Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

Dooohoooo

wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 9:48:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortions in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases. Perhaps "rejection" is a better word. From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor. And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!! In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex? You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!! Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic. Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants. Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-) Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout? You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality : internalized homophobia. Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

I am reminded of a scene from the 1994 BBC movie : "Beautiful Thing", where Ste asks Jaime :"Do you think I'm queer?", and Jamie responds :"Does't matter what I think"

Live long and prosper.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 10:55:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Doo Woo You

wsmunit7 : I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortions in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases.

The Fool: Yes because it's a hate term.

wsmunit7 Perhaps "rejection" is a better word.

The Fool: I believe anti-gay is the politically correct term.

wsmunit7: From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have then in their hatred and frustration towards me.

wsmunit7 : The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor.

The Fool: Is that really an objection, what does that mean it's just not our thing. Perhaps you find vagina yucky.

Wsmunit7: And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!!

The Fool: If it's a homosexual act then is pretty much done by homosexual unless heterosexual is being raped by a homosexual.

wsmunit7: In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex?

The Fool: I don't believe sex was invention, but a natural process and that homosexuality, is in a sense well, not really sex at all. It's a type of erotic pleasuring but technically it's not really sex. Perhaps sex is a misnomer.

wsmunit7: You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!!

The Fool: Enjoyable. So what, we brag about getting things we enjoy I think.

wsmunit7:Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic.

The Fool: The macho shimming doesn't work on me. I'm perfectly okay with it. Not that it's any more or less macho to quest for the things you enjoy.

How is that pathetic?

wsmunit7:Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants.

The Fool: well I don't know about "revel" in it.. But it's nice.

wsmunit7:Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

The Fool: I don't know if we have reliable data as to when it was actually invented but I believe you done by heterosexual. I don't actually have to check Google on that. What do I look like to you Oryus

wsmunit7:: For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-)Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

The Fool: I never went to the Boy Scouts Boy Scouts but I did play". With a girl" No seriously..

wsmunit7::: Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality: internalized homophobia.

The Fool: I don't believe non-homosexuals can have internalized homophobia.

wsmunit7: Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

The Fool: To be honest the concept is a little fishy as it cannot really be falsified very well. It's the same with internalized misandry or internalized misogyny.

The truth is that some men simply turn gay as they get older, it"s not impossible, nor does it mean that you were gay your whole life. I've seen this happen a lot. Your change in preference may have nothing to do previously being gay or having internalized homophobia.

Against The Ideologist

Respect us and we will respect you back
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 11:08:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 10:55:53 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Doo Woo You

wsmunit7 : I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortionsto in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases.

The Fool: Yes because it's a hate term.

wsmunit7 Perhaps "rejection" is a better word.

The Fool: I believe anti-gay is the politically correct term.

wsmunit7: From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have then in their hatred and frustration towards me.

wsmunit7 : The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor.

The Fool: Is that really an objection, what does that mean it's just not our thing. Perhaps you find vagina yucky.

Wsmunit7: And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!!

The Fool: If it's a homosexual act then is pretty much done by homosexual unless heterosexual is being raped by a homosexual.

wsmunit7: In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex?

The Fool: I don't believe sex was invention, but a natural process and that homosexuality, is in a sense well, not really sex at all. It's a type of erotic pleasuring but technically it's not really sex. Perhaps sex is a misnomer.

wsmunit7: You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!!

The Fool: Enjoyable. So what, we brag about getting things we enjoy I think.

wsmunit7:Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic.

The Fool: The macho shimming doesn't work on me. I'm perfectly okay with it. Not that it's any more or less macho to quest for the things you enjoy.

How is that pathetic?

wsmunit7:Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants.

The Fool: well I don't know about "revel" in it.. But it's nice.

wsmunit7:Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

The Fool: I don't know if we have reliable data as to when it was actually invented but I believe you done by heterosexual. I don't actually have to check Google on that. What do I look like to you Oryus

wsmunit7:: For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-)Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

The Fool: I never went to the Boy Scouts Boy Scouts but I did play". With a girl" No seriously..

wsmunit7::: Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality: internalized homophobia.

The Fool: I don't believe non-homosexuals can have internalized homophobia.

wsmunit7: Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

The Fool: To be honest the concept is a little fishy as it cannot really be falsified very well. It's the same with internalized misandry or internalized misogyny.

The truth is that some men simply turn gay as they get older, it"s not impossible, nor does it mean that you were gay your whole life. I've seen this happen a lot. Your change in preference may have nothing to do previously being gay or having internalized homophobia.

