VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:00:01 06/02/02 Sun
Author: Sarah
Subject: Re:!
In reply to: yasmin 's message, "Re:!" on 11:20:31 06/02/02 Sun

Right. Voice of reason. Since I have the potential to be biased on both sides, (tim as my boyfriend, yasmin as friend and fellow ex-captive of denmark road and rich umbers as a thouroughly nice chap) hopefully I'll be fair. Ignore the wierd logic. Ok. Rugby is a sport that is by its definition physical and requires contact. It is played by all boy teams, first played at public schools. So this is a sport played by upper class boys / young men. In its time (and arguably now) the game of rugby detached itself from conventional social etiquette. Here I'm talking about all those nice friendly tabboos the victorians and Edwardians had.
What I'm getting at is that i dont think rugby was designed to promote homosexuality. In fact I am of the persuasion that homosexuality is something you are born with. Instead i think rugby was designed to INHIBIT homosexuality in many ways, as it allowed men to bond in a controlled way. This is because the physical contact is not accompanied by sensual stroking or any of that nonsence, but by physical strength and violence and competition.
I think the main functions of rugby was to create a bonding spirit between boys so as to prepare them for 'male duties' especially warfare. You can see that in the works of world war 1 poets like Robert Graves, Wilfred Owen and Seigfried Sassoon. They speak of this spiritual connection with their fellow men, which reminds me of the game of rugby in that it promotes fellowship through active behaviour.
Incidentally Owen and Sassoon were both gay, but I dont think playing rugby made them gay. It may be possible that they derived homoerotic pleasure from it though - but hey, who knows, since I am female and not upper class.
Is this more or less plausible?
Let Tim enjoy his rugby without questioning his sexuality - for my sake !!!!!!

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.