Post by: Lucifer on July 06, 2021, 10:52:24 AM
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on July 06, 2021, 11:24:31 AM
Post by: Rush on July 06, 2021, 11:56:18 AM
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on July 06, 2021, 11:59:33 AM
He admitted it was parody and he does not believe that. But he has a point about what trans go through, I've seen horrible stuff happen to my trans friends. One was beaten half to death.I've seen WORSE happen to American soldiers. Not being shot from a distance but up close and personal butchering. You risk far more in combat. There is no comparison.
Wait a minute, what???? Who would do that and why? I’m suspicious.
Post by: Mr Pou on July 06, 2021, 12:08:25 PM
Post by: Rush on July 06, 2021, 12:13:58 PM
Wait a minute, what???? Who would do that and why? I’m suspicious.
Who would do what? What you bolded?
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on July 06, 2021, 12:24:43 PM
Parody or no, put that pussy on Omaha beach and watch him shit his pants six ways to Sunday.
well, most of us would probably soil our pants. It doesn't have anything to do with being someone completely messed up wrt gender.
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on July 06, 2021, 12:28:21 PM
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on July 06, 2021, 12:34:33 PM
Well, I was wondering why anyone would beat up a trans person, but I suppose it wouldn’t have to be because they were trans. If so, why? It strikes me as unlikely that simply being trans would be the sole motive.
There have been plenty of cases of hate crimes, people being beaten because they are [pick one: black, white, gay, straight, etc etc etc]
Why must there be a rational reason for beating someone?
But I'm not saying all beatings are irrational
Post by: Little Joe on July 06, 2021, 01:11:38 PM
There have been plenty of cases of hate crimes, people being beaten because they are [pick one: black, white, gay, straight, etc etc etc]Beat me to it. I don't like it, but it happens. A lot.
Why must there be a rational reason for beating someone?
But I'm not saying all beatings are irrational
Post by: Rush on July 06, 2021, 02:33:11 PM
Well, I was wondering why anyone would beat up a trans person, but I suppose it wouldn’t have to be because they were trans. If so, why? It strikes me as unlikely that simply being trans would be the sole motive.
That was the sole motive. Or at least because he was a very effeminate gay, not sure they knew the difference between gay and trans. Three (I think) men he’d never met kidnapped him off the street one night, drove out to the country, beat him severely, and left him there. He had to crawl to a farmhouse and upon seeing him they called for an ambulance. They never caught the guys that did it.
Post by: Little Joe on July 07, 2021, 04:30:08 AM
Wait a minute, what???? Who would do that and why? I’m suspicious.Couldn't you say that about child abuse or animal abuse? "Who would do that?" Bad people do bad shit for no good reason.
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on July 07, 2021, 06:27:14 AM
Couldn't you say that about child abuse or animal abuse? "Who would do that?" Bad people do bad shit for no good reason.
I was quite surprised to see Rush say that “horrible stuff” happened to her “trans friends” (note plural). This implies more than isolated violence “just because” someone is trans or gay than seems believable.
It just seemed suspicious to me, probably because of the Matthew Shepherd story that was unbelievably spun and remains a deceptive trope to this day, and the fact that apart from hoaxes, I’ve never seen or read or heard (until Rush’s statement) of such.
Post by: Rush on July 07, 2021, 10:12:51 AM
I was quite surprised to see Rush say that “horrible stuff” happened to her “trans friends” (note plural). This implies more than isolated violence “just because” someone is trans or gay than seems believable.
It just seemed suspicious to me, probably because of the Matthew Shepherd story that was unbelievably spun and remains a deceptive trope to this day, and the fact that apart from hoaxes, I’ve never seen or read or heard (until Rush’s statement) of such.
The incident with my friend happened more than 20 years before Matthew Shepard, and yes, the Shepard case was spun to be gay bashing starting with a lie told by one of the perpetrators’ girlfriends under the misguided impression it would help his case. The defense planned to use the angle that it was not a premeditated crime but an impulsive crime when Shepard allegedly made a sexual pass at them. I guess the idea was that people would find the violent reaction to a homosexual pass “understandable”. This was taken up by gay rights activists who spun it as a hate crime against gays. It very well may have been, with or without the false testimony, I’m not sure anybody knows the real truth of why they did it.