Against The Ideologist

Respect us and we will respect you back



You certainly gave yourself an appropriate handle / user name.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 11:10:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 11:08:33 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 1/5/2015 10:55:53 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Doo Woo You

wsmunit7 : I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortionsto in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases.

The Fool: Yes because it's a hate term.

wsmunit7 Perhaps "rejection" is a better word.

The Fool: I believe anti-gay is the politically correct term.

wsmunit7: From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have then in their hatred and frustration towards me.

wsmunit7 : The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor.

The Fool: Is that really an objection, what does that mean it's just not our thing. Perhaps you find vagina yucky.

Wsmunit7: And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!!

The Fool: If it's a homosexual act then is pretty much done by homosexual unless heterosexual is being raped by a homosexual.

wsmunit7: In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex?

The Fool: I don't believe sex was invention, but a natural process and that homosexuality, is in a sense well, not really sex at all. It's a type of erotic pleasuring but technically it's not really sex. Perhaps sex is a misnomer.

wsmunit7: You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!!

The Fool: Enjoyable. So what, we brag about getting things we enjoy I think.

wsmunit7:Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic.

The Fool: The macho shimming doesn't work on me. I'm perfectly okay with it. Not that it's any more or less macho to quest for the things you enjoy.

How is that pathetic?

wsmunit7:Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants.

The Fool: well I don't know about "revel" in it.. But it's nice.

wsmunit7:Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

The Fool: I don't know if we have reliable data as to when it was actually invented but I believe you done by heterosexual. I don't actually have to check Google on that. What do I look like to you Oryus

wsmunit7:: For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-)Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

The Fool: I never went to the Boy Scouts Boy Scouts but I did play". With a girl" No seriously..

wsmunit7::: Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality: internalized homophobia.

The Fool: I don't believe non-homosexuals can have internalized homophobia.

wsmunit7: Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

The Fool: To be honest the concept is a little fishy as it cannot really be falsified very well. It's the same with internalized misandry or internalized misogyny.

The truth is that some men simply turn gay as they get older, it"s not impossible, nor does it mean that you were gay your whole life. I've seen this happen a lot. Your change in preference may have nothing to do previously being gay or having internalized homophobia.

Against The Ideologist

Respect us and we will respect you back





You certainly gave yourself an appropriate handle / user name.

The Fool: That communicates nothing clearly.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 11:11:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
* The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have them [aim] their hatred and frustration towards me.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 11:35:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 10:55:53 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Doo Woo You

wsmunit7 : I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortions in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases.

The Fool: Yes because it's a hate term.

wsmunit7 Perhaps "rejection" is a better word.

The Fool: I believe anti-gay is the politically correct term.

wsmunit7: From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have then in their hatred and frustration towards me.

wsmunit7 : The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor.

The Fool: Is that really an objection, what does that mean it's just not our thing. Perhaps you find vagina yucky.

Wsmunit7: And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!!

The Fool: If it's a homosexual act then is pretty much done by homosexual unless heterosexual is being raped by a homosexual.

wsmunit7: In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex?

The Fool: I don't believe sex was invention, but a natural process and that homosexuality, is in a sense well, not really sex at all. It's a type of erotic pleasuring but technically it's not really sex. Perhaps sex is a misnomer.

wsmunit7: You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!!

The Fool: Enjoyable. So what, we brag about getting things we enjoy I think.

wsmunit7:Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic.

The Fool: The macho shimming doesn't work on me. I'm perfectly okay with it. Not that it's any more or less macho to quest for the things you enjoy.

How is that pathetic?

wsmunit7:Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants.

The Fool: well I don't know about "revel" in it.. But it's nice.

wsmunit7:Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

The Fool: I don't know if we have reliable data as to when it was actually invented but I believe you done by heterosexual. I don't actually have to check Google on that. What do I look like to you Oryus

wsmunit7:: For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-)Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

The Fool: I never went to the Boy Scouts Boy Scouts but I did play". With a girl" No seriously..

wsmunit7::: Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality: internalized homophobia.

The Fool: I don't believe non-homosexuals can have internalized homophobia.

wsmunit7: Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

The Fool: To be honest the concept is a little fishy as it cannot really be falsified very well. It's the same with internalized misandry or internalized misogyny.

The truth is that some men simply turn gay as they get older, it"s not impossible, nor does it mean that you were gay your whole life. I've seen this happen a lot. Your change in preference may have nothing to do previously being gay or having internalized homophobia.

Against The Ideologist

Respect us and we will respect you back



I prefer the APA to YouTube.com. Been there. Heard the arguments a million times. I decided to be me, not what someone else wanted / expected me to be.

