Brokeback Propaganda

[quote]juninho wrote:
Considering most people become sexually active in their early teens it would take a very bold person to immediately announce that they were gay. In fact it would take a very bold person even to admit this to themselves, and if you can’t see why then really there is no point in continuing with this debate. [/quote]

I think you make some good points regarding the above. However, you have missed my point. If someone is truly a “homosexual” male how are they physically able to have sex with a female?

Look at it this way…

how many truly heterosexual males are “able” to have sex with another male? Not many?..Hardly any?

And if you can have sex with both genders isn’t that called “bisexual?”

And if many of the so called “homosexuals” are indeed “bisexual” (able to have sex with either gender) then why is it so difficult to believe that many (with the proper therapy) could become “heterosexual.”

Something to think about for the truly open minded.

[quote]forlife wrote:
terribleivan wrote:
Dicks or chicks…what’s it going to be? Can’t have it both ways if people are changing their “orientation”.

Not having it both ways, idiot. What I said was that the large majority of people have a fixed orientation. A relatively small percentage of people are bisexual and can be happy with either gender.[/quote]

And the stats seem to prove you wrong as many “homosexual” men are in fact able to have sex with females. Are these men in reality “bisexual?” If not then how can they be attracted enough to a female in order to have sex?

THINK!

[quote]juninho wrote:
Anyway, the stats you used regarding gay men who’ve had heterosexual encounters is hardly proof of anything. Considering most people become sexually active in their early teens it would take a very bold person to immediately announce that they were gay. In fact it would take a very bold person even to admit this to themselves, and if you can’t see why then really there is no point in continuing with this debate.[/quote]

Exactly. As concluded by the National Association of Social Workers:

[quote]Social stigmatization of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people is widespread and is a primary motivating factor in leading some people to seek sexual orientation changes. Sexual orientation conversion therapies assume that homosexual orientation is both pathological and freely chosen. No data demonstrate that reparative or conversion therapies are effective, and in fact they may be harmful.

NASW believes social workers have the responsibility to clients to explain the prevailing knowledge concerning sexual orientation and the lack of data reporting positive outcomes with reparative therapy. NASW discourages social workers from providing treatments designed to change sexual orientation or from referring practitioners or programs that claim to do so. [/quote]

After reviewing the scientific evidence, they noted:

Also, as found by the American Psychological Association:

[quote]Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?
No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.

Can Therapy Change Sexual Orientation?
No. Even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual orientation through therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable. [/quote]

Similarly, based on scientific evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics concluded:

The fundamentalist bigots in this thread have no answer to the above facts. They bury their heads in the sand and pretend these scientific and mental health organizations don’t know what they are talking about.

They point to organizations like Exodus, which as I showed earlier, are filled with men who claim they have “changed” only to end up sleeping with one another.

They also fail to understand that even if a small number of bisexual males do “change” from liking men to liking women, that means nothing for people that are truly homosexual.

The statistics reviewed by the above organizations, and the scientific conclusions drawn based on those statistics, clearly show that for the large majority of people, changing one’s sexual orientation is not possible, and attempting to do so can in fact be damaging.

[quote]forlife wrote:
1-packlondoner wrote:
Anyway, with all you lot bickering I have actually gone away and found a cure for all that horrid gayness and gaynicity. I’ve even been nice enough to post the cure several times.

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1131245&pageNo=0#1132353

For a moment there I thought it might be working, but then I noticed the foot of the sexy guy next to her and all was lost.[/quote]

Ha ha… Nearly pissed myself laughing then. Good call.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
juninho wrote:
Considering most people become sexually active in their early teens it would take a very bold person to immediately announce that they were gay. In fact it would take a very bold person even to admit this to themselves, and if you can’t see why then really there is no point in continuing with this debate.

I think you make some good points regarding the above. However, you have missed my point. If someone is truly a “homosexual” male how are they physically able to have sex with a female?

