The Problem with "Fighting" Homosexuality

[Moishe3rd]

LOL! YOU are the one trying to change the goal posts! You were VERY OBVIOUSLY talking about same sex people having SEX!

YOU SAID - "And, same sex relationships are on the increase because it's easy.
A hell of lot easier than dealing with the opposite sex.
And, by the way - "Gay" people - you know this. Stop lying about it. It is so so so much easier to have sex with your sex than it is to have to deal with the opposite sex. Oh? Did I say "sex with your sex?" That's right, I did.
Self sex is the easiest.
Same sex sex is the next easiest.
And opposite sex sex is full of pain and total incomprehensibility over what the hell he/ she wants or is thinking."*

Okey dokey my dear coloratura.
It's about sex. Peachy.
I was told that it wasn't just about sex. As in:

EVERY relationship has difficulties, and neither one is inherently easier than the other. EVERY relationship requires work, sacrifice, and dedication.
?

But, no problemo. Sex is good.
So, do you have a problem with same sex sex? Do you think that opposite sex sex is easier than same sex sex?
If so, why?
Same sex sex partners know their way around how to pleasure their partner's sexual desires a lot better than opposite sex partners know how to pleasure their partner's sexual desires.
And, same sex partner's also know more about what goes on inside their partner's heads vis a vis sex such as that a man is turned on by visual stimuli while woman have more Daedalean stimuli.
For instance, it doesn't matter what a particular man's sexual preferences are - he will get turned on by viewing legs or asses or other parts of the body of the gender that turns him on.
Likewise, it doesn't matter what a particular woman's sexual preferences are, it is more likely that she will not become sexually excited by viewing legs or asses or other body parts of the gender that turns her on.
Men know this. Women know this.
Ergo, men or women understand same sex desires better than men or women understand opposite sex desires.

Good enough sex having sex for you now?

.

 

[Moishe3rd]

Actually, for a number of reasons, people will often have an easier time making friends with people of the opposite sex. Though it is more typical for people to have same-sex friends, this should not be considered a universal norm, or even near-universal. It's like men more typically identifying with a group and women more typically identifying with closer relationships. Though it is not unusual to see this, it is not unusual to see it reversed.

Ummm.... Okay... But I think you just told me I was wrong and then showed how I was correct....
But, as always, no problemo. I am obviously the confused one in this world.
"Arise, my love, arise, my love
Apollo\'s lighting the skies, my love
The meadows shine with columbine
And daffodils blossom away
Hear Venus call to one and all
And taste delight while you may
The world is bright and all is right
And life is merry and gay."
- What Do the Simple Folk Do? - from Camelot

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Ergo, men or women understand same sex desires better than men or women understand opposite sex desires.

Not every man is turned on by the same things, not all women are turned on by the same. A new partner, male or female, requires you to get to know them and to learn what it is that drives this new person into ecstasy, because it is very likely not going to be what sent your last partner into euphoric bliss.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Ummm.... Okay... But I think you just told me I was wrong and then showed how I was correct....

What I was telling you is that people usually do not easily fit into a predefined mold. To claim that everybody everywhere has an easier time making friends with the same sex is not an accurate statement as people very often make friends with the opposite sex easier than they do the same sex.

 

[Ingledsva]

Okey dokey my dear coloratura.
It's about sex. Peachy.
I was told that it wasn't just about sex. As in:

But, no problemo. Sex is good.
So, do you have a problem with same sex sex? Do you think that opposite sex sex is easier than same sex sex?
If so, why?
Same sex sex partners know their way around how to pleasure their partner's sexual desires a lot better than opposite sex partners know how to pleasure their partner's sexual desires.
And, same sex partner's also know more about what goes on inside their partner's heads vis a vis sex such as that a man is turned on by visual stimuli while woman have more Daedalean stimuli.
For instance, it doesn't matter what a particular man's sexual preferences are - he will get turned on by viewing legs or asses or other parts of the body of the gender that turns him on.
Likewise, it doesn't matter what a particular woman's sexual preferences are, it is more likely that she will not become sexually excited by viewing legs or asses or other body parts of the gender that turns her on.
Men know this. Women know this.
Ergo, men or women understand same sex desires better than men or women understand opposite sex desires.