The issue at the time of my friend’s incident was that gay life was largely underground. And like all activities driven underground by being illegal, they become dangerous. Gays had to meet surreptitiously. Prior to 1969 gay bars were run by the mafia, like any other illegal endeavor. It had only been a few years since the Stonewall Rebellion in NYC (which started gay bars being legalized) when my friend was attacked and they (gay bars) were still quasi-legal (and still sometimes run by the mafia, I met a couple of those guys) and so gays were treated badly by local police. Being harassed by police portrayed them as criminals which fueled public bigotry against them which fueled more police crackdowns; it was a vicious circle.
I say gay, but I mean all of them. The acronym LGBTQ didn’t exist back then. It was all just “gay” and they were viewed at most as only two types, gay men, or “fags” and gay women, or “dykes”. People (not in the gay community) didn’t think in terms of any difference between someone who wanted to be the other gender and someone who just wanted to have sex with their own gender. Within the community itself we knew the difference, but the general public didn’t and the fag haters didn’t.
But if you were a masculine gay man you could fly under the radar more. The effeminate gay men and the trans were open targets for hate and attack and rape. The victim would be less likely to go to the police for obvious reasons. (Ironically, straight men who hate gays will sometimes rape them.) Other terrible things I saw were how they were treated by family, coworkers and the general public and the fallout from that. Suicide, drug abuse, self-loathing, being fired from jobs when their “gayness” was discovered. One of my gay friends had his home set fire by an arsonist, for reasons related to him being gay.
I’m sure things aren’t near as bad now from what I can tell. I’m not in the community anymore but I can see how much more accepting society is now compared to back then so I get annoyed at gays/trans whining about inequality these days, especially when they align with leftists. Although it’s definitely still an issue, I don’t think it’s anything like it used to be. Heck, before even my day, gays faced being chemically castrated, imprisoned, and labeled as Communists, back in the 40s and 50s. So it’s kind of annoying seeing young’uns complain that somebody won’t use the pronoun they prefer!
Post by: nddons on July 07, 2021, 12:17:08 PM
https://twitter.com/i/status/141244944594226791229 seconds of my life have been lost watching that. Thanks a lot Lucifer.
Post by: bflynn on July 10, 2021, 10:59:46 PM
(Ironically, straight men who hate gays will sometimes rape them.)
Just to clarify - "straight" men who do this aren't straight. Bi at best.
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on July 11, 2021, 03:08:00 AM
Just to clarify - "straight" men who do this aren't straight. Bi at best.
well, since rape can be an act of violence rather than a sexual act, a guy raping a guy doesn't necessarily mean rapist is gay.
Post by: Rush on July 11, 2021, 05:40:52 AM
Just to clarify - "straight" men who do this aren't straight. Bi at best.
well, since rape can be an act of violence rather than a sexual act, a guy raping a guy doesn't necessarily mean rapist is gay.
What Bob said. Also straight men can go “gay for the stay” in prison. If you’re straight and think you wouldn’t, you will, when it becomes a choice between that and being targeted for violence because you have no protector, unless you think you’re gonna be the biggest alpha gangster there. Also there are straight men into humiliation who, for example, like to be forced by their mistress to service other people which may include another male. And there is the experimentation of adolescence, especially now with media obsession with LBQTXYZ......and constant message about how we are all on a spectrum. Kids today probably figure they’re supposed to try it, or that it’s “cool” if they do, or are told they’re homophobic if they don’t. I don’t know which is worse, that, or in the old days when such experimentation resulted in shame and regret.
I don’t buy the new woke ideas about “fluid sexuality” where most straights are actually not completely straight, or people can flip flop from one way to the other. I believe true bisexuals are extremely rare. Most people are firmly one way or the other and are from birth, despite wandering over to the other side on occasion. One person I knew who claimed to be bi was actually a straight male but had been sexually abused as a child by a male which left him messed up as an adult in that he had been conditioned to react sexually to men. Other cases, like for example the guys that “married” the Tiger King, go gay for financial reasons or come under the sway of a narcissist.
Sadly, I’ve even heard a young man say that he’s so scared of women these days, with the whole #metoo movement, that he just gets sex from guys because it’s much easier and safer. You may say he’s actually gay or bi and in denial, but I think that’s how much damage the cult of wokeness and the left’s attack on straight males is doing.