Make you a deal : I won't tell you how to live your life, you don't tell me how to live mine. I won't spy into your bedroom, you stay out of mine. You don't contest my civil rights, I will contest yours. Your fist stops at my face, mine stops at yours. If you violate that principle, expect a fight.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2015 11:43:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 11:35:24 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 1/5/2015 10:55:53 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Doo Woo You

wsmunit7 : I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortions in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases.

The Fool: Yes because it's a hate term.

wsmunit7 Perhaps "rejection" is a better word.

The Fool: I believe anti-gay is the politically correct term.

wsmunit7: From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have then in their hatred and frustration towards me.

wsmunit7 : The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor.

The Fool: Is that really an objection, what does that mean it's just not our thing. Perhaps you find vagina yucky.

Wsmunit7: And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!!

The Fool: If it's a homosexual act then is pretty much done by homosexual unless heterosexual is being raped by a homosexual.

wsmunit7: In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex?

The Fool: I don't believe sex was invention, but a natural process and that homosexuality, is in a sense well, not really sex at all. It's a type of erotic pleasuring but technically it's not really sex. Perhaps sex is a misnomer.

wsmunit7: You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!!

The Fool: Enjoyable. So what, we brag about getting things we enjoy I think.

wsmunit7:Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic.

The Fool: The macho shimming doesn't work on me. I'm perfectly okay with it. Not that it's any more or less macho to quest for the things you enjoy.

How is that pathetic?

wsmunit7:Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants.

The Fool: well I don't know about "revel" in it.. But it's nice.

wsmunit7:Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

The Fool: I don't know if we have reliable data as to when it was actually invented but I believe you done by heterosexual. I don't actually have to check Google on that. What do I look like to you Oryus

wsmunit7:: For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-)Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

The Fool: I never went to the Boy Scouts Boy Scouts but I did play". With a girl" No seriously..

wsmunit7::: Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality: internalized homophobia.

The Fool: I don't believe non-homosexuals can have internalized homophobia.

wsmunit7: Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

The Fool: To be honest the concept is a little fishy as it cannot really be falsified very well. It's the same with internalized misandry or internalized misogyny.

The truth is that some men simply turn gay as they get older, it"s not impossible, nor does it mean that you were gay your whole life. I've seen this happen a lot. Your change in preference may have nothing to do previously being gay or having internalized homophobia.

Against The Ideologist

Respect us and we will respect you back



I prefer the APA to YouTube.com. Been there. Heard the arguments a million times. I decided to be me, not what someone else wanted / expected me to be.


The Fool: good as I have a degree in cognitive science. But nice try though.

wsmunit7:: Make you a deal : I won't tell you how to live your life, you don't tell me how to live mine. I won't spy into your bedroom, you stay out of mine. You don't contest my civil rights, I will contest yours. Your fist stops at my face, mine stops at yours. If you violate that principle, expect a fight.

The Fool: I argue in favor of gay rights all the time. So I don't want to hear about how all heterosexuals are the problem.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 12:00:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 11:11:45 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
* The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have them [aim] their hatred and frustration towards me.

I don't hate. Period The End. It's a useless emotion. I may disapprove, but I don't hate. I just refuse to be bullied anymore.
For some reason, you seem to have taken what I said as a personal attack. It wasn't. If you took it that way , I can only wonder why.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 12:02:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 12:00:51 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 1/5/2015 11:11:45 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
* The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have them [aim] their hatred and frustration towards me.

I don't hate. Period The End. It's a useless emotion. I may disapprove, but I don't hate. I just refuse to be bullied anymore.
For some reason, you seem to have taken what I said as a personal attack. It wasn't. If you took it that way , I can only wonder why.

"Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic.""

The Fool:, That's why!!!
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 12:15:27 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 12:02:49 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 1/6/2015 12:00:51 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 1/5/2015 11:11:45 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
* The Fool: I have a feeling you're targeting the wrong crowd here, in fact the very crowd which supports gay marriage and homosexuality. But go ahead and shoot yourself in the foot! I start to get sick of supporting and fighting for homosexuals, only to have them [aim] their hatred and frustration towards me.

I don't hate. Period The End. It's a useless emotion. I may disapprove, but I don't hate. I just refuse to be bullied anymore.
For some reason, you seem to have taken what I said as a personal attack. It wasn't. If you took it that way , I can only wonder why.


"Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic.""

The Fool:, That's why!!!



Because I think anyone who needs to project machismo to be a man, shows insecurity in their (supposed) manhood.

(I DID say "I think". That is a personal opinion , and reflective of my choice of people I chose to associate with.)
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 12:27:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I don't mean to challenge anyone's masculinity, I only mean to challenge the machismo image some feel necessary to project.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 8:39:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 9:48:02 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

Well, it appears that 72% of DDO users are pro gay marriage, so I'm not sure where you get this majority of condemnation.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases. Perhaps "rejection" is a better word. From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.
This is quite asinine.
Are you suggesting that religious views do not affect society?


