Homosexuality is a choice? Never been proved.

[roguenuke]

I think it does matter. :shrug:

And your thoughts on this mean what exactly? The majority realize that it doesnt'. Even the military knows that gay men shower with straight men and that is just how it is. This has been true since men started taking showers. It has been true for as long as men have showered in front of other men. But men have not taken showers/gotten naked in front of women (in general). And while this may change one day, it would be due to coed showers, not some creepy stalkerish peepshow window as suggested by DDD.

 

[roguenuke]

If the glass is in between they would not have to.



As it is and if left unchanged: You are depriving straight men from access to seeing naked women while hypocritically promoting a double standard by allowing gay men from benefiting from this access in seeing naked men instead.

That just cannot stand. Either provide equal access or remove access completely!

Straight men are free to convince a woman to change in front of them if they choose. They are free to change outside of the view of other men, especially those men who are known to be gay if they choose. But there is no right to view those you are attracted to naked. It may occur, but that occurrence at a higher frequency for some does not grant anyone else the right to have that view of their attractions come up more often.

 

[Henrin]

And your thoughts on this mean what exactly? The majority realize that it doesnt'. Even the military knows that gay men shower with straight men and that is just how it is. This has been true since men started taking showers. It has been true for as long as men have showered in front of other men. But men have not taken showers/gotten naked in front of women (in general). And while this may change one day, it would be due to coed showers, not some creepy stalkerish peepshow window as suggested by DDD.

I think showering with people that are physically attracted to me that are of the same sex is creepy as ****, and I don't care if it has been going on forever. It's still ****ing creepy.

 

[DDD]

Straight men are free to convince a woman to change in front of them if they choose. They are free to change outside of the view of other men, especially those men who are known to be gay if they choose. But there is no right to view those you are attracted to naked.

The above is in direct conflict with below:

It may occur, but that occurrence at a higher frequency for some does not grant anyone else the right to have that view of their attractions come up more often.

If there is a right for access in seeing sexual objects live and naked then it should be equally distributed. If there is none then the access should be equally removed.

Make up your mind?

 

[roguenuke]

I think they are necessary. No one wants to shower with strangers or classmates, or teammates for that matter. We want to shower alone and have some amount of privacy. It's about time it's provided. The shower arrangement that has been around for decades is inappropriate and needs to change. There is no excuse to building a huge room for people to shower in. None.

Please. People have done it forever. While it makes some uncomfortable, it also provides a sense of esprit de corps for others. Plus, it helps to loosen up some of the prudes.

Efficiency, money and space saving are the reason for huge showers. There is nothing inappropriate about it. Men are men and they all have the same equipment. Women are women and we all have the same equipment. It really isn't that big of deal. I can't even remember the locker rooms in my high school for the dry teams. The one us swimmers had had individual showers. That is also how my Navy experience was with the exception of bootcamp. Individual showers. Now, locker rooms are open, but anyone is free to use the bathroom stalls.

Man, some guys are such prudes.

 

[DDD]

And while this may change one day, it would be due to coed showers, not some creepy stalkerish peepshow window as suggested by DDD.

This too is a good solution, brought up before though. Put everyone in unisex locker and shower rooms. No one has to declare their sexual identity while access is equally distributed.

 

[roguenuke]

The above is in direct conflict with below:



If there is a right for access in seeing sexual objects live and naked then it should be equally distributed. If there is none then the access should be equally removed.

Make up your mind?

There is no right to view other people you are attracted to. It is completely possible for gay men to have no one change in front of them. It isn't a right. It is a happenstance given the nature of separating the showers/locker rooms that way. If the straight men are uncomfortable changing in front of other guys of any sexuality, they are free to change in the restrooms and shower after everyone else is done or at home.

 

[roguenuke]

This too is a good solution, brought up before though. Put everyone in unisex locker and shower rooms. No one has to declare their sexual identity while access is equally distributed.

No. There should be three rooms. One mixed, and one for each gender. Get over yourself. Pretty sure gay men aren't all after your body.

 

[DDD]

Please. People have done it forever. While it makes some uncomfortable, it also provides a sense of esprit de corps for others. Plus, it helps to loosen up some of the prudes.

Just because it may have been done before it does not means that it is alright with. Further, this is about having too much of sense of esprit de corps! Catch my drift?

Too much of that distributed to a minority alone, for their benefits, and not to the benefits of others.

Prude people would be eliminated if put in the same shower locker rooms with women also.

Efficiency, money and space saving are the reason for huge showers. There is nothing inappropriate about it. Men are men and they all have the same equipment. Women are women and we all have the same equipment. It really isn't that big of deal. I can't even remember the locker rooms in my high school for the dry teams. The one us swimmers had had individual showers. That is also how my Navy experience was with the exception of bootcamp. Individual showers. Now, locker rooms are open, but anyone is free to use the bathroom stalls.

Just have this equally distributed. Thank you.

 

[Henrin]

Please. People have done it forever. While it makes some uncomfortable, it also provides a sense of esprit de corps for others. Plus, it helps to loosen up some of the prudes.

