homosexuality - hard-wired, not chosen

by **DangerBoy** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:01 pm

Is suggs now stalking happy2seeyou?

by **Napoleon Ier** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:07 pm

suggs wrote:And to forestall your embarrassing paedophilia argument, it has something to do with choice.
We don't disapprove of homosexuality, because consenting adults have freedom of choice whether to accept someone's advances or not.
A child does not have the same choice when abused by someone much older and bigger than them.
Its realy quite straightforward.

Bzzzzzzt! Nul points.

I'm talking about the perversity of the res ipse, not whether or not the act should be legal. After that, there's the gene debate: well, a priori, it seems to me that since paedophilia and mechanophilia (probably) aren't genetic, neother is homosexuality. Unresolved/failed Oedipal complexes also explain the disease nicely, but from there, will the empirical evidence show it to be a genetic or psychological disorder, I don't know, but my beliefs don't depend on either outcome.

by **suggs** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:10 pm

DangerBoy wrote:Is suggs now stalking happy2seeyou?

Yes.

by **suggs** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:32 pm

Nap, why is it "perverse"? Thats an aesthetic judgement, and thus fraught with rleatvistic pitfalls.
To be blunt, maybe i think it is perverse for men to like vaginas.
And whos to tell me my TASTE is wrong?

by **Napoleon Ier** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:27 pm

suggs wrote:Nap, why is it "perverse"? Thats an aesthetic judgement, and thus fraught with rleatvistic pitfalls.
To be blunt, maybe i think it is perverse for men to like vaginas.
And whos to tell me my TASTE is wrong?

It's immoral. It contravenes natural law. It's like incest-just...wrong, in every way.

by **bradleybadly** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:00 pm

Anarkistsdream wrote:Frankly, I could care less if a brother and sister start fucking, assuming they are both mature adults who have made that decision with knowledge and understanding. Why would you care if they f*ck or not?

I think this speaks volumes as to the mindset of the ordinary liberal here. Bunch of degenerates with almost no morals.

by **Napoleon Ier** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:05 pm

bradleybadly wrote:
Anarkistsdream wrote:Frankly, I could care less if a brother and sister start fucking, assuming they are both mature adults who have made that decision with knowledge and understanding. Why would you care if they f*ck or not?

I think this speaks volumes as to the mindset of the ordinary liberal here. Bunch of degenerates with almost no morals.

But can you blame them, bradley?

For the illuminates like us, it's easy to look down on lesser ideologies, but they've been brainwashed by the System to believe that they're nothing, that they must rely on the State, that they are nothing. Half-shells of men, softened by politically-correct claptrap. It's just not a world of real Men anymore...just of pathetic, limp-wristed dependants who live like junkies off the arbitrary directives of the State.

by **Gregrios** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:08 pm

heavycola wrote:Some interesting research from Sweden has found 'striking similarities' between the brains of gay men and straight women, and conversely between the brains of lesbian women and straight men.

So there you have it. It's not a choice, it's hard-wired in the womb. Unfortunate for the 10 % of humans whom god has decided to test by asking them to reject one of the most basic impulses.

That proves absolutely nothing! [-X

There's lots of guys with female tendencies who accept nature's way. 8-)

Don't get me wrong. If a person chooses to be homosexual, that's their decision. :roll:

The problem I have is when it's being bragged about or even being praised about. Homosexuality is the complete opposite of human existence and therefore should not be promoted but merely accepted.

by **jiminski** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:51 pm

nothing wrong with a bit of bum fun..

i think in a few centuries; when our gender hang-ups are no longer relevant, everyone will shaft everyone.

by **suggs** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:52 pm

jiminski wrote:nothing wrong with a bit of bum fun..

i think in a few centuries; when our gender hang-ups are no longer relevant, everyone will shaft everyone.

I wish i had a time machine

by **suggs** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:57 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
suggs wrote:Nap, why is it "perverse"? Thats an aesthetic judgement, and thus fraught with rleatvistic pitfalls.
To be blunt, maybe i think it is perverse for men to like vaginas.
And whos to tell me my TASTE is wrong?