The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor. And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!! In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex? You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!! Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic. Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants. Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)
Okay.


For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-) Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout? You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.
Never heard of anyone doing this.

Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality : internalized homophobia. Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.
So, you don't tell us anything about it. Okay, then.

I am reminded of a scene from the 1994 BBC movie : "Beautiful Thing", where Ste asks Jaime :"Do you think I'm queer?", and Jamie responds :"Does't matter what I think"
I don't think this is an apt quote.
Further, if you mean it like you said later in the thread, that what you think doesn't matter, then I'm glad you spent two weeks tweaking a post that has no relevance.

Live long and prosper.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 3:12:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
wsmunit7:Because I think anyone who needs to project machismo to be a man, shows insecurity in their (supposed) manhood.

(I DID say "I think". That is a personal opinion , and reflective of my choice of people I chose to associate with.)

The Fool: Regardless if it's your own opinion, it doesn't mean it makes any sense. Obviously somebody who is intimidated, is insecure, and that very insecurity is where your hatred derives from. What other purpose was there in making the thread? If not to target heterosexuals as a group with your hatred.

wsmunit7: I don't mean to challenge anyone's masculinity, I only mean to challenge the machismo image some feel necessary to project.

The Fool: There has been no challenging of masculinity here, like a feminist, your writing your own narrative and fulfilling it. Because of self-fulfilling prophecies. Your intentionally trying to get a reaction so you can blame those who react for the reaction. And then you want people to respect you?

As I said, show respect and you will get respect.

Against The Ideologist

Be gay already.. It's so yesterday already.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Cogitare
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2015 9:57:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/5/2015 9:48:02 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortions in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases. Perhaps "rejection" is a better word. From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor. And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!! In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex? You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!! Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic. Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants. Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-) Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout? You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality : internalized homophobia. Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

I am reminded of a scene from the 1994 BBC movie : "Beautiful Thing", where Ste asks Jaime :"Do you think I'm queer?", and Jamie responds :"Does't matter what I think"

Live long and prosper.

I've been thinking about this, and I think you've missed a big point in why some people reject homosexuality: Science. I mean, if you look at things like this: https://www.aids.gov..., you start to realize that it might not be as harmless and safe as people propose it to be. Also take into account the fact that the scientific studies concerning homosexuality out there tend to bash heads a lot, so you end up with a big mess that nobody knows the answer to. So, to go ahead and say "Homosexuality is fine! Anyone who's against it is just a bigot!", you are making an ignorant statement. But, considering society likes to distort things, a certain level of ignorance is understandable.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2015 12:15:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/6/2015 9:57:47 PM, Cogitare wrote:
At 1/5/2015 9:48:02 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortions in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases. Perhaps "rejection" is a better word. From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor. And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!! In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex? You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!! Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic. Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants. Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-) Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout? You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality : internalized homophobia. Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

I am reminded of a scene from the 1994 BBC movie : "Beautiful Thing", where Ste asks Jaime :"Do you think I'm queer?", and Jamie responds :"Does't matter what I think"

Live long and prosper.

I've been thinking about this, and I think you've missed a big point in why some people reject homosexuality: Science. I mean, if you look at things like this: https://www.aids.gov..., you start to realize that it might not be as harmless and safe as people propose it to be. Also take into account the fact that the scientific studies concerning homosexuality out there tend to bash heads a lot, so you end up with a big mess that nobody knows the answer to. So, to go ahead and say "Homosexuality is fine! Anyone who's against it is just a bigot!", you are making an ignorant statement. But, considering society likes to distort things, a certain level of ignorance is understandable.

Science says no such thing. Claiming that it does is flat-out ridiculous when not ONE legitimate scientific organization has blamed gays for AIDS. Unprotected anal sex is very dangerous behavior when it comes to STIs. Due to the obvious lack of any risk of pregnancy, gay men used condoms at a far lower rate than straights before the outbreak of AIDS. When the problem was realized steps were taken to remedy these risky practices, but the infection had already spread. It's like saying that there's something immoral or dangerous about being a sailor because their ships tended to transmit the black plague due to their ignorance that fleas on the bilge rats were carrying the disease. It's just an overwhelmingly stupid position to take, and people mostly do so due to confirmation bias.

