"...Holly, men talk about sex a lot, even as a joke...."

That's not my experience. Here's mine: bed a boy and he can't talk about sex. Sure, with the flying buttress of likker, he might drop some hoary double entendres, but Daddy Jack had it right about serious sex talk:

"Boys and girls in America have such a sad time together; sophistication demands that they submit to sex immediately without proper preliminary talk. Not courting talk--real straight talk about souls, for life is holy and every moment is precious."

Who talks that way? Who is strong and steady enough? Tell me you do and I'll doubt you, for there are chances in these threads to be far from coy. Here and elsewhere, people pass on openness to repeat their tired quarter-truths or flaunt their alleged virility or dry hump another person's leg.

Sure, sure, you can't talk to folks when you're sober.

Or feel good.

And confident.

Or seduce or be seduced.

But all these qualities can be learned...when you're sober. Likker is a waste of time. More than that, it's a waste of life. It doesn't infantilize a person, but it does keep an infant, albeit with boobs or chest hair, from maturing and acquiring the characteristics of adulthood: poise, forthrightness, eloquence, sober sexiness, etc.

I'd hang with Ms. Clark-Flory any night because she wouldn't be slurring and slobbering, thinking all the while that she was being suave and slick.

Whitney thought crack was whack. I think drunks are punks.

I also blame Bush-voters. At least Lady MacBeth had the decency to see the blood on her hands.

...he's rich, thereby refusing Jesus's longago directive to a rich man to foresake all his wealth and trust in God. There's no such thing as a rich Christian. There are, however, millions of rich Christianists, who love granite countertops and stainless steel appliances and foresake God and the poor.

And Mr. Keller's coloring of his hair reveals a man who opposes God's will. God gave Mr. Keller gray hair. Mr. Keller colors it.

Lastly, this line disgusts me, "I accept Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and savior," for it makes the Christ sound like a lapdog.

They were terrified by our nation's response to 9-11. They knew the stink of fascism. That stink was in the air and it's stronger still.

It's anonymous talking to anonymous! Or is it anonymous talking to itself? Whatever, it's a string of goo.

"The answer to my question is obviously no you have never spent any time around gay men."

Obviously.

Never.

Any.

Yeah, sure. I obviously never spent any time around gay men.

Einstein lives!

* binging, driving, crashing, bleeding, gasping, dying, embalming, burying are some obvious ones.

* but a less obvious one is the phenomenon of the young couple in the restaurant with NOTHING to say to each other. I often suspect that the two banged together while bobbing about like some olives in the sauce. The momentum carried them to the altar. 40 years later, they're just wrinkled versions of the two young and lonely souls who didn't know each other way back when.

* time spent drunk is time wasted acquiring fundamental social skills.

* sure, some old folks were fools themselves and what fool wants to be foolish alone, but that's no justification.

* a lot of young folks only look young. Due to drinking (and other nasty habits), they're old on the inside.

* drunks make lousy lovers. Sex is just a skill set. A drooly drunk might believe that they're a slickster under the sheets, but sober folks know better. So, while they should be digging in and practicing skillful sex, whiskey tenders no traction.

* addiction.

In today's America, where states legislate against two women loving each other, the Victorians were more progressive, tendering opportunity and respect to girl on girl. And whereas there were courting formalities to be observed, I think the let's-get-drunk-and-f*ck is regression.

In fact, that's the 99% Reply, which means it's what one hears 99% of the time. I'm starting to think that a substantial number of the folks who ply the tubes can't connect in person. They have their precious, precious "secrets," which are nothing more than who/what/when/where/why. So, folks will allude to a deep, complex life, but offer no particulars. Whatever you extrapolate from their posts will be denied and plausible denial is ALWAYS possible in cyberspace.

"Coy" is your operative word and many others cling to it oo. I wish you'd pick another word, for you'd be more interesting if you didn't emulate the pre-tragedy Scarlett O'Hara.

What's your idea of ad homming while allegedly rejecting ad homs?

Here: "Ad hominen attacks only demonstrate your intellectual shortcomings."

And what are your ideas?

To be frank, here's the fatty bulk of what I'm hearing from you and your alleged fellow choir boys: "But what about me(n)?!?"

Sometimes, I don Republican notions...or Republican notions before they became insane and fixated on imperialism and gay citizens. But way back when, cons lambasted victim culture. Of course, they pine for victimhood too nowadays, believing that "Christians" are being martyed and jes never you mind that there's no greater earthly gift than martyrdom: they want to stay as far away from cuddlin' on Jesus's lap as they can.

But back to victimhood: you live a cushy life. You have a computer and an Internet connection and so you live, relatively, in CushyVille. And so do most Western feminists. People who post at Salon don't have to go down into coal mines and come out, caked with coal dust, inside and out. People who post on Salon get to keep their teeth...or most of them...or have them replaced with dentures and bridges. People who post on Salon don't labor through 18-hour days. So, I'm repelled by men and women who don't suffer their victimhoods with all due relativity and humility.