difference between metrosexuals and homosexuals??
398038
METROSEXUAL\n   1. A man concerned with self-image, self-indulgence and money.(Usually urban, heterosexual, probably affluent).\n   2. A man who is seen, sociologically, as having attributes common to homosexuals, but is in fact heterosexual.
425922
Metrosexual (along with the concept, metrosexuality) is a term coined in 1994 in an article in the The Independent by British journalist Mark Simpson, shortly after the publication of his book about contemporary masculine identity Male Impersonators: Men Performing Masculinity.\n\nIn his seminal essay, Simpson described the effect of consumerism and media proliferation, particularly the men’s style press, on traditional masculinity. The metrosexual, he says, is an urban male of any sexual orientation who has a strong aesthetic sense and spends a great deal of time and money on his appearance and lifestyle.[1]\n\nIn its sound bite diffusion through the channels of marketers and popular media, who eagerly and constantly reminded their audience that the metrosexual was straight, the metrosexual has congealed into something more digestible for consumers: a heterosexual male who is in touch with his feminine side - he colour coordinates, cares deeply about exfoliation, and has perhaps manscaped.\n\nIn August of 2004, New York-based journalist and author Peter Hyman published a collection of essays entitled The Reluctant Metrosexual: Dispatches From An Almost Hip Life. The book is far from a celebration of metrosexuality (thus his "reluctant" position). To the contrary, Hyman attempts to debunk the term, which he compares to "Generation X." Here, the author reveals his belief that metrosexuality is, more than anything, a marketing ploy:\n\n"The metrosexual revolution is not so much an uprising as it is a more efficient way to sell expensive face creams, allowing marketers to trade on good, old-fashioned insecurity (a method that has been successfully imposed on women for decades). Men with disposable incomes who like to shop, it seems, are this year’s black." [citation needed] \nMen didn't go to shopping malls, so consumer culture promoted the idea of a sensitive guy who went to malls, bought magazines and spent freely to improve his personal appearance. As Simpson put it:\n\n"For some time now, old-fashioned (re)productive, repressed, unmoisturized heterosexuality has been given the pink slip by consumer capitalism. The stoic, self-denying, modest straight male didn't shop enough (his role was to earn money for his wife to spend), and so he had to be replaced by a new kind of man, one less certain of his identity and much more interested in his image – that's to say, one who was much more interested in being looked at (because that's the only way you can be certain you actually exist). A man, in other words, who is an advertiser's walking wet dream." [10] \nThis commercial vision is also adapted in television’s metrosexual archetype: Bravo’s Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. The “Fab Five” only transform the appearance of the straight guy and make him use hundreds of dollars worth of cosmetics, but they do not transform an anaclitic person into a narcissistic person.
672644
This is an answer to your question that also touches on a couple of the other answers that you have received.\n\nHomosexuality is sexual attraction to the same sex to the exclusion of the opposite sex.\n\nHomosexuality is as natural as any other form of sexuality.  The traditional natural law argument maintained that homosexuality did not exist in nature, and therefore was unnatural.  Now we know that to be totally false.  Decades long indepth studies have revealed that in fact homosexuality exists in all of the hundreds of species studied; furthermore, among those with pair bonding, homosexual pair bonds occur to the exclusion of any heterosexual mating.  The seminal study in this field is by Dr. Bruce Bagemihl and is titled "Biological Exuberance" it is published by St. Martin's Press and may be available used online.\n\nThe argument that it is communicable -- one of the traditional anti-gay argumetns -- is demonstrably false.  People may deal with their sexuality later in life, but sexual attraction to same sex members combined with a total lack of sexual attraction to opposite sexed members cannot be spread from one person to the other.\n\nTraditionally (pre 1970s) psychology treated homosexuality as a pathology (disease) and attempted, though admittedly without success, to "cure" it  -- that changed in the 1970s, partially as a result of political action, but mostly as a result of a series of studies that convinced most psychologists that homosexuality was, whatever else it might be, neither a disease nor curable.  Hundreds of peer reviewed studies since then have supported the progressive conclusion of the 1970's psychologists and psychiatrists.\n\nToday we have a movement that claims it can cure homosexuality.  Some of what it uses is pop psychology, most of what it uses is religious.  The reality is, now being established by study after study, despite bitter opposition from the practicioners to any studies being performed; that it doesn't, and in fact can't change anyone at all.\n\nThat is not to say that a gay person can't pretend to be straight.  Can't marry a woman, presuming that we are talking about a male (which will ill serve the woman, because real attraction will never be there)  and can't father children.  The whole process of living a secret life of one night stands and hidden trysts while pretending to be straight is the very closet from which gay people are escaping.  It doesn't change what you are -- only lets the bigots feel more comfortable that you are "like everyone else," at the cost of your self-worth, dignity, and character -- and most of your female partner's dignity as well.  To be in the closet is not to be straight, it is to be unhappy, perhaps even more unhappy than being celibate. It is also not to say that a gay person can't decide to live without sex, anyone can do that.  A gay person however is a gay person; and cannot be anything else, not because of pathology, which has been rejected now for over 40 years by the doctors that study homosexuality, but because it is what is natural to him or her.\n\nRegards,\n\nReynolds Jones\nSchenectady, NY\nhttp://www.rebuff.org
794559
I personally believe when it comes to sex, there is "no normal."  It's all about perception and how these men view sex.  The ultimate answer luys within them.  If they say no then you have to take their answer for face value.  Orgies don't equal gay.  Trains don't equal gay, etc.  Actors kiss the same sex all the time and they may or may not be gay.  If the man is striclty focused on the genitalia of the woman then he probably is able to block out the fact that men are are also participating.
