Male escorts are making crazy money at the RNC

[Saint Frankenstein]

Bhahahaha: http://nypost.com/2016/07/21/male-escorts-are-making-crazy-money-at-the-rnc/

"One of the hookers said he wasn’t surprised that the convention — filled with politicians who openly oppose gay marriage — brought such a boom in business.

“When it comes to anything people aren’t supposed to be doing, they like to do it,” the escort said.

“The Republicans have a lot of delegates in the closet, let’s put it that way.”

But ladies of the night weren’t reaping the same benefits.

When contacted by The Post, females for hire said they’re making much less money than normal.

“Has business been better for me? Honestly, no,” one woman said before abruptly hanging up the phone.

“Business is slower than usual,” said another. “I haven’t been getting any calls.”"

Yes, I know it's a tabloid, but it's still hilarious and I very much doubt there's much in it that's untrue. (They're not the only outlet reporting on this, either.) Stay classy, social conservatives.

 

[Skwim]

From the linked article

"Male prostitutes contacted by The Post said business is booming and Republican National
Convention attendees — most of them married — are clamoring for their [gay] services."​

At least when Democrats get away from the old ball-and-chain for a few days they don't turn pink and bend over

They get a good ol' female prostitute like any manly man

would.

Tee hee.

Gotta say, this will probably be the only political convention that ever gets made into a movie, and a comedy no less.


.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I want to laugh, but in a way a pity them. They are so sold on this primitive ideology of how "evil" and "perverse" homosexuality is, that they have repressed themselves to the point that getting away for awhile is the only way they can experience their inner most desires only when they have minimum chances of being found. Clearly it's a toxic and destructive ideology, but their poor minds have been chained down to these silly notions of how things out to be.
But, I'm going to laugh anyways, because I now just don't have ammo against their anti-LBGT crap, I have a loaded 890 caliber cannon to shoot off next time they want to attack the LBGT community.

 

[Aštra’el]

The mere act of hooking up with dudes does not make male politicians "homosexual".

 

[Mindmaster]

Yes, because there are absolutely no gay or bi people in the Republican party.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The mere act of hooking up with dudes does not make male politicians "homosexual".

Yes, because there are absolutely no gay or bi people in the Republican party.

Way to utterly miss the point. The point is the hypocrisy of the party being vehemently homophobic meanwhile so many of their members are in the closet and banging male hookers while they're away from their wives. Then they want to act like moral crusaders, attack LGBT people and take away or prevent us from having our due rights. Duh. Ted Haggard, anyone?

 

[fantome profane]

The mere act of hooking up with dudes does not make male politicians "homosexual".

yeah, right, it's not gay if you are on top.

 

[Mindmaster]

Way to utterly miss the point. The point is the hypocrisy of the party being vehemently homophobic meanwhile so many of their members are in the closet and banging male hookers while they're away from their wives. Then they want to act like moral crusaders, attack LGBT people and take away or prevent us from having our due rights. Duh. Ted Haggard, anyone?

What rights do you not have that heterosexuals have? Oh, none. Game over. The Republicans have moved on, and most of them were resisting because they thought society wasn't ready for it. The Pre-Trump+ Republicans are over it since about 2012.

Most of the anti-gay laws in the south were drafted by people like Jim Crow Democrats, historically. Anyway, there are more bi people than gay so the whole thing makes sense to me. Some people have bi same sex relations outside their marriage because they want both, personally to me it is between the husband and wife to decide if they want these types of open relations. I don't really see anything wrong with it if everyone knows what is going on.

 

[Mindmaster]

yeah, right, it's not gay if you are on top.

It's not gay if they are bi.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What rights do you not have that heterosexuals have? Oh, none. Game over. The Republicans have moved on, and most of them were resisting because they thought society wasn't ready for it. The Pre-Trump+ Republicans are over it since about 2012.

Most of the anti-gay laws in the south were drafted by people like Jim Crow Democrats, historically. Anyway, there are more bi people than gay so the whole thing makes sense to me. Some people have bi same sex relations outside their marriage because they want both, personally to me it is between the husband and wife to decide if they want these types of open relations. I don't really see anything wrong with it if everyone knows what is going on.

I'm really close to just throwing you on perma-ignore because at this point, you might as well be trolling. You're either trying extremely hard to be an exact caricature of a rabid, fact and reality free alt-right Trump supporter or you actually believe all this crap you're spewing and have effectively become a different person. I really hope it's the former, because if it's the latter...let's not go there.

