Grindr banned in the Olympic Village in Paris (2024)

[brnbk]

14 minutes ago, hntnhole said:

I respectfully disagree: 

Whether we're "gay" or not is not a choice, it's an inborn, naturally achieved inclination.  The only "choice" involved, is whether we accept our nature and act upon that inclination or not.

I must point out, you are just totally disregarding the subsequent clarification that I posted where I tried to explain that I was referring to choice in the second sense i.e. the choice involved of accepting our nature and acting upon that inclination. I was not referring to choice in the first sense i.e. wether we are gay or not. 

I clarified this, but somehow it is not being accepted. May I ask, why so?

 

Subsequent clarification

Edited August 2 by brnbk
ingrained bad habit

[BergenGuy]

3 hours ago, brnbk said:

I clarified this, but somehow it is not being accepted. May I ask, why so?

Why?  Because your "clarification" still reads as gay being a choice:

Quote

 

I am wondering if this confusion is because in US English, you would say,  In this sense rather than in that sense, and thus the sentence would read:  In this sense choosing to be gay, is indeed a choice and a brave choice for people who come from countries where it is illegal/dangerous etc.

 

Perhaps you mean to say that acting upon one's same-sex orientation is a choice.  But, the orientation itself ("gay") is NOT a choice.

[BootmanLA]

@brnbk You said "choosing to be gay". Those are your words.

I am not sure if English is not your first language, but those words mean exactly that: choosing to be gay.

If, instead, you mean "Choosing to be OPENLY gay" or "Choosing to be OPEN about being gay", that is something entirely different.

I'm amenable to chalking this up to a language difficulty, but there's no "other meaning" to "choosing to be gay"; it means someone who made the choice to be attracted to the same sex. And that simply doesn't happen.

[brnbk]

  

33 minutes ago, BergenGuy said:

Perhaps you mean to say that acting upon one's same-sex orientation is a choice.  But, the orientation itself ("gay") is NOT a choice.

Yes, Exactly, and I thought I had clarified that through my following posts:

                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Clarification

 

23 hours ago, brnbk said:

if you read all of what I wrote, you will see that I meant

in the sense that, many conservatives see homosexuality and being gay as a choice and not "natural"... and hold that gay men who have gay sex are making a choice to be gay. I was referring to the conservative view, not my view!

                                        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Subsequent Clarification

 

17 hours ago, brnbk said:

I wanted to add that for some reason, I notice my lines are being read as if I had said that being gay was a choice .................... wondering if this confusion is because in US English, you would say,  In this sense rather than in that sense, and thus the sentence would read:  In this sense choosing to be gay, is indeed a choice and a brave choice for people who come from countries where it is illegal/dangerous etc.

and then finally again in. 

                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Superior Clarification. 

 

4 hours ago, brnbk said:

.......... I was referring to choice in the second sense i.e. the choice involved of accepting our nature and acting upon that inclination. I was not referring to choice in the first sense i.e. wether we are gay or not. 

 

[ellentonboy]

On 7/27/2024 at 2:15 PM, brnbk said:

Isn't the ban of geo-location controlling as well? After all, athletes have the option  not to log into Grindr or app or turn of geo-location, should they choose. 

 

I am imagining if the guy is on Grindr in the Olympics!, he probably is on Grindr even when he is back in his homophobic country; and every gay man including gay athletes in homophobic countries, unfortunately, has the border and duty to fight the fight against homophobia! homophobia cannot be eliminated by doing away with a gay app or gay bar. Such a line of reasoning is circular, and seeks to blame and eliminate the victim rather than the perpetrator. 

 

 

Whose safety: Is Grindr really worried about the safety of gay athletes or is it more worried about the safety of its profits and intersectionality with the straight world? What I mean by that phrase is, the ability of Grindr to appear "normal" as defined by the heteronormative standards of the society in which it operates. According to multiple news sources, the Olympic village does not allow the family of athletes to stay with them, thus leaving a host of testosterones filled men with urges - cum filled balls desperate to drain it in a hole, any hole if they become desperate. Is fear of homosexual experimentation on part of the Olympians one of the main driving force behind this decision to ban GPS, as geolocation certainly makes a hook up easy: if I know how far the gay guy is, its easy to talk to him and perhaps arrange for a meeting -  cum filled encounter of Olympic proportions? 

 

 

Nope, you are incorrect here. The US Olympic made a decision that no athletes could indulge in alcohol consumption.  With Grindr, athletes can still use the app, they just can’t use the geo locator.