They are right that there is a whole spectrum of behavior, but in my opinion it’s wrong to make that the definition of bisexual. Your sexual orientation IMO is defined as which gender you want to mate with, that you bond with romantically for the long term, and that is either one or the other for the great majority of people. True bisexuals could flip a coin and be happy with either.
And then you have transgenders which is sort of a totally different animal. If you’re a male to female TG and are attracted to men, does that make you a straight woman? What about being attracted to another TG? I know a couple where one is a M to F TG and the other is a F to M TG. So the end result is a “straight” couple whether you view it as male and female birth sex or female and male transitioned sex. Either way they’re not bi.
Anyway I think the woke tendency to over analyze and call everybody bi is another way to erode traditional values and gender roles, and most especially gender identity and as I’ve said before, that isn’t even what TGs want; the whole point of being TG is you want to be the other gender. How can that be if there is no such thing as binary gender?
Just like there is binary gender, I believe there is mostly binary sexual orientation. You’re either attracted mostly to men or mostly to women, as in the one you’d be caught dead marrying. Just because you got your rocks off here and there in various other ways doesn’t make you bisexual.
But having said that I will grant that it’s dependent on how you define “bisexual”. I understand others define it differently than I do.
Post by: elwood blues on July 11, 2021, 07:22:40 AM
Post by: Rush on July 11, 2021, 07:32:53 AM
That's a lot of words ...!
Yeah I know. I’m trying to duck actual work I’m supposed to be doing. I’d rather sit here writing words and drinking more coffee. :(
Post by: bflynn on July 12, 2021, 06:44:42 AM
Anything else is leftist doublethink. You are defined by the reality of your actions, not by how you identify.
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on July 12, 2021, 07:04:45 AM
I disagree. If a guy is having sex with a guy then he isn't straight, no matter what the reason. He might have a preference for women, but having sex with men and women is bisexual by definition. If you want to stretch it, you might say they are just morally ambivalent about who they have sex with, but they're still doing it with both sexes.
Anything else is leftist doublethink. You are defined by the reality of your actions, not by how you identify.
"You are defined by the reality of your actions"
Given that rape is an act of violence, you cannot infer sexual "preference"
Of course, you are free to disagree.
Post by: Little Joe on July 12, 2021, 09:15:57 AM
"You are defined by the reality of your actions"No heterosexual man is going to voluntarily rape another man unless he has homosexual tendencies.
Given that rape is an act of violence, you cannot infer sexual "preference"
Of course, you are free to disagree.
It may be an act of violence, but it is still a choice.
Of course, you too are free to disagree.
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on July 12, 2021, 09:24:45 AM
No heterosexual man is going to voluntarily rape another man unless he has homosexual tendencies.
It may be an act of violence, but it is still a choice.
Of course, you too are free to disagree.
of course, we all have the right to disagree.
I believe that people are making the mistake of thinking of rape only in sexual terms.
Post by: bflynn on July 12, 2021, 10:42:38 AM
I believe that people are making the mistake of thinking of rape only in sexual terms.
I believe some people try to think of rape as only a violent act - it is non-consensual sex, with the noun of that phrase being sex.
When tab D is inserted into slot M, slot V, or slo tA, there is a sexual component to it. If the (male) aggressor doesn't identify men as a sexual partner, tab D isn't going anywhere and all he will be doing is beating someone up. That's just violence, not rape.
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on July 12, 2021, 10:45:57 AM
Post by: Rush on July 12, 2021, 11:08:57 AM
"You are defined by the reality of your actions"
Given that rape is an act of violence, you cannot infer sexual "preference"
Of course, you are free to disagree.
Agree. Same with the victim in that case. And same with the straight guy in prison doing it “voluntarily” with a protector only to avoid being raped by others. Also same with childhood victims of sexual molestation who might have an unwanted physical response. In all these cases yes, it is bisexual behavior. But it in no way means the person “is” a bisexual. I would also extend that to cases of limited “bi-curiosity” or other minor aberrations.
I disagree. If a guy is having sex with a guy then he isn't straight, no matter what the reason. He might have a preference for women, but having sex with men and women is bisexual by definition. If you want to stretch it, you might say they are just morally ambivalent about who they have sex with, but they're still doing it with both sexes.
Anything else is leftist doublethink. You are defined by the reality of your actions, not by how you identify.
No, the leftist doublethink is that we all must identify on a spectrum somewhere between hetero and homo despite millions of years of evolution saying otherwise. If having sex with men and women makes you a de facto bisexual, no matter the limited circumstances or complete lack of romantic attraction, then I self identify as a skydiver, because I jumped out of an airplane once.