Whatever that means. The whole time I was in school I don't remember the showers ever being used. Why? Because everyone thought it was creepy as hell to shower with other dudes. We just didn't do it. People shouldn't have to shower with people they don't want to shower with in order to actually get a shower, and there is really no excuse to make people feel uncomfortable when it is easily avoidable. We have privacy in bathrooms, so I see no reason there can't be privacy in shower facilities.

Efficiency, money and space saving are the reason for huge showers. There is nothing inappropriate about it.

There is everything inappropriate about it. If nothing was wrong with it a great deal of people wouldn't feel it was inappropriate and avoid doing it.

Men are men and they all have the same equipment.

I don't want to see them naked. I don't want them to see me naked. I don't want to shower with them. I want to shower alone.

Women are women and we all have the same equipment.

Many women don't want to shower with other women and just like men they shouldn't be forced to do so if they want to take a shower.

It really isn't that big of deal.

So why don't you just shower in the middle of the street if you are so cool with it.

 

[DDD]

No. There should be three rooms. One mixed, and one for each gender. Get over yourself. Pretty sure gay men aren't all after your body.

Err... This is not about me, never has been.

Three rooms are already available today over there. I heard they are not being used as much. If so then this solution does not get across very well.

 

[DDD]

There is no right to view other people you are attracted to.

Then remove gay people from straight people's locker rooms? Why has this right been so stepped upon till now?

It is completely possible for gay men to have no one change in front of them. It isn't a right. It is a happenstance given the nature of separating the showers/locker rooms that way.

Thus under the light of these new data should change to provide equal access to benefits of seeing naked and live sexual objects.

If the straight men are uncomfortable changing in front of other guys of any sexuality, they are free to change in the restrooms and shower after everyone else is done or at home.

Irrelevant. We were speaking of benefits that gay people already posses today by seeing other men naked and live today. The issue is about how to equally distribute this benefit.

Just because you underwent these precautions I do not see why others should.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Great post Captain! :kissy:

I know. It's some of my best work. Go find MORE of my awesome posts and comment on them. I do love responding to my adoring fans.

 

[roguenuke]

Just because it may have been done before it does not means that it is alright with. Further, this is about having too much of sense of esprit de corps! Catch my drift?

Too much of that distributed to a minority alone, for their benefits, and not to the benefits of others.

Prude people would be eliminated if put in the same shower locker rooms with women also.



Just have this equally distributed. Thank you.

You have yet to prove that gay men are having more sex in the bathrooms/locker rooms than straight couples.

I will continue to repeat myself, you do not have a right to see other people naked. No matter your personal feelings about this.

 

[roguenuke]

Then remove gay people from straight people's locker rooms? Why has this right been so stepped upon till now?



Thus under the light of these new data should change to provide equal access to benefits of seeing naked and live sexual objects.



Irrelevant. We were speaking of benefits that gay people already posses today by seeing other men naked and live today. The issue is about how to equally distribute this benefit.

Just because you underwent these precautions I do not see why others should.

No. Gay men do not have to be removed. Deal with it. They have been there forever. And you cannot force people to share their sexuality with you so it would be pointless to try.

You have yet to prove that being able to see random strangers in various stages of dress is some sort of advantage for anyone.

 

[roguenuke]

Err... This is not about me, never has been.

Three rooms are already available today over there. I heard they are not being used as much. If so then this solution does not get across very well.

Yes, it is about you. There is no one else coming on here actually suggesting what you have suggested. In fact, I've yet to see anyone who could actually vote on this particular issue ever suggest such a thing.

And if people are not using the current coed restrooms, this solidifies my stance all along, that the majority are quite content with not seeing members of the opposite sex naked/changing/showering in showerroom settings so your suggestion is unnecessary.

 

[DDD]

You have yet to prove that gay men are having more sex in the bathrooms/locker rooms than straight couples.

No need to. For this is irrelevant from "watching" (alone) live and nude sexual objects and benefit from natural testosterone shots linked with greater aggression and better performance in sports.

I will continue to repeat myself, you do not have a right to see other people naked. No matter your personal feelings about this.

You are making this an issue about rights, the constitution, and other lawful issues also. I am after equal distribution instead.

Besides, I will continue to counter this approach to my solution also with a: Please enforce this right on gay people that do not have the right to see us straight people naked and yet they do so. Thanks.

 

[DDD]

No. Gay men do not have to be removed. Deal with it.

Why? Cause it suits you better? How about we put a glass between genders and see you get naked in shower and locker rooms and you deal with it instead?

They have been there forever. And you cannot force people to share their sexuality with you so it would be pointless to try.

Being there forever does not makes it a viable solution. Cancer has also been there forever. We do not have to live with it do we?

You have yet to prove that being able to see random strangers in various stages of dress is some sort of advantage for anyone.

You mean healthy straight athlete men in their 18-24/27's seeing naked women would not increase testosterone levels? You do actually need research for this do not you?