Look at it this way…

how many truly heterosexual males are “able” to have sex with another male? Not many?..Hardly any?

And if you can have sex with both genders isn’t that called “bisexual?”

And if many of the so called “homosexuals” are indeed “bisexual” (able to have sex with either gender) then why is it so difficult to believe that many (with the proper therapy) could become “heterosexual.”

Something to think about for the truly open minded.

[/quote]

re the heterosexual men willing to engage in homosexual activity, I would again suggest that peer pressure makes this an unequal comparison.

I would also look at anecdotal evidence of straight men who turn ‘nick-bent’ when faced with a stretch in prison. I admit this is a bit of a weak comparison, but again something for the truely open minded to also think about…

I think its hilarious that non-gay people here are lecturing gay people on what it is to be gay.

Also, many gay guys I know had their first sexual experiences with a woman. Doesn’t mean they are straight.

Likewise I know some straight guys that have had one or two sexual experiences with guys in their youth. Doesn’t make them gay - they just didn’t know what they wanted.

Seems that for a bunch of straight guys on this thread some people (naming no names) are thinking far too much about the mehanics of gay sex…And then going ‘ewww you sickos’ once they’ve pondered it for say 10-15mins.

C’mon… Start a ‘out of the closet’ thread and we’ll salute you all. lol

[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
I think its hilarious that non-gay people here are lecturing gay people on what it is to be gay.

Also, many gay guys I know had their first sexual experiences with a woman. Doesn’t mean they are straight.

Likewise I know some straight guys that have had one or two sexual experiences with guys in their youth. Doesn’t make them gay - they just didn’t know what they wanted.

Seems that for a bunch of straight guys on this thread some people (naming no names) are thinking far too much about the mehanics of gay sex…And then going ‘ewww you sickos’ once they’ve pondered it for say 10-15mins.

C’mon… Start a ‘out of the closet’ thread and we’ll salute you all. lol[/quote]

I got called Gay by some right wing redkeck off here. I think the required response was I send him a PM and he comes out the cupboard.

[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
I think its hilarious that non-gay people here are lecturing gay people on what it is to be gay.

Also, many gay guys I know had their first sexual experiences with a woman. Doesn’t mean they are straight.

Likewise I know some straight guys that have had one or two sexual experiences with guys in their youth. Doesn’t make them gay - they just didn’t know what they wanted.

Seems that for a bunch of straight guys on this thread some people (naming no names) are thinking far too much about the mehanics of gay sex…And then going ‘ewww you sickos’ once they’ve pondered it for say 10-15mins.

C’mon… Start a ‘out of the closet’ thread and we’ll salute you all. lol[/quote]

agreed… I also find it pretty amusing the amount of homophobia to be found on a site which is dedicated mostly to the aesthetics of the male physique. Whenever my Mrs see’s me on this site she’ll invariably make some remark about this. Methinks some people doth protest too much…

[quote]forlife wrote:
They point to organizations like Exodus, which as I showed earlier, are filled with men who claim they have “changed” only to end up sleeping with one another.[/quote]

What a brash statement to make. And actually a very ignorant and bigoted one!

How can you sit there and make a claim that their ranks "are filled with men who “claim they have “changed” only to end up sleeping with one another?”

Wow forlife, you crossed the line that time.

Do you know for a fact that they HAVE NOT changed?

Of course not!

You just want to play this little gay game of yours. Since YOU tried to change and apparently faild then everyone else failed as well.

Honestly that sounds more bigoted than anything that any who oppose gay marriage have stated.

You should be ashamed (if you have any shame left) for such a statement.

You all seem more enlightened over there in the mother country. Maybe we could set up a meeting for you to educate the homophobic rednecks and bible bashers here in the U.S. You might even help a few of the louder ones come out of the closet in the process!

[quote]juninho wrote:
ZEB wrote:
juninho wrote:
Considering most people become sexually active in their early teens it would take a very bold person to immediately announce that they were gay. In fact it would take a very bold person even to admit this to themselves, and if you can’t see why then really there is no point in continuing with this debate.