17654
Being homosexual is having a sexual attraction to someone of the same gender.
1116328
Nowadays, they don't call it gay any more. They call it metrosexual...
999926
No.  Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years.  If people would pay as much attention to their history classes as they do to their Bible Studies, they would know that.  It is a PROVEN MEDICAL FACT that the brains of homosexuals are different than heteros.  A homo males brain reacts more like a hetero females, and a lesbian's brain, more like a hetero males.  They PHYSICALLY respond differently to phermones.  It is not an abomination, it is a physical difference that they have NO control over, and the Bible thumpers need to accept it and move on.
594783
I'd say sexier. No, that does not make me gay. Not that there is anything wrong with that!
311545
There are many different shades and levels of sexual attraction.\nMost people are strictly heterosexual.  There are some who have had one or very few homosexual encounters.  Some people are bisexual, and there are a few who are strictly homosexual.\nYou can use any combination that suits you, as long as your partners are consenting adults.
690056
Transsexuality is referred to in the DSM-IV as Gender Identity Disorder. It's the idea that their birth gender is opposed to the gender they perceive themselves as. Meaning, guys feel like girls, or girls feel like guys. This is different from sexual identity (straight, gay, etc.). Gender identity and sexual identity are distinct from one another. Wrap your head around that one and you got it. \n\nThe sexual identities of transsexuals are usually lumped into categories; straight, gay/les., and asexual (not interested in either guys or girls). A guy who becomes a girl and likes girls is considered gay, for example. Whereas a girl who becomes a guy and likes girls is straight. The exact numbers aren't known, but more of the transsexual crowd identifies as gay/les or asexual than in society as a whole. We're just not sure how much more. \n\nOther researchers such as Bailey and Blanchard have forwarded other ideas. They say transsexuals are mostly sexually interested in themselves and nothing more than warped gays. Bailey and Blanchard aren't very popular with the GBLT crowd for other reasons, too.  \n\nIt's a little confusing, I agree. When I was learning about it those were my first questions, too. Hope this helps.
410592
a man who is well groomed, articulate and very fashionable.  Metrosexual males (like David Beckham for example,  will appeal, although not necessarily sexually) to gay and straight men and gay and straight women.  Hence they are very marketable - many of today's models and celebs are metrosexual.  Viva diversity
855064
Homosexuals are sexually attracted to adults of the same sex, heterosexuals are sexually attracted to adults of the opposite sex, and pedophiles are sexually attracted to children. Adults are able to consent to sexual relations and children are not. Homosexuals and heterosexuals seek consenting relationships, pedophiles seek abusive relationships. Nobody is hurt in adult homosexual or heterosexual relationships, and a child is hurt in pedophilia. Homosexual and heterosexual people should both be free to engage in adult relationships, and pedophiles should be in psychiatric counseling and jail.
124469
Just because you wear small shirts doesn't make you gay.  Usually when a straight guy knows a lot about fashion, he's called a metrosexual.  It has nothing to do with being gay :)
233605
Gay refers to men that love and are attracted to other men, while lesbian refers to women and love and are attracted to other women. Contrary to popular belief, most gays and lesbians do not wish they were the opposite sex or go out of their way to act like the opposite sex, but are quite happy as they are.
991773
homosexuality is really an expression of authority on part of one male and submission on the other,it is really strictly a male nonsexual behaviour inspite of what everybody wants others to believe.thats why women are hypnotized into believing they could possibly also have same sex attraction when obviously all sex with women is about men and family  and social life.its a fag conspiracy internationally,\nproof\nwhy would gay fags want to be married? what on earth could make 2 men who already practice their deviance in peace ,what would make them want to commit that ultimatwe parody of everything ultimately sacred ,of the building unit of society?what difference is it for them to be called husband and husband?\nit doesnt make any sense,it indicates that it is a subversive movment fed by the appetites of millions of perverts.
34394
Wow i'm gay and i don't ride a lot of poles. GAY = Attracted to members of the same sex. BI = Attracted to both Male and Female.
118648
Male = Viagra.\n\nFemale = Fake it.