Black gay sex black man would be be seeings rough a train
![black gay sex black man would be be seeings rough a train black gay sex black man would be be seeings rough a train](https://images.theconversation.com/files/187455/original/file-20170925-21172-1gjqald.jpg)
Of course, what Sandra Rose forgets to mention, conveniently, is that the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention studies show that men on the “down low” - often meant to be black men who have sex with men but don’t identify as gay and continue to have sex with women - do not contribute to higher rates of HIV among black women. Your homosexuality is no different than a man’s.
![black gay sex black man would be be seeings rough a train black gay sex black man would be be seeings rough a train](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/12/26/magazine/26mag-DMX/26mag-DMX-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg)
“Either you’re going to walk the horse or ride it. “You are obviously one of those lesbians who believe that there is something ‘natural’ about a woman with another woman, but clearly have issues with a man being with another man - as evidenced in the fact that everytime you mention a gay dude, it’s negative or you find a way to attach an HIV stereotype to it. “I’m more troubled at you, a gay woman who would have worded this post ENTIRELY differently if this were two fem broads cuddled up, taking yet ANOTHER opportunity to use gay men, or the perceived notion of gay men to rant about HIV and AIDS, but that never seems to come up when you lovingly discuss the ‘lesbuns’… care to explain? Dare to explain? Not too many straight men would be seen in public like this, but I could be wrong – Isn’t assuming that they’re on the DL or some straight dudes one step away from bisexuality just because they have on baseball caps and not skinny jeans or capri pants a stretch? Their physical attachment/comfort with one another speaks volumes. LMAO! From the looks of it, these are two gay men who don’t give a damn what anybody else thinks about it. “Carrington,” a commenter on Sandra Rose’s site, seemed to sum it up for many of her commenters as well: The upside of the anti-gay sentiment of the twitpic poster as well as from Sandra Rose herself are the numbers of comments defending the young men - whomever they are and wherever they were when this photo was made. “Meanwhile, African Americans account for the highest rate of new HIV/AIDS cases.” “As more and more black women switch roles and responsibilities with men, more and more fatherless men are turning to other men for the strength and guidance they are missing in their lives. “It’s become nearly impossible to distinguish heterosexual men from down low thugs due to the proliferation of female-led households in the black community. “Over the past 4 decades, black women have decided to go it alone with their kids rather than be subservient to black men like their mothers and aunts were back in the days when black men were the majority head of households. The controversy about the photo has been apparently stirred up by blogger Sandra Rose, who is often described as a lesbian but also called a “gay-baiter.” She titles her blog of the photo as, “ Thug love: 2 thugs on a train.”įrom this one photo, Sandra Rose has extrapolated: It’s too bad more people don’t have the courage to be themselves.” According to the comments, it seems the young men’s primary offense, in addition to seemingly being gay, is that they are ‘normal looking’ and apparently in love. McCullom takes on the haters and describes the photo as “a very sweet and innocent photo. Later, I read about some of the controversy the photo was garnering on the popular Rod 2.0 - a blog by Rod McCullom, a self-described “television producer-writer-gym-rat-wannabe-novelist.”