Good enough sex having sex for you now?

.

Don't even try that BULL here! You will be called on it.

You tried to change what you said, when someone called you on it!

You tried to change that "easier to have SEX with the same sex," - to an attempted switch to platonic relationships with the same sex!

*

 

[1robin]

Ah ha, I see you haven't taken American Government 101 yet. I'll leave your education to your school system. I have neither the time nor the inclination to bring you up to speed.

I had some old school teacher for civics. He used to hit us. I am not joking. He body slammed the 6'4" class bully through a desk. He was a WW2 vet and used to throw 50 caliber shell casings at us. However we were all so scared of him that I think everyone made an A and knew more about civics than a congressman. Rights are things inherent to humans that Governments are not to take away.

I will let Jefferson answer your question:

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

 

[1robin]

To everyone responding to 1Robin's posts.

Sorry if you feel slighted but I must end this at some point. I am not seeing anything new and this thread is taking up all my time and is not what I enjoy debating anyway. Instead of ending that abruptly I will instead give what IMO is a fair summary which you may disagree with at your leisure but to which I have no intention of debating further.

Again my two primary claims were:
1. That homosexuality leads to massive additional suffering (usually at rates in excess of heterosexuality).
2. That homosexuality does not contain any gain that justifies the cost.

With the exception of one response which challenged one of the minor supporting claims for my first argument all other responses have been the result of either not including one of the two or neither, or of misunderstanding or distorting one or both.

First the one point that actually challenged on of the minor supports of position one. I listed STD's, physical damage, spousal abuse, sexual violence, divorce rates, adultery, promiscuity, unsafe sex, etc...... One of homosexuality's defenders effectively challenged divorce rates. The data is very premature and hard to find but they did provide a significant amount. Since even granting the point my primary claim suffers little damage I did not feel it justifiable to seriously investigate whether it was a fact or not. I granted it out of convenience and because I am burned out.

Every other argument I saw fell into a few categories though they were stated in countless ways.

1. Gains. About half the arguments were of the type that either falsely claimed I said no gain can possibly exist in homosexuality or claims that any gain justified any cost. These are both incorrect. I never said that someone could not claim some benefit from homosexuality. I said they could not find any gain that offset the cost. Of course the appeal to emotion by claiming love justifies anything is not true to begin with but is actually not believed to be true by virtually anyone. We can love drugs, abusive partners, even killing. Yelling love does not justify anything. Those that thing what makes them happy justifies any cost are called psychopaths and are locked up.
2. The tried and true sub category was the next most common. I can't evaluate every form homosexuality may come in in a post. I am judging a general behavior. Of course some forms are less risky than others but that does not even matter anyway. They all have significant risks and none contain compensating gains for those costs.
3. Another was claiming that because bias merely exists that competent authorities like the CDC are incompetent until proven competent. As I explain debates take place on common grounds. If no other can be found legal procedure serves the purpose. In legal circles those highly trained and fluent in a particular subject are considered valid unless proven otherwise. I served on a Jury where expert testimony was the entire case.
4. Another, that unless I have a solution I am not allowed to mention a problem. Wrong, I can claim cancer is bad without being able to treat it.
5. Or that homosexuality is not a choice. A. No one on earth knows that, the science is all over the map currently. B. Even if the orientation is not a choice acting on it is, the same way heterosexuality is not a choice but promiscuity is. C. Given that no species is 100% homosexual and very few have homosexual tendencies the odds strongly suggest the orientation it's self is a choice with additional evidence being how many practice both types of sexuality.
6. One of the last ones was suggesting that my faith was driving my claims. Or that I had some personal animosity towards homosexuals. The former might be personally true but it had nothing to do with my argument and the latter is just plain wrong. I view all immoral acts as equally wrong. I commit immoral acts just as everyone else does. I hope to not be hated or resented for my mistakes and treat others the same. I hate the sin and try to love the sinner. My beliefs are theological my argument was secular and my intention is forgiveness.