As you say, you are defined by your actions, not how you identify. The very prefix “bi” implies two symmetrical parts, ergo, in this case, more or less equally attracted to each. A straight man who loves and bonds emotionally with only women, and has most of his sex with women, but might have, for whatever reason, sexual contact with a man in specific limited circumstances, is not symmetrical. He’s way skewed to the hetero, and there’s no point trying to redefine sexuality into a zillion subcategories, like the left does with all identity politics.
The truth is, homosexual contact is widespread in nature in many species and is so in Homo Sapiens - as an incidental baked in phenomenon in the context of reproductive biology. Put simply, people get horny, but they’ll not always stay on the path that gets a sperm to the egg. There is spillover into situations other than the one that leads sperm to egg, and one of those situations is as Bob points out, violence.
But it all does depend on how we define it and everyone seems to define it differently. For example, in one autobiography I read, by a man who was in prison, he says, you are only gay if you perform oral sex or are the recipient of anal sex. As long as you remain only the receiver of oral or the giver of anal, you are straight. This is among people who are completely straight outside. The concept of “bisexual” isn’t even on their radar. Either you’re straight, or gay, or a straight “bitch” that has to service an owner.
Maybe we can all agree that those definitions aren’t really the best ones to go by though.
Post by: bflynn on July 12, 2021, 11:20:21 AM
Thank you for proving my point.
Was your point that rape requires sex? Because I think you said it was an act of violence.
Violence is a frequent but not required element of rape. Mixing someone a Cosby Special drink is not violent at all, nor is the non-consensual sex you could have after the victim passes out, but that sex certainly qualifies as rape. Whether violent or not, if you remove the sex, you wouldn't call it rape - it either becomes just violence or ... nothing.
Post by: bflynn on July 12, 2021, 11:23:00 AM
then I self identify as a skydiver, because I jumped out of an airplane once.
If you jumped out of a plane once, you ARE a skydiver.
Post by: Rush on July 12, 2021, 02:27:02 PM
If you jumped out of a plane once, you ARE a skydiver.
This made me laugh so hard, I can’t think of a comeback. Would you believe me if I told you I gave that to you?
Post by: Anthony on July 12, 2021, 05:56:44 PM
I disagree. If a guy is having sex with a guy then he isn't straight, no matter what the reason. He might have a preference for women, but having sex with men and women is bisexual by definition. If you want to stretch it, you might say they are just morally ambivalent about who they have sex with, but they're still doing it with both sexes.
Anything else is leftist doublethink. You are defined by the reality of your actions, not by how you identify.
Totally agree. If you can get it up for a guy, you're not just heterosexual, your Bi or Gay.
Post by: nddons on July 12, 2021, 09:54:14 PM
Totally agree. If you can get it up for a guy, you're not just heterosexual, your Bi or Gay.TMI in this thread.
I’ll make it simple. My wife doesn’t understand that
I want to vomit when I see two men kissing, but not with two women kissing. This is a nearly universal reaction for guys.
I tell her with women, men are just hoping to be invited to the party.
End of story.
Post by: Rush on July 13, 2021, 04:18:03 AM
Totally agree. If you can get it up for a guy, you're not just heterosexual, your Bi or Gay.
So victims of forced molestation who have an unwanted physical reaction to stimulation are bi or gay? After such an attack they’re supposed to accept they are actually part homo?
https://students.wustl.edu/rape-myths-facts/
Quote
Male Survivor Rape Myths
Myth: Men can’t be sexually assaulted.
Fact: Men are sexually assaulted. Any man can be sexually assaulted regardless of size, strength, appearance or sexual orientation.
Myth: Only gay men are sexually assaulted.
Fact: Heterosexual, gay and bisexual men are all assaulted for the same reason- because someone decided to assault them.
Myth: Only gay men sexually assault other men.
Fact: Most men who sexually assault other men identify themselves as heterosexual. This fact helps to highlight another reality: sexual assault is about violence, anger and control over another person, not lust or sexual attraction.
Myth: A woman can not sexually assault a man.
Fact: Although the majority of perpetrators are male, people of all genders can be both victims and perpetrators of sexual violence.
Myth: Sexual arousal, including climax, erection or ejaculation during a sexual assault means the survivor wanted it or consented to the sexual contact.
