I haven't met any roadgeeks in person, so I may not be in a position to touch on this subject, but roads aren't a very social subject and that's a reason why we are often introverted. I'm not autistic in any way, likewise with others who use the AJAX chat (the only roadgeeks I've "talked" to). I don't know why I'm sensitive to statements regarding autism/aspergers in the roadgeek community, I just am.
Quote from: Molandfreak on January 08, 2014, 07:04:13 PM
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 08, 2014, 03:44:32 PM
^ I had another thread where Tapatalk crashed, but I can't remember which thread it was.
This is a very interesting discussion about sexuality and road geeks. I too have noticed a higher concentration of LBGTQ people that partake in our hobby, but I haven't thought much about it before. I think there are other female road geeks out there, but they just don't know it yet because they have not sought such a community as of yet. However, I still think there will always be more guys than girls. I have also noticed that more than a few people that are road geeks also tend to have a mild case of Asperger's. I do wonder if there is a reason for all of this, or it just happens to be this way.
I have also thought that someone can be part gay and part straight on a spectrum of 0 (homosexual) to 100 (heterosexual). Some people are attracted to certain attributes of men but at the same time may be attracted to other attributes of women. There are also plenty of people that probably are close to 0 or 100, but I also feel that it is very possible to be somewhere in the middle. I do wonder if there is a test out there that could give you that score.
Call me an asshole, but I believe any significant increase in a minority population among roadgeeks is completely coincidental. The fact that I'm bi does not have anything to do with my interest in roads. As for the aspergers/autism thing, I believe that's coincidental, too. I haven't met any roadgeeks in person, so I may not be in a position to touch on this subject, but roads aren't a very social subject and that's a reason why we are often introverted. I'm not autistic in any way, likewise with others who use the AJAX chat (the only roadgeeks I've "talked" to). I don't know why I'm sensitive to statements regarding autism/aspergers in the roadgeek community, I just am.
It's not coincidental. People on the autism/Asperger's spectrum like to put things in order, maintain lists, have routines, etc., which lends itself very nicely to roads and their websites.
The denier is the liar.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 08, 2014, 01:46:04 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 08, 2014, 01:30:35 PM
indeed. I'm about 95% straight. hey, David Bowie is hot; this is a universal fact! I don't think (even if I weren't in a relationship) I'd act on any attractions I felt towards men, but I am completely okay with acknowledging that some of them are pretty damn attractive.
I am probably the world's worst judge of male attractiveness. I can look at a male and think, "He fell out of an ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down, and when he landed the tree fell on top of him," but I can't look at a male and think, "He's a handsome chap."
Do you not find your kitty cats to be beautiful ? Are you sexually attracted to them? Why is male attractiveness always assumed to be sexual attractiveness? I don't have to have any sexual desire towards guys to know that some guys are better looking than others.