And if homosexuality is so bad because gay men were the epicenter of the AIDS epidemic, does that make lesbians superior to straight people, considering they were largely untouched by it due to *gasp* the inherent risk factors (or lack thereof) of their typical sexual practices?
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Cogitare
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2015 8:37:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/7/2015 12:15:05 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:57:47 PM, Cogitare wrote:
At 1/5/2015 9:48:02 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I've been thinking about this for over 2 weeks. I wanted to make sure I wasn't using cognitive distortions in my reasoning. I have revisited what the cognitive distortions are, and think I have resolved those issues. (I have trained in doing that.)

I am typing this offline so I can rationally review and edit as necessary to make as sure as possible that I am being clear .It will not be posted immediately.

From what I can see, most people here claim to be heterosexual males. Of those, the majority seem to condemn homosexuality. A limited few expresses a "live and let live" attitude.

I have also researched the symptoms and basis of homophobia. Perhaps "phobia" is not the correct word extension in some cases. Perhaps "rejection" is a better word. From what I have been able to discern, the #1 supposed reason is religion. Well, if you want to argue that, you are in the wrong forum. Go to "Religion". Personally, I think arguing religion is inane. If you respond with a religious argument, I, personally, will ignore you.

The second most prominent objection of supposedly hetero males seems to be the "eeewwwwie, yucky " factor. And this is what has occupied me. I have spent over 2 weeks thinking about this, and I have yet to come up with a single homosexual activity that isn't practiced by, or at least fanatasied about or invented by supposedly hetero people!!!!! In fact, I think the heteros probably invented them!!!!!! Oral sex? You heteos BRAG about getting "head" from your girl!!!! Like you made some macho conquest!! How pathetic. Most of you revel in cunnilingus!!! (Talk about "YUCK!!!!!) The ONLY difference is the gender of the participants. Anal sex? Invented by heteros as birth control (or well copied from "situational homosexuality" : "google" it. Try to educate yourself.)

For many of you, you have ready repartee for me. :-) Don't need them. Been there, done that. Heard that at least a million times. Be honest with yourself. How many of you played "Show me yours, and I'll show you mine" on a Boy Scout campout? You can lie to me, but you can't lie to yourself. Some of us liked it, some of us didn't .Like I said, you have to be honest with yourself.

Which brings us to the last supposedly hetero male rejection of homosexuality : internalized homophobia. Having spent 30 years living with it, and 6 years in therapy because of it, I think I probably know more about it than most of you. (Unless you are a licensed therapist.) I won't pretend to know all about it. I refer you to ample sources on the www. Maybe you are, maybe you're not. Only you can determine that. But do it from knowledge, not from ignorance.

I am reminded of a scene from the 1994 BBC movie : "Beautiful Thing", where Ste asks Jaime :"Do you think I'm queer?", and Jamie responds :"Does't matter what I think"

Live long and prosper.

I've been thinking about this, and I think you've missed a big point in why some people reject homosexuality: Science. I mean, if you look at things like this: https://www.aids.gov..., you start to realize that it might not be as harmless and safe as people propose it to be. Also take into account the fact that the scientific studies concerning homosexuality out there tend to bash heads a lot, so you end up with a big mess that nobody knows the answer to. So, to go ahead and say "Homosexuality is fine! Anyone who's against it is just a bigot!", you are making an ignorant statement. But, considering society likes to distort things, a certain level of ignorance is understandable.

Science says no such thing. Claiming that it does is flat-out ridiculous when not ONE legitimate scientific organization has blamed gays for AIDS. Unprotected anal sex is very dangerous behavior when it comes to STIs. Due to the obvious lack of any risk of pregnancy, gay men used condoms at a far lower rate than straights before the outbreak of AIDS. When the problem was realized steps were taken to remedy these risky practices, but the infection had already spread. It's like saying that there's something immoral or dangerous about being a sailor because their ships tended to transmit the black plague due to their ignorance that fleas on the bilge rats were carrying the disease. It's just an overwhelmingly stupid position to take, and people mostly do so due to confirmation bias.

And if homosexuality is so bad because gay men were the epicenter of the AIDS epidemic, does that make lesbians superior to straight people, considering they were largely untouched by it due to *gasp* the inherent risk factors (or lack thereof) of their typical sexual practices?