You should know damn well that trans people don't share the same protections and privileges that cis people do, and you also know damn well that the Republicans had nothing to do with advancing LGBT rights. That was the Democrats and a coalition of leftists and progressives. The Republicans don't give a **** about LGBT people. They don't accept us and they never will. They weren't playing around in their official party platform. They hate us. Nothing's changed there. They only "like" us insofar as we do what they want us to do, basically be closeted and/or have some measure of self-loathing with demonstrations of submission to heteronormativity and to support their political ideals no matter how much it hurts us. What they're doing is called "pinkwashing": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkwashing_(LGBT) We're just cannon fodder to them.

 

[Aštra’el]

I do not believe that men who understand they are men should refer to themselves as a "cis". I can see why trans people might use the term, but to everyone else it just seems completely unnecessary.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I do not believe that men who understand they are men should refer to themselves as a "cis". I can see why trans people might use the term, but to everyone else it just seems completely unnecessary.

"Cis" means "on the same side of", so a cis man is a male with an XY body who identifies as a man. It's a way of fixing possibly problematic language, as trans identities are often referred to in ways that present them as "less than" cis identities.

Oh, and I am a man who understands that he's a man.

 

[Mindmaster]

I do not believe that men who understand they are men should refer to themselves as a "cis". I can see why trans people might use the term, but to everyone else it just seems completely unnecessary.

I think the term is pretty silly too. Male and female should be enough, the whole cisgender silliness is just gender studies jargon anyway. Transgender is the "non-standard" so it is the one that needs explaining.

 

[Mindmaster]

I'm really close to just throwing you on perma-ignore because at this point, you might as well be trolling. You're either trying extremely hard to be an exact caricature of a rabid, fact and reality free alt-right Trump supporter or you actually believe all this crap you're spewing and have effectively become a different person. I really hope it's the former, because if it's the latter...let's not go there.

You should know damn well that trans people don't share the same protections and privileges that cis people do, and you also know damn well that the Republicans had nothing to do with advancing LGBT rights. That was the Democrats and a coalition of leftists and progressives. The Republicans don't give a **** about LGBT people. They don't accept us and they never will. They weren't playing around in their official party platform. They hate us. Nothing's changed there. They only "like" us insofar as we do what they want us to do, basically be closeted and/or have some measure of self-loathing with demonstrations of submission to heteronormativity and to support their political ideals no matter how much it hurts us. What they're doing is called "pinkwashing": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkwashing_(LGBT) We're just cannon fodder to them.

Yea, well, there are plenty of pro-LGBT Republicans, and most of the under 45 crowd is. We're either gonna change their minds, or they're gonna die out of the party naturally. Personally, I feel the one-woman one-man rhetoric in the new Republican party platform is the worst part of it. But, you know as well as I the platform is written by the entrenched management, not the up and comers. The rest is pretty logical. Don't, however, make the mistake of thinking all Republicans are with that notion -- I would say most of them aren't, and there are large groups within the Republican party (the Young Republicans, and the Log Cabin Republicans in particular) - http://www.logcabin.org/ for example, and I personally have no issue with LGBT communities at all. (Which would be funny if it were the case, since I am bi, but anyway...)

People keep trying to impress that the Republicans are one uniform thing and really it's just a bunch of people who believe America-first ideas. The pro-LGBT Republicans are the new wave, so don't get used to that. We're already mothballing the anti-LGBT folks, and Trump is just the first sign of it.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

What rights do you not have that heterosexuals have? Oh, none. Game over.

There are plenty of states where it's perfectly legal to fire someone for being LGBT. Can't really say the same about straight people. Most if not all of the anti-LGBT laws which have been passed were passed by Republican state legislatures.

Don't, however, make the mistake of thinking all Republicans are with that notion -- I would say most of them aren't, and there are large groups within the Republican party (the Young Republicans, and the Log Cabin Republicans in particular) - http://www.logcabin.org/ for example

The Log Cabin Republicans are an utter failure. They've been trying for how long (40 years?) to get the Republican Party on side with LGBT rights and have got nowhere. To quote Dan Savage: "Not only hasn't it gotten any better, it's gotten worse." Any LGBT who claims it's possible to support LGBT rights and the Republican Party at the same time is lying. Hell, you've got Gay Republicans sharing a platform with neo-Nazis out of a mutual dislike of Islam. What is even right about that?