Big difference. In one case you are being told 100 percentage you can not indulge (as in the alcohol ban). With Grindr, you can still hook up, you just can’t find where exactly your potential sex partner is located.  Grindr is NOT saying you can’t have sex, but the US Olympic committee is saying you can’t drink alcohol.

Sorry but that is an entirely different scenario.

[cockfun69]

21 hours ago, hntnhole said:

I respectfully disagree: 

Whether we're "gay" or not is not a choice, it's an inborn, naturally achieved inclination.  The only "choice" involved, is whether we accept our nature and act upon that inclination or not.

In some parts of the world, some may feel repressed enough (culturally, religiously, whatever) to avoid their truth, and pretend to be what they're not (or worse, foreswear any sexual activity at all). That's not an invalid choice, it's merely a choice somewhere on the scale of regrettable-to-tragic. 

Yes decades ago many gay men were repressed and had terrible relationships with women and had unhappy families.
And these days many 'str8' men dabble with guys just to fuck when a woman isn't around.
Plus there are still many countries and cultures where m2m activities are illegal (even capital offences) so there is no 'choice'.

[hntnhole]

On 8/1/2024 at 10:31 PM, brnbk said:

I am wondering if this confusion is because in US English, you would say,  In this sense rather than in that sense, and thus the sentence would read:  In this sense choosing to be gay, is indeed a choice and a brave choice for people who come from countries where it is illegal/dangerous etc.

I've spent some time looking back at responses in this thread, and this^ is the closest I've come to what I commented about.  I'm quite familiar with usage of the English language, particularly the Americanized version, and I've never lived (nor done much business) with what must be a Canadian dialect.  Thus, if I misunderstood some colloquialism, please accept my apologies. 

My point was, and remains, no one "chooses" their sexuality.  The only "choice" is whether we sublimate it for various (and negative) reasons, or we embrace it (our gay sexuality), know in our hearts (emotionally) and minds (intellectually), that we gay folks are not intrinsically evil, bad, wicked, but rather that our innate sexuality is basically a cypher in determining what kind of human being we choose (emotionally/intellectually) to be.  

Thus, those who accept, embrace, celebrate their innate sexual orientation have made the choice to be the men or women they were born to be, and able to live honest and productive lives without wasting all the effort to be closeted.  

I enjoy reading your responses, since it's obvious you're an intelligent and caring man.  I also enjoy the discourse, the sharing of viewpoints of what seems to be around 80,000+ other guys, just as you do.  Peace. 

[brnbk]

20 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

@brnbk You said "choosing to be gay". Those are your words.

I am not sure if English is not your first language, but those words mean exactly that: choosing to be gay............................ there's no "other meaning" to "choosing to be gay"; it means someone who made the choice to be attracted to the same sex. And that simply doesn't happen.

1 hour ago, hntnhole said:

..............  I'm quite familiar with usage of the English language, particularly the Americanized version, ..........................My point was, and remains, no one "chooses" their sexuality.  The only "choice" is whether we sublimate it for various (and negative) reasons, or we embrace it (our gay sexuality).

My sentence did came with a Caveat: In this sense; warning readers that i was referring to being gay as a choice, in another sense( the second one where do something with it: embrace etc.)   and not the popular one; and I had referred to the sense/context in my first line about authoritarian countries and the dangers gays face in such places. 

On 7/31/2024 at 8:40 PM, brnbk said:

Unfortunately in authoritarian countries, gay men who choose to have gay sex always have such dangers dangling over their head for being gay. In that sense(this sense) choosing to be gay, is indeed a choice and a brave choice for people who come from countries where it is illegal/dangerous etc.

I meant in 'that/this sense', as in , in such a context.
 

I believe my usage might be a bit Archaic and not quite American, but I would be surprised if I was wrong. Having said that, I have been known to be wrong... so ....

Edited August 3 by brnbk
ingrained bad habit

[blackrobe]

On 7/31/2024 at 5:40 PM, brnbk said:

I wonder if your charitable view of Grindr is because you have the good fortune and privilege of choosing to say No to working with them.

Of course you do.

As we all know, nothing says you support an organization unreservedly like refusing to interview with them on ethical grounds. 😏 

It's time to hang a "Don't feel the Troll" sign on this thread.

[brnbk]

3 hours ago, blackrobe said:

It's time to hang a "Don't feel the Troll" sign on this thread.

Hardly! I believe it is time to hang a 🫵" Turn the GPS on, Grindr " sign. 👯‍♂️as the Olympians want to hook up easily. I sure am glad I am not in any Olympics Team, or else I most likely would not have fun for two weeks. 