Ok, none of this is aimed at anyone in general. I am just tired of spending so much time in one area and it not even being among my primary interests and the debate requiring me to repeat myself in almost every post. Rebut this as you wish. I do not plan to respond and I cannot even promise to read them but I hope to see you all in other threads. Happy debating.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Taking bets on when you will return again, 1Robin.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Taking bets on when you will return again, 1Robin.

Those who say they are done in a thread never stay done with it for very long.

 

[Drolefille]

Those who say they are done in a thread never stay done with it for very long.

I HAVE HAD IT UP TO HERE WITH YOU! I QUIT

 

[Drolefille]

Those who say they are done in a thread never stay done with it for very long.

Missed you.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Firstly, its pointless hating those you disagree with about anything,
it will not convince them; only generate more polarization.

Its important to understand just why homosexuality increases after conflict.

Social conflict generates feelings of antipathy as well as putting normal family relationships into a state of close
interpersonal conflict.

Typically the man returns to his family after warfare and is suffering from PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder),
This increases his sexual desire as a coping mechanism, but as his emotions are damaged, he is often
incapable of genuine positive emotion towards his wife. The mother then transfers this lack of emotion onto the child.
The male child then has ingrained feelings of fear towards his mother, and sometimes the father tries to compensate;
thus the male child bonds maternally with the father. The daughter often rejects the aggression in her father, and
fixates on the mother where rejection of the male becomes ingrained.

This happens in what Freud called the 'phallic' phase of development - between 4 and 6 years old. This is why
most of the homosexual psychological construction is felt to be 'from as far back as can be remembered'.

I describe a typical scenario, and gender inversion can happen in many other scenarios. The subconscious
then begins to become active during puberty. So its deeply ingrained - originating in very early childhood.

For those who manage to transcend it, embarrassment at their own trauma, and not wanting to revisit it,
makes them unlikely to want to speak out about it.

Unfortunately those who have been through such trauma are more likely to become involved in conflict again.
So the psycho-social behavior repeats through the generations, and normally occurs in the proximity of other
psychological problems, which form a complex. This makes it very difficult for the victim to isolate the various
traumas from each other analytically.

A way of helping the situation is that when the mother rejects the male child, it should ideally be placed in the
care of another woman. If the father is suffering from PTSD, the daughters should as early as possible bond with men
who are emotionally stable.

As for the teaching of Jesus on the issue, he claims that homosexuals shall be redeemed before the sinners of
Capernaum. These are the 'money-changers' and those that beheaded John the Baptist.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Those who say they are done in a thread never stay done with it for very long.

LOL yeah, and that declaration has been made for years by the same person.

 

[columbus]

Same sex sex partners know their way around how to pleasure their partner's sexual desires a lot better than opposite sex partners know how to pleasure their partner's sexual desires.
And, same sex partner's also know more about what goes on inside their partner's heads vis a vis sex such as that a man is turned on by visual stimuli

Here's the thing pumpkin.

On a superficial level you are correct. A couple of ignorant teens fumbling around will likely be more successful if they both "have one".

But the secret to a good love life is making your partner happy. That is learned.

I'm gay and male, so that is the only perspective I can really speak from. Because I so much wanted to be normal, which meant straight, I had to learn how to please women. The concept did not come naturally to me, or even the desire. So I paid attention to what made them happy. I quickly discovered that it is not rocket science, and while it varies a bit from person to person, some behaviour just WORKS. I never had to pick up a girl, I have no repertoire of pick up lines because they always found me. Women talk.

Everyone has to learn how to have the best sex, it doesn't just happen. And it is not as different as all that being gay or straight.