I think you make some good points regarding the above. However, you have missed my point. If someone is truly a “homosexual” male how are they physically able to have sex with a female?

Look at it this way…

how many truly heterosexual males are “able” to have sex with another male? Not many?..Hardly any?

And if you can have sex with both genders isn’t that called “bisexual?”

And if many of the so called “homosexuals” are indeed “bisexual” (able to have sex with either gender) then why is it so difficult to believe that many (with the proper therapy) could become “heterosexual.”

Something to think about for the truly open minded.

re the heterosexual men willing to engage in homosexual activity, I would again suggest that peer pressure makes this an unequal comparison.[/quote]

Assuming you are a heterosexual male, how much peer pressure do you think it would take for you to actually be able to have sex with another man?

See my point?

These guys are getting aroused and having sex with females.

I think that’s odd if they are tuly “homosexual.”

This is not really a fair comparison as you have suggested.

The overwhelming majority of homosexual men are or have had sex with females…without being in prison with them!

I wonder how many of the “homosexuals” are in reality “bisexual?” And while they may very well “prefer” men to women they are certainly attracted to women as well.

Again, something to think about if we are really going to have a discussion about this.

[quote]forlife wrote:
terribleivan wrote:
Dicks or chicks…what’s it going to be? Can’t have it both ways if people are changing their “orientation”.

Not having it both ways, idiot. What I said was that the large majority of people have a fixed orientation. A relatively small percentage of people are bisexual and can be happy with either gender.[/quote]

That’s a bullshit statement and you know it. You are attempting to prove a point that cannot be proven or disproven, so it has absolutely no relevence. If I am wrong, provide me the genetic proof. And don’t give me the organizations that have fallen prey to your garbage - give me genetic proof from the human anatomy (search long and hard…genetic proof doesn’t exist).

Whoops, I should have never said long and hard to you…

Terms all the new participants need to know in this thread:

Logic - The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning.

Gaylogic - twisting and contorting facts to support the conclusion that homosexuality is natural and normal.

Let the gaylogic flow!

[quote]ZEB wrote:
juninho wrote:
ZEB wrote:
juninho wrote:
Considering most people become sexually active in their early teens it would take a very bold person to immediately announce that they were gay. In fact it would take a very bold person even to admit this to themselves, and if you can’t see why then really there is no point in continuing with this debate.

I think you make some good points regarding the above. However, you have missed my point. If someone is truly a “homosexual” male how are they physically able to have sex with a female?

Look at it this way…

how many truly heterosexual males are “able” to have sex with another male? Not many?..Hardly any?

And if you can have sex with both genders isn’t that called “bisexual?”

And if many of the so called “homosexuals” are indeed “bisexual” (able to have sex with either gender) then why is it so difficult to believe that many (with the proper therapy) could become “heterosexual.”

Something to think about for the truly open minded.

re the heterosexual men willing to engage in homosexual activity, I would again suggest that peer pressure makes this an unequal comparison.

Assuming you are a heterosexual male, how much peer pressure do you think it would take for you to actually be able to have sex with another man?

See my point?

These guys are getting aroused and having sex with females.

I think that’s odd if they are tuly “homosexual.”

I would also look at anecdotal evidence of straight men who turn ‘nick-bent’ when faced with a stretch in prison. I admit this is a bit of a weak comparison, but again something for the truely open minded to also think about…

This is not really a fair comparison as you have suggested.

The overwhelming majority of homosexual men are or have had sex with females…without being in prison with them!

I wonder how many of the “homosexuals” are in reality “bisexual?” And while they may very well “prefer” men to women they are certainly attracted to women as well.

Again, something to think about if we are really going to have a discussion about this.

[/quote]

How much of a discussion can we really have? Haven’t we tried that?