Fact: Sexual arousal, including climax, erection and ejaculation are physiological responses that may result from mere physical contact or even extreme stress. These responses do not imply the survivor wanted or enjoyed the assault and do not indicate anything about sexual orientation. Some rapists are aware how arousal, climax, erection and ejaculation can confuse a victim of sexual assault; this motivates them to manipulate their victims to the point of arousal, climax, erection or ejaculation to increase their feelings of control and to discourage reporting of the crime.
Post by: Rush on July 13, 2021, 04:36:01 AM
I want to vomit when I see two men kissing, but not with two women kissing.
I have the same reaction but in reverse. ;D
Except as much as I advocate for gays, I dislike the way it’s pushed on us in every show these days, woke browbeating at every turn. Same with biracial couples. I’m also an advocate of that, mixing up the genes is a good thing, but it’s unrealistic to portray a biracial couple in 100% of the ads you see, it becomes forced and jarring, same with gay couples in every movie or show anymore.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I hate the way the Marxist left has appropriated the gay cause and the black cause for their own empowerment, while wrecking the world for these very groups by destroying the economy and fueling hatred and resentment.
Post by: nddons on July 13, 2021, 08:01:27 AM
I have the same reaction but in reverse. ;DI’ve said before that the GLB group’s fatal flaw was allowing the Ts to join their movement.
Except as much as I advocate for gays, I dislike the way it’s pushed on us in every show these days, woke browbeating at every turn. Same with biracial couples. I’m also an advocate of that, mixing up the genes is a good thing, but it’s unrealistic to portray a biracial couple in 100% of the ads you see, it becomes forced and jarring, same with gay couples in every movie or show anymore.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I hate the way the Marxist left has appropriated the gay cause and the black cause for their own empowerment, while wrecking the world for these very groups by destroying the economy and fueling hatred and resentment.
This is nothing but a sad freak show, and I have no respect for them.
Talk about the media force-feeding us this mental illness, look at this article from the Federalist. Now they are harming children to fulfill their fantasies. Sick and disgusting.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/13/facebook-promotes-videos-of-transgender-couple-pushing-their-newborn-to-suck-a-mans-chest/
Barking for the Yak woman is more normal than this stuff.
Post by: Rush on July 13, 2021, 09:08:02 AM
I’ve said before that the GLB group’s fatal flaw was allowing the Ts to join their movement.
This is nothing but a sad freak show, and I have no respect for them.
Talk about the media force-feeding us this mental illness, look at this article from the Federalist. Now they are harming children to fulfill their fantasies. Sick and disgusting.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/13/facebook-promotes-videos-of-transgender-couple-pushing-their-newborn-to-suck-a-mans-chest/
Barking for the Yak woman is more normal than this stuff.
Good Lord. If they really cared about that baby they’d have the birth mother nurse it like nature intended. Even if they get the M->F to produce “milk” (it can happen in males, it’s called galactorrhea) it’s not exactly the same stuff a woman’s body produces after giving birth. Even females that have non-pregnancy related galactorrhea are not producing the appropriate milk with the right nutrient composition for a newborn.
The milk produced immediately after birth is colostrum, full of antibodies, growth factors and other compounds beneficial to the newborn. Shortly thereafter the “milk” comes in, and consists of the right mix for the baby at the right stage of life, and changes as he grows. It even changes during the day, and even during each individual feeding.
And don’t get me started on formula. If you have to put your baby on formula for medical or circumstantial reasons, that’s one thing. But if there is an option for the birth mother to breastfeed, it is by far the best thing for the baby.
To raise the baby without a gender? Less than one percent of adults in the U.S are transgender. Even if there is a genetic increase in likelihood that the child will be, because of the parents, it is still statistically very unlikely “it” will not identify with the gender indicated by its genitals at birth. To raise it confused, deliberately, seems like child abuse.
Post by: Little Joe on July 13, 2021, 03:04:38 PM
So victims of forced molestation who have an unwanted physical reaction to stimulation are bi or gay? After such an attack they’re supposed to accept they are actually part homo?No. The victims are not. But the guy that rapes another guy IS gay or Bi. Unless someone has a gun to their head forcing them to commit the rape. But even under that scenarios, I don't think I could get it up for a guy.