 

[Mindmaster]

There are plenty of states where it's perfectly legal to fire someone for being LGBT. Can't really say the same about straight people. Most if not all of the anti-LGBT laws which have been passed by Republican state legislatures.
The Log Cabin Republicans are an utter failure. They've been trying for how long (40 years?) to get the Republican Party on side with LGBT rights and have got nowhere. To quote Dan Savage: "Not only hasn't it gotten any better, it's gotten worse." Any LGBT who claims it's possible to support LGBT rights and the Republican Party at the same time is lying. Hell, you've got Gay Republicans sharing a platform with neo-Nazis out of a mutual dislike of Islam. What is even right about that?

Not much worse than the current cognitive dissonance in the Democratic party. Let's face it, any time you get large groups of folks together uniformity isn't possible. As far as Dan Savage (who supposedly grew up here), he's full of crap. Look, I've been alive for awhile and when I was young there were regular gay bashing going on in Chicago -- that never even happens anymore. The attitude from that time until now is completely changed. Worse? Please. Gay people used to have to literally pretend to be straight and marry women just so they wouldn't be suspect. We're FAR away from that. His commentary doesn't even make any sense. I've seen how LGBT has been treated in the 70s, 80s, 90s, and the 2000+ and it's been steadily improving. At this point, no one even cares if you are gay unless they are gay and want to hook up.

Trump is pro-LGBT enough that he felt sort of troubled by being hemmed in by the Christian right on the marriage issue. Trump agreed to support the party platform when he took the nomination, but he doesn't write the platform. You can tell he double steps on his words every time he says it -- he doesn't believe it himself. His comments on Orlando reflect it, and moreover all the up and comers are certainly pro-LGBT or LGBT tolerant. The party is in complete transformation on that issue, and regardless of the fact that certain factions have been working for 40 years on that point, now really is the time. Watch Trumps speech yesterday? He came out, supported LGBT, and the whole convention applauded. Why? We're American's first. Plain and simple, every citizen deserves their rights and safety. The paleoconservatives are a dying breed, and they no longer reflect the party significantly.

I really despise people who don't like how something is going down in a party and don't actively take action to improve the situation. Don't like Republican LGBT stance, but like everything else they're about? Join the party and become an activist or shut up. I really hate all the armchair quarterbacks who sit on the sidelines and do nothing to improve the situation.

 

[Sunstone]

In my admittedly limited experience, most men who are rabidly anti-gay are in the closet homosexuals.

 

[Revoltingest]

Bhahahaha: http://nypost.com/2016/07/21/male-escorts-are-making-crazy-money-at-the-rnc/

"One of the hookers said he wasn’t surprised that the convention — filled with politicians who openly oppose gay marriage — brought such a boom in business.

“When it comes to anything people aren’t supposed to be doing, they like to do it,” the escort said.

“The Republicans have a lot of delegates in the closet, let’s put it that way.”

But ladies of the night weren’t reaping the same benefits.

When contacted by The Post, females for hire said they’re making much less money than normal.

“Has business been better for me? Honestly, no,” one woman said before abruptly hanging up the phone.

“Business is slower than usual,” said another. “I haven’t been getting any calls.”"

Yes, I know it's a tabloid, but it's still hilarious and I very much doubt there's much in it that's untrue. (They're not the only outlet reporting on this, either.) Stay classy, social conservatives.

This is good.
Their indulgences portend both greater tolerance & free commerce.
Perhaps there's hope for the party that knows how to party, eh?

 

[Revoltingest]

I think the term is pretty silly too. Male and female should be enough, the whole cisgender silliness is just gender studies jargon anyway. Transgender is the "non-standard" so it is the one that needs explaining.

There's a progressive feel for applying a prefix to normal people.
This way, the abnormal ones won't feel awkwardly singled out.
I'm considering identifying as a non-retarded non-LGBTIFR non-adolescent non-neurotypical groundskeeper.
Or for shorts.....a NRNLGBTIFRNANNTGK.
Such specificity will eschew obfuscation, eh?

 

[Mindmaster]

There's a progressive feel for applying a prefix to normal people.
This way, the abnormal ones won't feel awkwardly singled out.
I'm considering identifying as a non-retarded non-LGBTIFR non-adolescent non-neurotypical.
Or for shorts.....a NRNLGBTIFRNANNT.
Such specificity will eschew obfuscation, eh?

You are being heard loud in clear. If we get any more designations we're not going to be able to talk without radio phonetics. LGBT? I thought you said LGBTQ++!

I SUPPORT THE LIMA GOLF BRAVO TANGO QUEBEC!