Here we have individuals that are so caught up in their own beliefs that facts mean nothing to them. Instead, they would rather bash religion and call everyone who doens’t agree with them a homophobe. I’m just glad we live in a country where the vast majority of Americans are confident enough to withstand the assualt.

[quote]terribleivan wrote:
You are attempting to prove a point that cannot be proven or disproven, so it has absolutely no relevence.[/quote]

Actually, I’m simply sharing with you the scientific conclusions of EVERY MAJOR MEDICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION IN THE WORLD.

To which, you have absolutely no response except the limp statement that “all of them must be biased!”

Lol.

Will you actually read it this time?

In 1990, researchers at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada examined the occurrence of left-handedness in heterosexual and homosexual women. Brain organization in left-handed people is known to be slightly different than in right-handed people. For example, left-handed people tend to have their language area centered in the right hemisphere of their brain; it is generally accepted that the area for language is in the left hemisphere. Even though only thirty-five percent of the general population is totally left-handed, the scientists found that sixty-nine percent of homosexual women were totally left-handed . As a result, they suggested that homosexuals have a different brain organization than heterosexuals. Referring to studies in which women with higher than normal levels of masculinizing hormones such as testosterone were more likely to be left-handed and gay, they hypothesized that atypical sex hormone levels during pregnancy may have affected lesbians? early fetal development.

In 1994, Hall and Kimura studied the fingerprint ridges heterosexuals and homosexuals. After the sixteenth week of pregnancy, fingerprints are known to be unchangeable, so if there were any significant fingerprint differences in the two groups, one could argue that sexual orientation may be determined before birth. In fact, Hall and Kimura did find that the difference between the number of ridges on the left hands of homosexual men was greater than that of heterosexuals. Citing that individuals with higher left-hand ridge counts perform differently on sexually dimorphic cognitive tasks than do those with higher right-hand ridge counts, the researchers concluded that there must be an ?early biological contribution to adult sexual orientation?.

Twin studies

In 1991, Bailey and Pillard studied three all male groups: identical twins, fraternal twins, and men with adoptive brothers.Of the 170 relatives examined, 52% of the identical twins were both gay, 22% of fraternal twins were both gay, and 11% of the adoptive brothers were both gay.

In 1992, Bailey and Pillard followed-up their experiment on homosexual men by studying identical twin, fraternal twin, and nongenetically related adopted sisters. As expected, their results mirrored those found in their gay brother study. Whereas only six percent of adopted sisters were both lesbian, sixteen percent of fraternal twin sisters and forty-eight percent of identical twin sisters were both lesbian . Clearly, the basis for a similar argument for predetermined homosexuality in women has been laid.

In 1993, Whitam, Diamond, & Martin found that 65% of identical twins were both gay, whereas only 29% of fraternal twins were gay.

Genetic differences
In 2004, Camperio-Ciani studied 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men and their relatives, which included more than 4,600 people overall. The female relatives on the mother’s side of the homosexual men tended to have more offspring than the female relatives on the father’s side. This suggests that women who pass on the gay trait to their male offspring are also more fertile. In comparison, the female relatives on both the mother’s and the father’s side of the heterosexual men did not appear to be as fertile, having fewer offspring.
In 2006, research published in the journal ?Human Genetics? found that the genetics of mothers of multiple gay sons act differently than those of other women. Scientists looked at 97 mothers of gay sons and 103 mothers without gay sons to see if there was any difference in how they handled their X chromosomes. They found that almost one fourth of the mothers who had more than one gay son processed X chromosomes in their bodies in the same way. Normally, women randomly process the chromosomes in one of two ways – half go one way, half go the other. The research “confirms that there is a strong genetic basis for sexual orientation, and that for some gay men, genes on the X chromosome are involved,” said study co-author Sven Bocklandt, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of California at Los Angeles. “When we looked at women who have gay kids, in those with more than one gay son, we saw a quarter of them inactivate the same X in virtually every cell we checked,” Bocklandt said. “That’s extremely unusual.”