Post by: Rush on July 13, 2021, 07:54:16 PM
No. The victims are not. But the guy that rapes another guy IS gay or Bi. Unless someone has a gun to their head forcing them to commit the rape. But even under that scenarios, I don't think I could get it up for a guy.
An actual gun to your head? I can’t imagine anybody getting it up for anybody under those circumstances. But maybe if it’s that or getting your head blown off...
Speaking of guns, this is from an article on wartime rape:
Quote
Jean Paul was at university in Congo, studying electronic engineering, when his father – a wealthy businessman – was accused by the army of aiding the enemy and shot dead. Jean Paul fled in January 2009, only to be abducted by rebels. Along with six other men and six women he was marched to a forest in the Virunga National Park.
Later that day, the rebels and their prisoners met up with their cohorts who were camped out in the woods. Small camp fires could be seen here and there between the shadowy ranks of trees. While the women were sent off to prepare food and coffee, 12 armed fighters surrounded the men. From his place on the ground, Jean Paul looked up to see the commander leaning over them. In his 50s, he was bald, fat and in military uniform. He wore a red bandana around his neck and had strings of leaves tied around his elbows.
"You are all spies," the commander said. "I will show you how we punish spies." He pointed to Jean Paul. "Remove your clothes and take a position like a Muslim man."
TRIGGER WARNING, this link has highly disturbing content, but informative if you can stomach it:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/jul/17/the-rape-of-men
I will not post here what follows, but to summarize, eleven of the twelve rebels queued up and raped him in turn, and probably the one that didn’t was the nine year old kid. So you are telling me all of those fighters were gay or bisexual? It’s not statistically possible.
Bob is right, it’s about power and violence and not sex at all. I can’t tell you how they get it up but I can more easily believe extreme circumstances of war somehow create conditions where they can somehow, than I can believe all of that band of armed rebels were not heterosexual.
Anyway, I’ve never gotten into the head of a rapist, like I have a victim, so I can’t really tell you I am certain of it, I can only go by the data, and it says most men that rape men are straight.
Oh, I will post this part:
Quote
But when I contact Stemple by email, she describes a "constant drum beat that women are the rape victims" and a milieu in which men are treated as a "monolithic perpetrator class".
"International human rights law leaves out men in nearly all instruments designed to address sexual violence," she continues. "The UN Security Council Resolution 1325 in 2000 treats wartime sexual violence as something that only impacts on women and girls… Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently announced $44m to implement this resolution. Because of its entirely exclusive focus on female victims, it seems unlikely that any of these new funds will reach the thousands of men and boys who suffer from this kind of abuse. Ignoring male rape not only neglects men, it also harms women by reinforcing a viewpoint that equates 'female' with 'victim', thus hampering our ability to see women as strong and empowered. In the same way, silence about male victims reinforces unhealthy expectations about men and their supposed invulnerability."
Post by: Lucifer on July 14, 2021, 05:46:59 AM
Post by: Little Joe on July 14, 2021, 06:19:58 AM
TMI in this thread.https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/attachments/26-high-definition-jpeg.98232/
I’ll make it simple. My wife doesn’t understand that
I want to vomit when I see two men kissing, but not with two women kissing. This is a nearly universal reaction for guys.
I tell her with women, men are just hoping to be invited to the party.
End of story.
I couldn't figure out how to copy that image from POA, but I thought Stan might like this too.
Post by: Anthony on July 14, 2021, 06:31:14 AM
TMI in this thread.
I’ll make it simple. My wife doesn’t understand that
I want to vomit when I see two men kissing, but not with two women kissing. This is a nearly universal reaction for guys.
I tell her with women, men are just hoping to be invited to the party.
End of story.
Not bored anymore, huh? Yes, many if not most men get viscerally uncomfortable and disgusted when two men kiss passionately. There is something in our DNA that finds it revolting. It doesn't mean we are Homophobes, closet Gays, latent Gays, or Gay anything. It means we are a normal hetero MALES.
Post by: Rush on July 14, 2021, 06:48:23 AM
Not bored anymore, huh? Yes, many if not most men get viscerally uncomfortable and disgusted when two men kiss passionately. There is something in our DNA that finds it revolting. It doesn't mean we are Homophobes, closet Gays, latent Gays, or Gay anything. It means we are a normal hetero MALES.
