I am... mostly straight (heh), and I have had multiple gay dude friends who were just platonic friends.
Yes, absolutely this can work, why would anyone think otherwise?
Lotta straight guys could probably get some decent fashion and grooming tips, I know I did, hahaha!
Also, entirely serious, gay dudes can make some of the best wingmen ever for their staight buds.
You can just actually do this.
Some people think you can't be friends with people of a gender you're attracted to. And as a bisexual, I can confirm that I have never seen anyone as a friend, only prey.
Yeah I've never understood that (first sentence) way of thinking.
I had more platonic gal friends than guy friends growing up, because most of the guys were insecure, boisterious, idiot assholes.
Simple as.
As for the second sentence, well, if we ever meet st the same bar, I'll make sure to be coy at first and then stern, but polite, hahahaha!
There are simply those I have and have not conquered
And as a bisexual, I can confirm that I have never seen anyone as a friend, only prey.
Bravo! you made my morning coffee go up my nose.
We're ace-spec and find the concept of attraction difficult for most people, except if we have a strong emotional connection to them.
However we also find the deliniation between like and love difficult too, we don't really understand the desire or ability to split feelings and what we'd like to do with a person based on a mere label such as 'friend' or 'partner'. This is part of the reason we chose to identify as relationship anarchists and discuss explicitly with each person what they and us are okay with and do so ocassionally over time too.
We also, not based on attraction but societal values and ideas, don't see any relationship we have with anyone or anymany automatically important or successful. For example 'familial' relationships, like any relationship, if the others connected to us wish to have such a relationship go well then they have to work at it as much as any relationship, regardless of label or assumed worthiness to a certain type of connection or things they are allowed or not allowed to say and/or do.
So yes, we can be 'friends' with anyone or anymany, but the label alone means very little.
It's always someone else's job to fix straight men's problems.
Tbf, the article is written by a gay man. So this is more men trying to fix problems nobody asked them to fix. (Which doesn't seem to be influenced by sexual preference).
It's not like matter and antimatter. They don't destroy each other on contact.
"As long as they don't come on to me..."
🤮
Says every "100% straight" man as they trim their fingernails, brush their teeth, and put on their nicest shirt before going out on "platonic" date with their gay friend.
I have far more straight than gay friends. I think it is purely because of my hobbies. I like cars, computers, and a bunch of these things that someone once decreed are "heteronormatively manly" and as a result, my friends happen to be straight.
I couldn't care less who they have sex with, because I don't choose friends based on what they do in bed.
In my experience, the more straight a person is, the dumber they are about anything computer, broadly speaking.
Since about 1990ish onward, yeah its still a hetero male dominated field, but the farther away someone gets from heteronormative man, chances get higher that they're actually extremely gifted/talented at doing actual software dev / it / academic research.
Don't forget Alan Turing, essentially the inventor of modern computing, was a gay man, and if you look through the history of notables in the actual field of comp sci, not the business of it, you'll find it has a lot more woman and non straight dudes in it that many other fields.
In my experience, the more straight a person is, the dumber they are about anything computer, broadly speaking.
Wow, really hot take here. Who people have sex with has nothing to do with their capabilities or intellect. That's just as bad as staying "the gayer someone is, the worse they are at sports, broadly speaking".
The rest I agree, as someone who works in the field yes, many of us are LGBTQ+ folks, but still not a majority. Which still results in people like me meeting, and engaging with more straight men than gay peeps.
You missed the 'in my experience' part of my sentence.
Its an anecdote.
That's what 'in my experience' means.
But again, broadly speaking... statistically valid correlations can and do exist between people's sexuality and many, many other aspects of themselves, their lives.
Like you can say oh, sexuality has no impact on who someone is or what they are capable of or what their life will look like... but this just assumes society is totally materially and morally neutral, and it treats all sexualities with statistical invariance, and it also precludes the possibility that to any extent, innate, complex biological differences exist.
You're basically saying sexuality is just an arbitrary choice, that society respects totally, thats the only way you could thoroughly believe that 'sexuality has nothing to do with ... capabilities or intellect.'
(You're also confusing outcomes with capabilities in that particular line, but w/e)
LQBTQ+ people are certainly statistically more likely to:
Experience physical violent crime against them,
Become homeless,
Commit suicide.
The idea that someone's sexuality doesn't have any influence on I guess seemingly unrelated aspects of their lives, their experiences, their outcomes, is just objectively false.
But if we do want to talk about actual data and studies, irt to sexuality and human intelligence, here's a fairly recent meta analysis:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7031189/
Without going into it in too much detail, there do actually seem to be some statistically significant differences between different kinds of intelligence per homo/hetero male/females, and the paper does go into some proposed theories as to the actual biological mechanics of why these differences may exist.
I have a very straight guy friend. his two best friends are a gay trans man and me a bi trans woman