I am sorry you feel my response is "troll", because the person who raised the question seemed to appreciate my answer. Also, I am really glad for the people who raised the question of my usage of "gay as choice" because I realized even if I meant to say something and even if i am correct(technically) , ultimately how most people read it, is something that matters quite a bit. As someone who is trying to improve his communication skills including writing, I feel that's a big one for me.  

 

If you feel this thread has reached its finality, then I would invite you to try another one I started last week. 

 

[BootmanLA]

1 hour ago, brnbk said:

Also, I am really glad for the people who raised the question of my usage of "gay as choice" because I realized even if I meant to say something and even if i am correct(technically) , ultimately how most people read it, is something that matters quite a bit.

I'm sorry, but no, you were not correct, technically or otherwise.

I suspect, based on your postings, that you are French-Canadian, and you are attempting to translate a thought in French into English. But you mistranslated, as far as I can tell. What I think you MEANT to say is that someone can choose to ACT gay, or to BE OPENLY gay, but the English words you used - "choose to be gay" have a very, very specific meaning, and it's simply untrue.

And again, to be fair, this distinction may not be readily apparent to someone translating from one language to another. I have a passing ability to read some basic French, and a bit more Spanish, but I know well enough to know that anything I wrote in either language would be subject to contextual errors, perhaps egregious ones. I wouldn't be "technically" correct - I'd be wrong.

[brnbk]

19 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

I suspect, based on your postings, that you are French-Canadian, 

I am happy to let u know, that your suspicions are unfounded and I am not French. I am actually Indian, a real Indian i.e. from the country of India, and not what you refer to as "Indian" in  U.S. English.

 

19 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

What I think you MEANT to say is that someone can choose to ACT gay, or to BE OPENLY gay, but the English words you used - "choose to be gay" have a very, very specific meaning, and it's simply untrue.

Unfortunately even though English is better than classical languages in terms of exactness, English still suffers from the drawbacks of natural language in that one word or phrase can have many meanings . You are quite right: In the U.S and Anglosphere, choosing to be gay usually refers to the question of wether one is born gay or choose to be gay (nature vs nurture). and gay rights activists tend to base their arguments and demands for acceptance and rights under the banner of "Born this way". Since these societies generally place the Individual above society, the Individual who accepts his "true self" i.e. his nature is celebrated as being authentic and a hero, and this approach works well for the gay activists in anglo societies. 

However, In Eurasia, given the preeminence  of religion, such a individual focused approach has limited traction. Even if someone is born gay, social conservatives  argued that one could be born a serial cheater, a pervert, etc. and thus the natural argument , born this way,  does not have as much saliency as in Anglo American culture and society which celebrates individualism whereas Eurasia tends to give importance to Church and society. In Eurasian cultures, the Individual who often does break societal and religious expectations - such as marrying outside of ones religion : a jew or a gypsy, or social class i.e. nobility or peasant, rich or poor , is often celebrated as the hero in such cultures and 'gay as choice', usually has a different meaning and context than the US. 

So while 'choosing to be gay' might sound like a slur in US English, it really is a compliment in the Eurasia: the Hero  choose to marry his sweetheart/love even though society disapproves. 

Hope this gives you some background and context of how "choosing to be gay" could mean different things in different part of the world. While in the US, it has a negative connotation, in  Eurasia that is not the case. 

 

 

Edited August 4 by brnbk
ingrained bad habit

[BootmanLA]

6 hours ago, brnbk said:

However, In Eurasia,

If you were writing in Hindi, or any other language where the concepts of "choose to be gay" and "choose to be out" are expressed with the same words, then it might be "technically correct."

But in English, if you use the first phrase to mean the second, then you're not technically correct at all. It's a mistranslation of a concept, at best.

That said - given that it's an error of phrasing, not an attempt to mislead, just accept the "L" and move on. I can assure you that if I were to try to translate a very specific thought into Hindi (or Bengali or Sanskrit or Tamil or anything else), I would probably make a mistake as well, perhaps an egregious one; and if I did, I'd certainly do the same.

[brnbk]

2 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

That said - given that it's an error of phrasing, not an attempt to mislead, just accept the "L" and move on. I can assure you 

These, my friend, are Indian lands! and we are not moving anywhere...you obviously are a very opinionated person who considers yourself the last word on style and usage.

I have no desire to lead or mislead, just inform; you of course are free to accept it or not. 

[Poz50something]

Jeezus! I mean, amid all the global chaos, Grindr being banned in the Olympic Village is earth shattering, isn’t it??!!? This is the hill y’all wanna die on?