I've been thinking about what you said, and I'm not sure I understand what your saying. Nowhere in my response did I claim that homosexuals are the cause of AIDS. You also made the analogy of the sailors, which is a bit confusing, considering people have been warned of having sex with a person of the same gender for a long time now, starting from religious texts that condemned the practice. Also, it has been shown the plague in Europe was actually caused by human contact, not rats or fleas, so your comparison is invalid. Also, you assume that lesbians are somehow better protected from the majority of STDs, which is also incorrect. While they may have a decreased risk from HIV, they are just as likely to get other STDs. So yeah, I'm not sure whether your response was emotionally fueled or just plain ignorant, but your going to need to come up with actual factual information if you wish to get your point across (whatever it is).
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2015 5:52:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/8/2015 8:37:35 AM, Cogitare wrote:
At 1/7/2015 12:15:05 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:57:47 PM, Cogitare wrote:
I've been thinking about this, and I think you've missed a big point in why some people reject homosexuality: Science. I mean, if you look at things like this: https://www.aids.gov..., you start to realize that it might not be as harmless and safe as people propose it to be. Also take into account the fact that the scientific studies concerning homosexuality out there tend to bash heads a lot, so you end up with a big mess that nobody knows the answer to. So, to go ahead and say "Homosexuality is fine! Anyone who's against it is just a bigot!", you are making an ignorant statement. But, considering society likes to distort things, a certain level of ignorance is understandable.

Science says no such thing. Claiming that it does is flat-out ridiculous when not ONE legitimate scientific organization has blamed gays for AIDS. Unprotected anal sex is very dangerous behavior when it comes to STIs. Due to the obvious lack of any risk of pregnancy, gay men used condoms at a far lower rate than straights before the outbreak of AIDS. When the problem was realized steps were taken to remedy these risky practices, but the infection had already spread. It's like saying that there's something immoral or dangerous about being a sailor because their ships tended to transmit the black plague due to their ignorance that fleas on the bilge rats were carrying the disease. It's just an overwhelmingly stupid position to take, and people mostly do so due to confirmation bias.

And if homosexuality is so bad because gay men were the epicenter of the AIDS epidemic, does that make lesbians superior to straight people, considering they were largely untouched by it due to *gasp* the inherent risk factors (or lack thereof) of their typical sexual practices?

I've been thinking about what you said, and I'm not sure I understand what your saying. Nowhere in my response did I claim that homosexuals are the cause of AIDS.

If they aren't the cause of it, then gay sex is still harmless and safe, so long as you don't have unprotected sex with people who are infected with an STI. Which holds true for every sexual orientation. So you have no rational standard on which to single out homosexuality as somehow being in itself dangerous because of HIV.

You also made the analogy of the sailors, which is a bit confusing, considering people have been warned of having sex with a person of the same gender for a long time now, starting from religious texts that condemned the practice.

Lol, what? Does the bible say that using condoms while having sex prevents the threat of STDs? Because that's the warning which would have helped to prevent this. You're presupposing that gay sex is inherently dangerous, when it isn't, making the warnings of religious texts absolute rubbish. Your argument only makes sense if AIDS is some how caused by homosexual sex, or if it has some other universal detrimental effect, which is scientifically preposterous.

Also, it has been shown the plague in Europe was actually caused by human contact, not rats or fleas, so your comparison is invalid.

Lol, yeah, that fact that you think that this is well-established and unquestionable shows just how much you know about medical science. There are many competing theories concerning the pandemic known as the Black Peath. But the prevailing theory is that it was Yersinia pestis imported from Asia. Even if this theory were unseated, that does not mean that there has never been an outbreak of Yersinia pestis spread by bilge rats; we know what to look for historically based on other historic examples of such outbreaks. And even if we discovered that Yersinia pestis and its spread by vector was a wild figment of our imagination, it still wouldn't negate my comparison, because in the event of a fictional plague of that nature it would still be ridiculous to blame the sailors.

Also, you assume that lesbians are somehow better protected from the majority of STDs, which is also incorrect. While they may have a decreased risk from HIV, they are just as likely to get other STDs.

No, I don't. I only referenced HIV, which was the standard that you brought into the conversation. Moving the goalposts now doesn't change the fact that if having a higher rate of transmission for HIV somehow makes male homosexuality more dangerous than heterosexuality, it also makes heterosexuality more dangerous than female homosexuality. In other words, you are using a bogus and arbitrary standard if you're looking to establish a moral dichotomy between heterosexuality and homosexuality.

So yeah, I'm not sure whether your response was emotionally fueled or just plain ignorant,

Lol, I'll put a lot of stock in your unsupported personal opinions. I promise.

but your going to need to come up with actual factual information if you wish to get your point across (whatever it is).

You're going to need to learn how to use the proper form of you're if you want to be condescending. Bad grammar detracts immensely from the desired effect.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Cogitare
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/16/2015 11:32:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/8/2015 5:52:02 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/8/2015 8:37:35 AM, Cogitare wrote:
At 1/7/2015 12:15:05 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:57:47 PM, Cogitare wrote:
I've been thinking about this, and I think you've missed a big point in why some people reject homosexuality: Science. I mean, if you look at things like this: https://www.aids.gov..., you start to realize that it might not be as harmless and safe as people propose it to be. Also take into account the fact that the scientific studies concerning homosexuality out there tend to bash heads a lot, so you end up with a big mess that nobody knows the answer to. So, to go ahead and say "Homosexuality is fine! Anyone who's against it is just a bigot!", you are making an ignorant statement. But, considering society likes to distort things, a certain level of ignorance is understandable.

