is that what all this wholly unnecessary pushback and rah-rah is about?

it seems to me that b/c *I* posted it y'all have to attack the article b/c you think i'm adopting the author's position and calling y'all out as bad ppl b/c you don't engage in platonic touch as described by the author.

if that's the case y'all are completely off base. b/c that was not my intention at all. i didn't read this article as an attack on individuals - it's more an attack on homophobia as a concept. not unlike the many think pieces out there that call out other phobias and isms like racism and sexism and chauvinism and xenophobia and misogyny et al. the author's point is that homophobia works to keep men isolated from touch - not that men who don't engage in platonic touch are homophobes (though the 2 aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but i digress). as i read the article it says the men who are isolated from touch are relatively blameless - the avoidance of touch is a result of their conditioning. the guys can't help it. and when i posted this article that's what i thought - that the men who avoid touch b/c of homophobia aren't necessarily to be blamed for it. hell, when i read the article i immediately identified and i don't think i'm a bad person b/c i avoid touching other men for the most part b/c of my own internalized homophobia. i'm sad for me and for other men but i'm not angry about it.