Tom

 

[Moishe3rd]

Here's the thing pumpkin.

On a superficial level you are correct. A couple of ignorant teens fumbling around will likely be more successful if they both "have one".

But the secret to a good love life is making your partner happy. That is learned.

I'm gay and male, so that is the only perspective I can really speak from. Because I so much wanted to be normal, which meant straight, I had to learn how to please women. The concept did not come naturally to me, or even the desire. So I paid attention to what made them happy. I quickly discovered that it is not rocket science, and while it varies a bit from person to person, some behaviour just WORKS. I never had to pick up a girl, I have no repertoire of pick up lines because they always found me. Women talk.

Everyone has to learn how to have the best sex, it doesn't just happen. And it is not as different as all that being gay or straight.

Tom

Peachy.
I have no disagreement with what you wrote.
And, what you wrote disagrees not in the least with what I wrote.

 

[Ingledsva]

Firstly, its pointless hating those you disagree with about anything,
it will not convince them; only generate more polarization.

Its important to understand just why homosexuality increases after conflict.

Social conflict generates feelings of antipathy as well as putting normal family relationships into a state of close
interpersonal conflict.

Typically the man returns to his family after warfare and is suffering from PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder),
This increases his sexual desire as a coping mechanism, but as his emotions are damaged, he is often
incapable of genuine positive emotion towards his wife. The mother then transfers this lack of emotion onto the child.
The male child then has ingrained feelings of fear towards his mother, and sometimes the father tries to compensate;
thus the male child bonds maternally with the father. The daughter often rejects the aggression in her father, and
fixates on the mother where rejection of the male becomes ingrained.

This happens in what Freud called the 'phallic' phase of development - between 4 and 6 years old. This is why
most of the homosexual psychological construction is felt to be 'from as far back as can be remembered'.

I describe a typical scenario, and gender inversion can happen in many other scenarios. The subconscious
then begins to become active during puberty. So its deeply ingrained - originating in very early childhood.

For those who manage to transcend it, embarrassment at their own trauma, and not wanting to revisit it,
makes them unlikely to want to speak out about it.

Unfortunately those who have been through such trauma are more likely to become involved in conflict again.
So the psycho-social behavior repeats through the generations, and normally occurs in the proximity of other
psychological problems, which form a complex. This makes it very difficult for the victim to isolate the various
traumas from each other analytically.

A way of helping the situation is that when the mother rejects the male child, it should ideally be placed in the
care of another woman. If the father is suffering from PTSD, the daughters should as early as possible bond with men
who are emotionally stable.

As for the teaching of Jesus on the issue, he claims that homosexuals shall be redeemed before the sinners of
Capernaum. These are the 'money-changers' and those that beheaded John the Baptist.

Just absolute BULL!

I suggest you read through this thread looking for the actual studies.

*

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This happens in what Freud called the 'phallic' phase of development - between 4 and 6 years old. This is why
most of the homosexual psychological construction is felt to be 'from as far back as can be remembered'.

You may want to update you psychology. Freud has largely fell out of favor in psychology and psychiatry, and ehis stages of psychosexual development have been replaced with Erik Erikson's approach of psychosocial development.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Just absolute BULL!

I suggest you read through this thread looking for the actual studies.

*

You may project your anger on to me if it helps you.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

You may want to update you psychology. Freud has largely fell out of favor in psychology and psychiatry, and ehis stages of psychosexual development have been replaced with Erik Erikson's approach of psychosocial development.

Well, yes fashion has replaced reason to a large extent. But at least you recognize that its a developmental process.
People who fear spiders have had a bad experience with spiders, hence...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

People who fear spiders have had a bad experience with spiders, hence...

No, arachnaphobia is usually an irrational fear, that's the nature of phobias. Once phobics get the appropriate therapy they become more rational and less fearful, and before you know it they will happily let a tarantula sit on their hand.

Therapy for homophobes would be quite a good idea actually.