 

[DDD]

Yes, it is about you. There is no one else coming on here actually suggesting what you have suggested. In fact, I've yet to see anyone who could actually vote on this particular issue ever suggest such a thing.

Not about me and voting will come in time after prior sensitization of this issue.

And if people are not using the current coed restrooms, this solidifies my stance all along, that the majority are quite content with not seeing members of the opposite sex naked/changing/showering in showerroom settings so your suggestion is unnecessary.

Nah, it just means that your solution does not work. Mine has yet to be tested and seen in deed that it does

 

[roguenuke]

No need to. For this is irrelevant from "watching" (alone) live and nude sexual objects and benefit from natural testosterone shots linked with greater aggression and better performance in sports.

You are making this an issue about rights, the constitution, and other lawful issues also. I am after equal distribution instead.

Besides, I will continue to counter this approach to my solution also with a: Please enforce this right on gay people that do not have the right to see us straight people naked and yet they do so. Thanks.

You continue to fall back on this stupid sports advantage thing, yet the very fact of making them mandatory everywhere would then defeat that "advantage" because both teams would then get the advantage. An advantage you have yet to even prove exist, at all, since you have failed to show any accurate or relevant research that would properly control all the variables for your suggestion, not just showing pics of naked ladies and then measuring testosterone levels. It isn't the same thing.

You are trying to make this about something you have no right to. You have no right to "equal distribution" (whatever the heck that is supposed to be).

Straight men do not have any right to only be seen naked by other straight men. Heck, you have no way of knowing truly which men would or wouldn't be attracted to you. Plenty of married guys out there on the "down low". And there will always be some.

 

[roguenuke]

Not about me and voting will come in time after prior sensitization of this issue.

Nah, it just means that your solution does not work. Mine has yet to be tested and seen in deed that it does

Go ahead start now. I dare you.

Your solution is the one that we will not see. It is much more likely that we would see coed bathrooms/locker rooms than pervy windows.

 

[Henrin]

Not about me and voting will come in time after prior sensitization of this issue.



Nah, it just means that your solution does not work. Mine has yet to be tested and seen in deed that it does

You solution makes everything worse, imho. Mine deals with all the problems at once.

It deals with a system that was never appropriate and puts in place the system that should been there from the start.
It solves the problem of people being attracted to each other in the shower.
It solves the transsexual problem.
And really any problems that could come up in the future due to people showering together.

 

[roguenuke]

You solution makes everything worse, imho. Mine deals with all the problems at once.

It deals with a system that was never appropriate and puts in place the system that should been there from the start.
It solves the problem of people being attracted to each other in the shower.
It solves the transsexual problem.
And really any problems that could come up in the future due to people showering together.

And who is going to pay for your proposed system? It would cost a fortune and take up at least two, three, even four times or more as much space as current lockerrooms/bathrooms do, especially in high schools/middle schools. It simply isn't a viable solution, especially not in our economy. And since no one really cares except some extremists, it isn't an issue.

Even in the military it doesn't matter. "Oh my god, I have to shower in front of gays now." "Um, yeah, dude they were there all along and if you didn't know it, it probably means they weren't interested."

 

[DDD]

You continue to fall back on this stupid sports advantage thing, yet the very fact of making them mandatory everywhere would then defeat that "advantage" because both teams would then get the advantage. An advantage you have yet to even prove exist, at all, since you have failed to show any accurate or relevant research that would properly control all the variables for your suggestion, not just showing pics of naked ladies and then measuring testosterone levels. It isn't the same thing.

The issue in sports is to compete with advantages. If gay people have advantages by seeing naked men live in locker and shower rooms then straight people should also be exposed to seeing naked women in locker and shower rooms.

As for research I have presented mine. Australian top athletes in football are severely aggressive. Aggression is linked with testosterone levels and that you have in a previous research. To be honest the only one who has been denying this proposal of mine with no research is you. How about you provide research that naked women do not increase testosterone levels in young healthy athlete men?

You are trying to make this about something you have no right to. You have no right to "equal distribution" (whatever the heck that is supposed to be).

Straight men have no right to equally benefit from distribution to access? Why? Why only gay people to benefit from this and straight men should not?

Straight men do not have any right to only be seen naked by other straight men.

Yet they do and do so constantly, do not they? This is getting jiberish!

Heck, you have no way of knowing truly which men would or wouldn't be attracted to you. Plenty of married guys out there on the "down low". And there will always be some.

Irrelevant once the access is distributed equally.

 

[DDD]

You solution makes everything worse, imho. Mine deals with all the problems at once.

It deals with a system that was never appropriate and puts in place the system that should been there from the start.
It solves the problem of people being attracted to each other in the shower.
It solves the transsexual problem.
And really any problems that could come up in the future due to people showering together.

I am not the one who disagrees to any solution and keep it the old way here Henrin. I am open to any solution just as long as access to live sexual content is distributed equally and not partially. I was raising practical concerns.

How to make this solution a reality when it may cost too much?