Science says no such thing. Claiming that it does is flat-out ridiculous when not ONE legitimate scientific organization has blamed gays for AIDS. Unprotected anal sex is very dangerous behavior when it comes to STIs. Due to the obvious lack of any risk of pregnancy, gay men used condoms at a far lower rate than straights before the outbreak of AIDS. When the problem was realized steps were taken to remedy these risky practices, but the infection had already spread. It's like saying that there's something immoral or dangerous about being a sailor because their ships tended to transmit the black plague due to their ignorance that fleas on the bilge rats were carrying the disease. It's just an overwhelmingly stupid position to take, and people mostly do so due to confirmation bias.

And if homosexuality is so bad because gay men were the epicenter of the AIDS epidemic, does that make lesbians superior to straight people, considering they were largely untouched by it due to *gasp* the inherent risk factors (or lack thereof) of their typical sexual practices?

I've been thinking about what you said, and I'm not sure I understand what your saying. Nowhere in my response did I claim that homosexuals are the cause of AIDS.

If they aren't the cause of it, then gay sex is still harmless and safe, so long as you don't have unprotected sex with people who are infected with an STI. Which holds true for every sexual orientation. So you have no rational standard on which to single out homosexuality as somehow being in itself dangerous because of HIV.

You also made the analogy of the sailors, which is a bit confusing, considering people have been warned of having sex with a person of the same gender for a long time now, starting from religious texts that condemned the practice.

Lol, what? Does the bible say that using condoms while having sex prevents the threat of STDs? Because that's the warning which would have helped to prevent this. You're presupposing that gay sex is inherently dangerous, when it isn't, making the warnings of religious texts absolute rubbish. Your argument only makes sense if AIDS is some how caused by homosexual sex, or if it has some other universal detrimental effect, which is scientifically preposterous.

Also, it has been shown the plague in Europe was actually caused by human contact, not rats or fleas, so your comparison is invalid.

Lol, yeah, that fact that you think that this is well-established and unquestionable shows just how much you know about medical science. There are many competing theories concerning the pandemic known as the Black Peath. But the prevailing theory is that it was Yersinia pestis imported from Asia. Even if this theory were unseated, that does not mean that there has never been an outbreak of Yersinia pestis spread by bilge rats; we know what to look for historically based on other historic examples of such outbreaks. And even if we discovered that Yersinia pestis and its spread by vector was a wild figment of our imagination, it still wouldn't negate my comparison, because in the event of a fictional plague of that nature it would still be ridiculous to blame the sailors.

Also, you assume that lesbians are somehow better protected from the majority of STDs, which is also incorrect. While they may have a decreased risk from HIV, they are just as likely to get other STDs.

No, I don't. I only referenced HIV, which was the standard that you brought into the conversation. Moving the goalposts now doesn't change the fact that if having a higher rate of transmission for HIV somehow makes male homosexuality more dangerous than heterosexuality, it also makes heterosexuality more dangerous than female homosexuality. In other words, you are using a bogus and arbitrary standard if you're looking to establish a moral dichotomy between heterosexuality and homosexuality.

So yeah, I'm not sure whether your response was emotionally fueled or just plain ignorant,

Lol, I'll put a lot of stock in your unsupported personal opinions. I promise.

but your going to need to come up with actual factual information if you wish to get your point across (whatever it is).

You're going to need to learn how to use the proper form of you're if you want to be condescending. Bad grammar detracts immensely from the desired effect.

Forgive the late response, but I've been thinking what you said over. So, since apparently all I've been saying are "personal opinions", I thought I would just show you the information from which my judgement derives from. So, here you are: http://www.webmd.com... http://www.cdc.gov...
http://psychcentral.com...

Because much of the information is often biased, whether towards a religion or an activist group, I tend to look at general information regarding homosexuality. So, just to check, what I just said is not "unsupported personal opinions" like you claim, but factual observations. Funny thing is, you haven't actually given me any scientific proof or knowledge that says that homosexuality is harmless, so to say that I'm spouting opinions is quite ironic. Just thought I'd point that out.
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/17/2015 1:39:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/16/2015 11:32:29 PM, Cogitare wrote:
At 1/8/2015 5:52:02 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/8/2015 8:37:35 AM, Cogitare wrote:
At 1/7/2015 12:15:05 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 1/6/2015 9:57:47 PM, Cogitare wrote:
I've been thinking about this, and I think you've missed a big point in why some people reject homosexuality: Science. I mean, if you look at things like this: https://www.aids.gov..., you start to realize that it might not be as harmless and safe as people propose it to be. Also take into account the fact that the scientific studies concerning homosexuality out there tend to bash heads a lot, so you end up with a big mess that nobody knows the answer to. So, to go ahead and say "Homosexuality is fine! Anyone who's against it is just a bigot!", you are making an ignorant statement. But, considering society likes to distort things, a certain level of ignorance is understandable.

