Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound homophobic, OP.

How is it homophobic?

It embraces a specific (and problematic) view of masculinity and then assumes anything that doesn’t fit that view must be “gay.” Never mind that those uniforms might be better for performance, “real” men don’t wear skin tight clothes so it must be to appeal to gay men. And “real” men would be too uncomfortable to see other men in tight clothes, so “real” men would prefer lower-quality gameplay in order to not see men in tight pants. “Real” men avoid all physical contact, so a chest bump must mean they’re gay.

Huh? No. That's not what I meant at all. It has nothing to do with rejecting or assigning a certain type of masculinity to anyone. Where did that come from? I was talking about WATCHING football, not being a football player. And I don't think there's anything wrong with being gay either. (I guess I forgot to add "Not that there's anything wrong with it" to my post so of course you must assume I'm homophobic )

Oh, I think it’s exactly what you meant. You assumed that only gay men would be comfortable watching a sport where the male players wear skin tight clothes and come into physical contact with each other, presumably because watching the sport otherwise wouldn’t appeal to heterosexual men.

Well I'm enjoying it.

Men are in charge of football. Men are in charge of the uniforms. Men watch the football....

You really can’t see any advantage to form-fitting rather than loose clothing? If not, you clearly don’t understand anything about the game.

Pretending straight men are oblivious to skintight clothing and ass-patting is absurd.

Anonymous wrote:Not to mention “deep penetration” “pistol formations” and those sexy tight ends.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound homophobic, OP.

How is it homophobic?

It embraces a specific (and problematic) view of masculinity and then assumes anything that doesn’t fit that view must be “gay.” Never mind that those uniforms might be better for performance, “real” men don’t wear skin tight clothes so it must be to appeal to gay men. And “real” men would be too uncomfortable to see other men in tight clothes, so “real” men would prefer lower-quality gameplay in order to not see men in tight pants. “Real” men avoid all physical contact, so a chest bump must mean they’re gay.

Huh? No. That's not what I meant at all. It has nothing to do with rejecting or assigning a certain type of masculinity to anyone. Where did that come from? I was talking about WATCHING football, not being a football player. And I don't think there's anything wrong with being gay either. (I guess I forgot to add "Not that there's anything wrong with it" to my post so of course you must assume I'm homophobic )

Oh, I think it’s exactly what you meant. You assumed that only gay men would be comfortable watching a sport where the male players wear skin tight clothes and come into physical contact with each other, presumably because watching the sport otherwise wouldn’t appeal to heterosexual men.

Well I'm enjoying it.

Men are in charge of football. Men are in charge of the uniforms. Men watch the football....

You really can’t see any advantage to form-fitting rather than loose clothing? If not, you clearly don’t understand anything about the game.

Pretending straight men are oblivious to skintight clothing and ass-patting is absurd.

Because you can only see it through your own gay-hating lens. You’re a bigot, OP.

Anonymous wrote:Or what??? One of my kids is really into watching sports on tv so I've been watching a lot of football lately. Wow.... The football players are wearing those skin-tight tights that reveal their chiseled butts and thighs, their arms extending out of their jerseys are totally muscular and perfect. They're constantly giving each other congratulatory pats on each others' butts and doing chest-bumps, and leaning their helmets against each other -- they must be able to breathe each others' breath. And then of course they're falling all over each other on the field.

How can watching all this not be a homo-erotic event for men? Or is that a well-established fact that I've somehow missed? It seems like if it were for straight men, they would at least change the uniforms to be less sexy....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound homophobic, OP.

How is it homophobic?

It embraces a specific (and problematic) view of masculinity and then assumes anything that doesn’t fit that view must be “gay.” Never mind that those uniforms might be better for performance, “real” men don’t wear skin tight clothes so it must be to appeal to gay men. And “real” men would be too uncomfortable to see other men in tight clothes, so “real” men would prefer lower-quality gameplay in order to not see men in tight pants. “Real” men avoid all physical contact, so a chest bump must mean they’re gay.

Huh? No. That's not what I meant at all. It has nothing to do with rejecting or assigning a certain type of masculinity to anyone. Where did that come from? I was talking about WATCHING football, not being a football player. And I don't think there's anything wrong with being gay either. (I guess I forgot to add "Not that there's anything wrong with it" to my post so of course you must assume I'm homophobic )

Oh, I think it’s exactly what you meant. You assumed that only gay men would be comfortable watching a sport where the male players wear skin tight clothes and come into physical contact with each other, presumably because watching the sport otherwise wouldn’t appeal to heterosexual men.