[quote]forlife wrote:
You all seem more enlightened over there in the mother country. Maybe we could set up a meeting for you to educate the homophobic rednecks and bible bashers here in the U.S. You might even help a few of the louder ones come out of the closet in the process![/quote]

lol

My personal take is that I couldn’t care less if you fuck sheep as long as the sheep gets a reacharound.

When it comes to matters of what gets you off I really don’t care about anyone else other than what get’s ME, okay and if I’m feeling saucy, my lady du jour (more often lady du nuit!) going.

But people getting angry over two consenting people doing whatever they want, WTF?

As for all this ‘how would you be able to have sex with a man?’ or ‘how would you be aroused enough to have sex with a woman’ rubbish.

People, I wake up with a hard-on when I dreamt about nothing. Then I get another one just from being on a bus.

I can be aroused just by thinking about being aroused. Wow, I hope that stays with me into my 40s and 50s…

As for more detail than that people, well if you PM some of the very friendly and helpful gay guys on this site about the mechanics of gay sex that seem to fascinate you so much I’m sure they could be persuaded to fill you in… Y’know… In private…

[quote]forlife wrote:
You all seem more enlightened over there in the mother country. Maybe we could set up a meeting for you to educate the homophobic rednecks and bible bashers here in the U.S. You might even help a few of the louder ones come out of the closet in the process![/quote]

More name calling from a supposedly “open minded” individual.

forlifes Biology lesson:

The anus is the inch-and-a-half-long end portion of the large intestine, which opens to allow solid wastes to exit the body. Other parts of the large intestine include the colon and the rectum.

CAUTION Do Not Insert Any Item Into The Anus! As this may cause serious consequences including but not limited to anal cancer.

"Homosexuals are at increased risk for this rare type of cancer, which is potentially fatal if the anal-rectal tumors metastasize to other bodily organs. Dr. Joel Palefsky, a leading expert in the field of anal cancer, reports that while the incidence of anal cancer in the United States is only 0.9/100,000, that number soars to 35/100,000 for homosexuals.

Matters not whether you wear a condom or not…IT’S DANGEROUS!

The anal sphincter muscle is not anatomically designed to comfortably admit external objects–it is designed to relax and stretch when stimulated internally by rectal fullness from stool. The automatic reflex is for it to contract and tighten when pressure is applied externally. The risks, even with gentle insertion, are laceration of the anal tissue, and rectal mucosa, resulting in pain, bleeding, and difficulty passing stool comfortably. And leaves the person open to infection.

ANAL SEX IS DANGEROUS AND ACCORDING TO THE CDC CANNOT BE MADE SAFE!

There is also increased risk of spreading gastrointestinal pathogens through anal contact–whether it is bacterial infections like salmonella or E. Coli, or parasitic infections like Giardia.

You see forlife, once you tear the very tender tissue in the rectum it leaves the person open to infection. Not necessarily from the intruders penis, but from the vitims own feces!

Wear all of the condoms you want and lubricate until the sun don’t shine. You still have major problems.

Oh and in addition to the above there is this:

“Aside from the traumatic and infectious risks, there is the risk of sphincter tone (tightness) loss over time due to repeated dilation for insertive intercourse. Many receptive partners experience stool incontinence (leaking of stool or poor control) when they have anal sphincter tone decrease. This, needless to say, is very bothersome and uncomfortable and has to be surgically corrected if it becomes chronic.”

That sounds like a really sloppy painful mess.

(Don’t you wish deep down that all that politically correct gay propaganda was actually true?)

Some people on this site a) never had anal sex witha lady and b) never watched a Rocco Sifredi film…

I think people would be amazed at what the anus is capable of… ha ha

[quote]1-packlondoner wrote:
Some people on this site a) never had anal sex witha lady and b) never watched a Rocco Sifredi film…

I think people would be amazed at what the anus is capable of… ha ha[/quote]

Some guys on this site have never had sex with anyone. Surely touching their own penis…a man’s GENITALS ! Makes them gay ?