Science says no such thing. Claiming that it does is flat-out ridiculous when not ONE legitimate scientific organization has blamed gays for AIDS. Unprotected anal sex is very dangerous behavior when it comes to STIs. Due to the obvious lack of any risk of pregnancy, gay men used condoms at a far lower rate than straights before the outbreak of AIDS. When the problem was realized steps were taken to remedy these risky practices, but the infection had already spread. It's like saying that there's something immoral or dangerous about being a sailor because their ships tended to transmit the black plague due to their ignorance that fleas on the bilge rats were carrying the disease. It's just an overwhelmingly stupid position to take, and people mostly do so due to confirmation bias.

And if homosexuality is so bad because gay men were the epicenter of the AIDS epidemic, does that make lesbians superior to straight people, considering they were largely untouched by it due to *gasp* the inherent risk factors (or lack thereof) of their typical sexual practices?

I've been thinking about what you said, and I'm not sure I understand what your saying. Nowhere in my response did I claim that homosexuals are the cause of AIDS.

If they aren't the cause of it, then gay sex is still harmless and safe, so long as you don't have unprotected sex with people who are infected with an STI. Which holds true for every sexual orientation. So you have no rational standard on which to single out homosexuality as somehow being in itself dangerous because of HIV.

You also made the analogy of the sailors, which is a bit confusing, considering people have been warned of having sex with a person of the same gender for a long time now, starting from religious texts that condemned the practice.

Lol, what? Does the bible say that using condoms while having sex prevents the threat of STDs? Because that's the warning which would have helped to prevent this. You're presupposing that gay sex is inherently dangerous, when it isn't, making the warnings of religious texts absolute rubbish. Your argument only makes sense if AIDS is some how caused by homosexual sex, or if it has some other universal detrimental effect, which is scientifically preposterous.

Also, it has been shown the plague in Europe was actually caused by human contact, not rats or fleas, so your comparison is invalid.

Lol, yeah, that fact that you think that this is well-established and unquestionable shows just how much you know about medical science. There are many competing theories concerning the pandemic known as the Black Peath. But the prevailing theory is that it was Yersinia pestis imported from Asia. Even if this theory were unseated, that does not mean that there has never been an outbreak of Yersinia pestis spread by bilge rats; we know what to look for historically based on other historic examples of such outbreaks. And even if we discovered that Yersinia pestis and its spread by vector was a wild figment of our imagination, it still wouldn't negate my comparison, because in the event of a fictional plague of that nature it would still be ridiculous to blame the sailors.

Also, you assume that lesbians are somehow better protected from the majority of STDs, which is also incorrect. While they may have a decreased risk from HIV, they are just as likely to get other STDs.

No, I don't. I only referenced HIV, which was the standard that you brought into the conversation. Moving the goalposts now doesn't change the fact that if having a higher rate of transmission for HIV somehow makes male homosexuality more dangerous than heterosexuality, it also makes heterosexuality more dangerous than female homosexuality. In other words, you are using a bogus and arbitrary standard if you're looking to establish a moral dichotomy between heterosexuality and homosexuality.

So yeah, I'm not sure whether your response was emotionally fueled or just plain ignorant,

Lol, I'll put a lot of stock in your unsupported personal opinions. I promise.

but your going to need to come up with actual factual information if you wish to get your point across (whatever it is).

You're going to need to learn how to use the proper form of you're if you want to be condescending. Bad grammar detracts immensely from the desired effect.

Forgive the late response, but I've been thinking what you said over. So, since apparently all I've been saying are "personal opinions", I thought I would just show you the information from which my judgement derives from. So, here you are: http://www.webmd.com... http://www.cdc.gov...
http://psychcentral.com...

Because much of the information is often biased, whether towards a religion or an activist group, I tend to look at general information regarding homosexuality. So, just to check, what I just said is not "unsupported personal opinions" like you claim, but factual observations. Funny thing is, you haven't actually given me any scientific proof or knowledge that says that homosexuality is harmless, so to say that I'm spouting opinions is quite ironic. Just thought I'd point that out.

You ignored some significant references. Try looking at :

www.ama.com

www.apa.com