Seinfeld says it’s because deep down men know they have weak sales resistance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yf3tmUy6gk
Don’t shoot me, I’m just the messenger. ;D
But I agree, it doesn’t mean you’re a closet gay or a homophobe (despite Jerry using that word, that was back in 1992) any more than protesting that you hate alcohol means you’re a closet alcoholic.
Post by: Little Joe on July 14, 2021, 07:39:13 AM
Seinfeld says it’s because deep down men know they have weak sales resistance.The only problem with that analogy is that most heterosexual men don't HATE gays (yes, some do, but . . .). They (we/I) are revolted by the action, but not by the people. I used to be good friends with a gay male couple. They were both mechanics in the shop where I worked. They would purposely kiss each other in front of me just to watch my reaction. But we were still friends.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yf3tmUy6gk
Don’t shoot me, I’m just the messenger. ;D
But I agree, it doesn’t mean you’re a closet gay or a homophobe (despite Jerry using that word, that was back in 1992) any more than protesting that you hate alcohol means you’re a closet alcoholic.
Post by: Anthony on July 14, 2021, 08:07:17 AM
The only problem with that analogy is that most heterosexual men don't HATE gays (yes, some do, but . . .). They (we/I) are revolted by the action, but not by the people. I used to be good friends with a gay male couple. They were both mechanics in the shop where I worked. They would purposely kiss each other in front of me just to watch my reaction. But we were still friends.
Exactly. I don't hate Gays, but just find their public display of affection uncomfortable purely because of how I am wired. I am also slightly uncomfortable when a man and a woman get TOO physically affectionate in public, but much less so. It's just how I was raised.
Post by: Rush on July 14, 2021, 08:25:12 AM
The only problem with that analogy is that most heterosexual men don't HATE gays (yes, some do, but . . .). They (we/I) are revolted by the action, but not by the people. I used to be good friends with a gay male couple. They were both mechanics in the shop where I worked. They would purposely kiss each other in front of me just to watch my reaction. But we were still friends.
Unless you are in a bar late at night it is extremely rude for any couple, gay or straight, to make out in in the presence of others, to sit in each other’s laps or otherwise engage in intimate displays of affection. Maybe that is old fashioned of me but I can’t stand it, and it’s usually straight couples just because they are more numerous. But for your friends to do that purposely just to try to shock you is even more rude.
The term “homophobia” has been hopelessly corrupted. Technically it should only refer to an irrational, unjustified fear of homosexuals, or fear of being/becoming one yourself. But in common usage it’s applied to people who hate gays (but don’t fear them), to people who simply disapprove of the act (like the religious “love the sinner but hate the sin”) and to people like you who simply find the act revolting but don’t otherwise have a problem with homosexuals. In all these cases the word “homophobia” is not appropriate. Do you go around fearing your gay friends? Fearing that you might subconsciously actually be gay? Of course not.
Most especially these days it has been expanded (along with its sister word transphobia) to include anyone not totally embracing full on woke leftist groupthink about non-binary genders and unconventional lifestyles. Just like how if you are white, you are automatically racist, if you are straight, you are homophobic, that is what we’ve come to.
Post by: Username on July 14, 2021, 08:37:27 AM
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on October 24, 2022, 10:28:28 AM
"According to news reports (here, here, here and here), on September 14, while the school was in lockdown, the assistant principals of a Cleveland high school allowed masked teens with guns into the school to protect them from the police officers outside.
The teens reportedly pulled up to the high school in three stolen cars. The school security officer, who saw them arrive, called 911 and the school went into lockdown. Part of the 911 call recording (reproduced here) has someone saying, repeatedly, “Don’t let them in the building,” and “Do not let anybody through that door, people.” Dispatch responds, “Keep the school locked down.” "
"Despite this, the school’s two assistant principals allowed the teens into the school. A witness statement explains, “I … instructed the four suspects to come to the vestibule because it was unsafe to be outside because I saw police officers.” "
Post by: Mase on October 24, 2022, 10:34:56 AM
Post by: texasag93 on October 24, 2022, 01:29:01 PM
I would assume Ohio, but Cleveland, TX has some pretty big idiots in it as well.
Post by: jb1842 on October 24, 2022, 01:51:50 PM
Post by: Anthony on October 24, 2022, 04:39:53 PM
If I was a parent of a student at that school there, there would be a massive lawsuit against them. Criminal charges need to be brought against the employees of that school.
Exactly. Cops and teachers, school administrators and board members need to be held personally accountable.