Well I'm enjoying it.

Men are in charge of football. Men are in charge of the uniforms. Men watch the football....

You really can’t see any advantage to form-fitting rather than loose clothing? If not, you clearly don’t understand anything about the game.

Pretending straight men are oblivious to skintight clothing and ass-patting is absurd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound homophobic, OP.

How is it homophobic?

It embraces a specific (and problematic) view of masculinity and then assumes anything that doesn’t fit that view must be “gay.” Never mind that those uniforms might be better for performance, “real” men don’t wear skin tight clothes so it must be to appeal to gay men. And “real” men would be too uncomfortable to see other men in tight clothes, so “real” men would prefer lower-quality gameplay in order to not see men in tight pants. “Real” men avoid all physical contact, so a chest bump must mean they’re gay.

Huh? No. That's not what I meant at all. It has nothing to do with rejecting or assigning a certain type of masculinity to anyone. Where did that come from? I was talking about WATCHING football, not being a football player. And I don't think there's anything wrong with being gay either. (I guess I forgot to add "Not that there's anything wrong with it" to my post so of course you must assume I'm homophobic )

Oh, I think it’s exactly what you meant. You assumed that only gay men would be comfortable watching a sport where the male players wear skin tight clothes and come into physical contact with each other, presumably because watching the sport otherwise wouldn’t appeal to heterosexual men.

Well I'm enjoying it.

Men are in charge of football. Men are in charge of the uniforms. Men watch the football....

You really can’t see any advantage to form-fitting rather than loose clothing? If not, you clearly don’t understand anything about the game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound homophobic, OP.

How is it homophobic?

It embraces a specific (and problematic) view of masculinity and then assumes anything that doesn’t fit that view must be “gay.” Never mind that those uniforms might be better for performance, “real” men don’t wear skin tight clothes so it must be to appeal to gay men. And “real” men would be too uncomfortable to see other men in tight clothes, so “real” men would prefer lower-quality gameplay in order to not see men in tight pants. “Real” men avoid all physical contact, so a chest bump must mean they’re gay.

Huh? No. That's not what I meant at all. It has nothing to do with rejecting or assigning a certain type of masculinity to anyone. Where did that come from? I was talking about WATCHING football, not being a football player. And I don't think there's anything wrong with being gay either. (I guess I forgot to add "Not that there's anything wrong with it" to my post so of course you must assume I'm homophobic )

Oh, I think it’s exactly what you meant. You assumed that only gay men would be comfortable watching a sport where the male players wear skin tight clothes and come into physical contact with each other, presumably because watching the sport otherwise wouldn’t appeal to heterosexual men.

Well I'm enjoying it.

Men are in charge of football. Men are in charge of the uniforms. Men watch the football....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, see? Straight men are pretty touchy about their feelings about other men.

You’re really just laying your gay hate out there for the world, aren’t you.

You’re a shitty person, OP.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound homophobic, OP.

How is it homophobic?

It embraces a specific (and problematic) view of masculinity and then assumes anything that doesn’t fit that view must be “gay.” Never mind that those uniforms might be better for performance, “real” men don’t wear skin tight clothes so it must be to appeal to gay men. And “real” men would be too uncomfortable to see other men in tight clothes, so “real” men would prefer lower-quality gameplay in order to not see men in tight pants. “Real” men avoid all physical contact, so a chest bump must mean they’re gay.

Huh? No. That's not what I meant at all. It has nothing to do with rejecting or assigning a certain type of masculinity to anyone. Where did that come from? I was talking about WATCHING football, not being a football player. And I don't think there's anything wrong with being gay either. (I guess I forgot to add "Not that there's anything wrong with it" to my post so of course you must assume I'm homophobic )

Oh, I think it’s exactly what you meant. You assumed that only gay men would be comfortable watching a sport where the male players wear skin tight clothes and come into physical contact with each other, presumably because watching the sport otherwise wouldn’t appeal to heterosexual men.

Anonymous wrote:Wow, see? Straight men are pretty touchy about their feelings about other men.

Anonymous wrote:You done stepped off into the deep end, Op.