It's immoral. It contravenes natural law. It's like incest-just...wrong, in every way.

Your worst ever post, by some way.
I thought shouting "BECAUSE IT IS, SO NAH!" was copyright Suggs

I have no idea what "natural law" is - but it often seems to be used as a substitue for "God" or "How I wish the world was if I was king".
But it means NOTHING.
Whats wrong, in every way, is how people like you have tried to make people, that are SLIGHTLY different from you, as unhappy as possible for hundreds of years.
You give the right wing a bad name.

by **Pedronicus** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:22 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:Do we have any homosexuals on Conquer*Club who are comfortable speaking their peace? Seems that it would be an invaluable perspective.

I'm not gay. I do however have my oldest memory (of getting an erection when I was 5 or 6) and not being abused in any way, up to that point of my life, due to a certain thing that turned me on. It still does. This shit is hardwired.
I haven't been abused since that moment - but i know that if a certain thing flicks your switch, it flicks your switch all your life.

by **suggs** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:24 pm

Its ok, Pedronicus.
We can share our Hedgehog love -fuck 'em!

by **CoffeeCream** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:32 pm

Freetymes wrote:Well it is interesting but I am not sure you can draw conclusions from a sample group of only 90 "Volunteers" in one study and a "Smaller" number in a second study. Also I find it odd that they are comparing homosexuality and heterosexuality in an attempt to understand mental illness. Combine this with where this "Research" is being done and it may be interesting but it is little more than anecdotal evidence and certainly not enough for a conclusion.

You raise a good point. The fact that this study was done in an attempt to understand certain types of mental illness should send up a warning flag immediately. People could use that later to make a correlation between homosexuality and depression. I wouldn't be using this particular study to make the case that it's a natural behavior.

by **Anarkistsdream** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:01 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
bradleybadly wrote:
Anarkistsdream wrote:Frankly, I could care less if a brother and sister start fucking, assuming they are both mature adults who have made that decision with knowledge and understanding. Why would you care if they f*ck or not?

I think this speaks volumes as to the mindset of the ordinary liberal here. Bunch of degenerates with almost no morals.

But can you blame them, bradley?

For the illuminates like us, it's easy to look down on lesser ideologies, but they've been brainwashed by the System to believe that they're nothing, that they must rely on the State, that they are nothing. Half-shells of men, softened by politically-correct claptrap. It's just not a world of real Men anymore...just of pathetic, limp-wristed dependants who live like junkies off the arbitrary directives of the State.

Hahahaha... What makes me a normal liberal? I'm a registered Republican! You people talk so much idiocy it cracks me up.

I believe that... GET THIS... all men are equal, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

Especially with comments like yours above, Nappy, you prove I WAS correct about the Neo-Nazi movement and your place in it. Thank God you aren't pushing your ignorant beliefs on the stupid Americans in this country.

by **jay_a2j** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:03 pm

Anarkistsdream wrote:Unless you are gay or actually lived with a gay person for a length of time, I'd wisely suggest you just shut the f*ck up...

This goes out to all of you. Fucking homophobic bitches.

So I guess since I've never slept with my sister, a goat or a 4 year old, incest, bestiality and pedophilia are ok? That argument FAILS on soooo many levels! :roll:

heterophobe!

by **jonesthecurl** on Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:38 pm

jay_a2j wrote:
Anarkistsdream wrote:Unless you are gay or actually lived with a gay person for a length of time, I'd wisely suggest you just shut the f*ck up...

This goes out to all of you. Fucking homophobic bitches.

So I guess since I've never slept with my sister, a goat or a 4 year old, incest, bestiality and pedophilia are ok? That argument FAILS on soooo many levels!

heterophobe!

Actually, I can't resist saying, in good CC style, that last night I slept with your sister, and her four-year old goat.. They said I was better than you were. Except the goat, who said "Baaaaaa!"

by **bradleybadly** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:00 am

Anarkistsdream wrote:I'm a registered Republican!

