Oh no, its an epidemic!

[AeroEngineer]

According to Oprah and the front page of CNN.com...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/personal/04/23/o.women.leave.menfor.women/index.html

Lock your wives in your houses, men! You never know when lesbianism could strike!

But seriously, do the gay members of this forum find this article offensive? To me, it seemed to assume that sexuality was something that could be easily changed.

[mtdim]

It doesn't seem surprising; female homosexuality is far more socially acceptable than male homosexuality. I suppose it has to do with a smaller "ick" factor.

[Imperialparadox]

It doesn't seem surprising; female homosexuality is far more socially acceptable than male homosexuality. I suppose it has to do with a smaller "ick" factor.

I've always found that an interesting 'phenomenon.' Though admittedly, while I have no problem with either, if I had my choice I would much rather watch two women together then two men, so I guess I contribute to that! :D

[ConstitutionHugger]

I think it's because looking at 2 naked women is much better looking than 2 naked men. That goes for men and women. Also Men are more aroused visually than women are

[ConstitutionHugger]

I bet there will be some VERY interesting comments in this thread

[Rorus Raz]

It doesn't seem surprising; female homosexuality is far more socially acceptable than male homosexuality. I suppose it has to do with a smaller "ick" factor.Women are expected to maintain their looks more than men. I assure you that Rosie has just as much "ick" factor as a man.

[TCUFan]

I'm probably going to have my 'dude membership' revoked, but I never could figure out the fascination of watching two women go at it. I never could figure out the fascination with porn or strippers, for that matter. I was always too preoccupied with getting the real thing.

And not having to pay for it.

TCUFan

[soupdragon]

I can never understand the whole clam licking thing! Each to their own I guess

[Broseph]

I'm probably going to have my 'dude membership' revoked, but I never could figure out the fascination of watching two women go at it. I never could figure out the fascination with porn or strippers, for that matter. I was always too preoccupied with getting the real thing.

And not having to pay for it.

TCUFan

Your dude membership... has not been revoked.

Your logic seems justified in that you still enjoy some of the same things a dude would, just not all of them.

Judge Broseph, the King of the Bros, has ruled.

[grapabeaux]

According to Oprah and the front page of CNN.com...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/personal/04/23/o.women.leave.menfor.women/index.html

Lock your wives in your houses, men! You never know when lesbianism could strike!

But seriously, do the gay members of this forum find this article offensive? To me, it seemed to assume that sexuality was something that could be easily changed.

Sorry that the facts make you feel uncomfortable. But the fact remains that sexuality remains far more fluid than the essentialists (the "born-that-way" cultists) would have you believe.

[Pudge]

I think sexuality is fluid to a degree, and moreso in women than in men. While a woman may face scorn for leaving her husband for another woman, men are scorned far worse just for being gay from the get-go. Just my 2 cents.

[foxgurrrl]

It's because our society champions the objectification of women... and flaunting girl on girl sex is just another way to cheapen the true nature of a woman, true femininity. Women are the life givers, nurturers. Our society promotes terminating life (abortion) and promoting unhealthy relationships.

This is no different than porn or how you always see female celebrities showing their boobs and butts while male celebrities are fully clothed in tuxedos. Females are objects. It's wrong, but true. And this sensationalistic article promotes this.