Sheldon? Is that you? Hey! wait a minute? Are you insulting my writing ability??

Tone is extremely difficult to determine on the internet, especially when most people don't know how to write well. That is why I rarely if ever use sarcasm. Here especially I keep my tone neutral.

It is also nearly impossible to read someone else's reactions on the internet, Defending myself from someone's attempted insult, or unintentional slight, is a lot different than actually FEELING insulted.

For instance, I don't FEEL insulted when someone says straight men can't dress well, but I know the statement is an insult (whether intentional or not), so I file it under "things that person has reasoned out poorly or not thought much about."

That reason is also why I am extra careful to be clear when someone says something personal like Bigjim did or with hot button issues such as homosexuality. It's really hard to know how people are going to perceive things through extremely mediated conversation, so it's better to clear things up before things get taken wrong.

Thus, I have no idea why you stated "I think it was insulting clear" and if it was sarcasm, why you reacted to my responses with personal assessments of me when I was only seeking clarity for the above reasons.

This has nothing to do with bigjim. My points were this: You don't recognize sarcasm when you see it, but it seems you do get insulted easily.

I was not and have never insulted Bigjim.

I was also not degrading homosexuals. The insult is saying that if someone dresses well, they must not be straight. Saying so is saying straight men are incapable of dressing well. That thinking is collectivist.

Me either, but natty seems a bit too "old school", as well.

I think it came about because casual workwear became TOO casual, ie. flip flops, tank tops, etc.

Sometimes reality hits them in the face and they scratch their heads while we just shake ours...

I could....but you'd find it insulting.

I don't understand what you mean. Could you please state it another way?

Exactly, Thank You for pointing that out..

I think the metro sexual look leans a little toward the effenimate/gay category.

I think it was insultingly clear.

I've never really liked the term metrosexual because I don't see what dressing well has to do with sexuality. I also don't see how dressing well necessarily means dressing in a metropolitan style either!

I was being clear for the sake of avoid misunderstandings.

They're fine. And the word I believe you're looking for in reference to a nicely dressed/groomed straight guy is metrosexual. Lol. I'd rather more men took into consideration what they looked and smelled like!

ornery vs incompetent vs mini dictator vs SLOW vs officious vs......
there are sooo many choices, like ice cream

It really is pathetic that because a person is black they are expected to toe the liberal line. And to be demonized not following that doctrine shows to me a shaky moral footing of collective speak.

Really?! Lol. Well, at least the people in Co Springs won't get ornery, being stoned and all.

Oh...I thought that was sarcasm.

I think he got it, jm lol

I know, but saying a man who dresses well must be gay is an insult to straight men just like saying a black man who speaks well isn't authentically black is insulting to black men.

"When will the mainstream media call attention to racist political thinking?" <Juan Williams>

Why should they?

OA, :)
I really felt bad for him over NPR. He really seemed surprised.

I will say, the young gentlemen at the consulate (no females in the front room) are very courteous and good looking. this was NOT my experience in Co Spgs. and now, they're probably all stoned, which will mean an EXTRA hour in line. well, maybe not in Co Spgs but definitely in Summit County (Breck, Vail)

Lol, you really do! I'm sure you smell nice, tho. You wouldn't be allowed to get near the consulate otherwise... ;-)

Juan is not always wrong. Good story.Thanks bigjim.