Yeah and Snorri's a med student

by **Nickbaldwin** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:49 am

bradleybadly wrote:
Anarkistsdream wrote:I'm a registered Republican!

Yeah and Snorri's a med student

And you are a cunt.

by **heavycola** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:43 am

Napoleon Ier wrote:
heavycola wrote:
sam_levi_11 wrote:comparing incest and peadophiliia to homos*xuality is a bit extreme considering they are nothing like each other

Nappy does it all the time.

Explain, then, how is it that homosexual, incestual and paedophilic impulses are inherently and fundamentally different?

Please explain the difference, nappy, between a consensual and loving relationship between two grown adults, and child rape. Is there one? What is it? Or do you see the two AS EXACTLY THE SAME??????!!?????

by **Anarkistsdream** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:12 am

bradleybadly wrote:
Anarkistsdream wrote:I'm a registered Republican!

Yeah and Snorri's a med student

If you are incapable of having a mature conversation, I wisely suggest you don't come back.

by **tzor** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:30 am

As I said before I hate the notion "hard wired." Strong tendencies to a thing is not a hard wiring to a thing. This is too emotional a topic so I'll just change the subject. This is on topic actually.

I am left handed. (I'm actually right armed, but let's not complicate things here.)

What does that mean? Am I "hard wired" to write with the left hand, forced by nature to scribble in one manner and in a manner that some in society might consider "sinister?" (That's a joke for anyone who knows latin or the etymology of the word.)

No it means that I have a preference for doing a thing. It is certanly neither "hard wired" nor an addicition. While I haven't really taught my right hand to write, I have taught it to use a mouse because it was easier at the time. Now I can use a mouse with either hand. I can also paint small minis with either hand.

Anyway, let's get away from my hands :twisted:

and back to sex. In one sense all sexual impulses are occasions of sin. Before you jump on me for being a prude allow me to explain. Almost all impulses are self centered and sexual impulses are indeed self centered, attempts to reach a "sexual high" of some sort. Now since sex involves more than the self we have to consider the implication of sex on the "other." Paedophilic tendencies almost never involve the other except in a way that is deceptive to the self. (They often lie to themselves in thinking that they are actually caring for the victims they are mollesting.)

But not all sex is that way you might argue, not all sex is solely about personally reaching a sexual high, but having ones partner reach a sexual high. Eurica, or as the infamous mistranslation went, "my bath water is too hot." You now have a scale that is sliding going from the mutual desires to achieve for the self, to mutual desires to achieve for the other, to mutual desires to achieve for the other which is in turn open to the creation of the third wo in turn will become a source even greater means of offering the self to the other.

by **The1exile** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:51 am

bradleybadly wrote:I think this speaks volumes as to the mindset of the ordinary liberal here. Bunch of degenerates with almost no morals.

Overgeneralisaton and ad hominem fallacies in one line? that's pretty impressive, if still stupid.

by **Dancing Mustard** on Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:40 am

Napoleon Ier wrote:Well done on missing the point. Again. Quite a track record you're building up there...

You certainly are...

You asked what the difference was between homosexuality and paedophilia etc, in the context of making them illegal. I told you it was harm/health.

I couldn't give a flying bollock about your red-herring posturing about 'impulses'. If you want to pretentiously pretend you understand that field of psychology then go ahead and knock yourself out... but for your "Oh surely you evil liberals will want to make them all legal just the minute you prove homosexuality is genetic" ramblings can be addressed without engaging in such trite discourse.

In other words: you asked a question, I gave you the answer. Just because I didn't give you the answer you wanted that would have enabled you to pontificate about your latest pretentious sideshow (about which you are entirely ignorant), is just your hard luck. It's not me missing the point (indeed, in this case, that was your role).

Napoleon Ier wrote:<Insert two paragraphs of childish flaming which Nappy can't seem to post without doing, in this space here.

Yes yes, I know you're upset that we're not all agreeing with you in the fashion that you'd hoped, but if you're going to ask open questions (and I appreciate that you will fallaciously squeal and howl that you didn't), then you're going to get open answers. At least have the good grace not to be such a baby about it when you receive them.