[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.
So this leaves us with two options. Either, those guys are gay, or, sexuality is more complex than the confines that modern definitions try to squeeze it into.
So, you are saying that it is a choice then?[/quote]
Did you really mis-understand that so badly or are you playing around?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.
So this leaves us with two options. Either, those guys are gay, or, sexuality is more complex than the confines that modern definitions try to squeeze it into.
So, you are saying that it is a choice then?
Did you really mis-understand that so badly or are you playing around?[/quote]
A little of both. The question was a bit sarcastic as I knew that wasn?t his point. But I was making the point that his case supports the notion of choice.
ZEB was contending that homosexuality is a choice because homosexuals can go either way.
Cockney “contradicted” by saying at least some straight men could physically perform as a homosexual.
To me that makes the idea of sexuality as a choice more likely than the case ZEB presented, as there are people attracted to males that choose a heterosexual lifestyle.
ZEB?s argument of heterosexuality being bread in (heterosexuals can?t choose to be gay in his argument), while homosexual activity is a choice doesn?t hold water in my mind. If it truly is a choice there would have to be bisexuals on both side of the fence. People with a choice would never statistically all choose the same side.
Not saying I agree, just trying to logically determine the merits of cockney?s information.
I would like to think that DD is joshing, but who knows.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.[/quote]
Oh I’m aware that the topic has been discussed. What I’m not aware of (and no one else is either as far as I know) is who did this study, how big was it, who sponsored it, when was it done and several other questions regarding this suspect information.
If you’d care to post the specifics that would nice.
At this point I don’t think there are any heterosexuals that are buying into that nonsense it at this point.
Oh god forbid kids don’t have to be in orphanages! My, the hardships that should come on kids that would actually get to celebrate their birthdays for once! Or maybe even get the chance to play little league sports? I guess you’re right, it would suck to be adopted from an orphanage by a loving couple who have had extensive background checks performed…
[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Now how many straight males can become aroused with another man? Oh yea, NONE.
Then explain how most Greek men were able to practice pederasty, per the quote provided.[/quote]
Most Greeks did not practice pedophilia. This sickening practice was performed by some of the elite. Also, as stated previously it was looked down upon (as was homosexuality) by the majority of Greeks, not unlike the view of the majority of Americans.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Most Greeks did not practice pedophilia. This sickening practice was performed by some of the elite. Also, as stated previously it was looked down upon (as was homosexuality) by the majority of Greeks, not unlike the view of the majority of Americans.[/quote]
So you’re saying the Wikipedia source is wrong when it says most Greek men had same sex relationships? On the basis that you personally find it disgusting, and couldn’t possibly conceive of any other straight male engaging in it, despite the cultural norms at the time?
Even if you’re right about pederasty only being practiced by “the elite”, are you claiming that all of the “elite” were gay, and that no true heterosexuals were in their ranks?
Because a single case of a heterosexual man having sex with another male blows your argument out of the water.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.
Oh I’m aware that the topic has been discussed. What I’m not aware of (and no one else is either as far as I know) is who did this study, how big was it, who sponsored it, when was it done and several other questions regarding this suspect information.
If you’d care to post the specifics that would nice.
At this point I don’t think there are any heterosexuals that are buying into that nonsense it at this point.
[/quote]
As I said before, feel free to do the google search. I will certainly not be carrying out that search from work.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.
So this leaves us with two options. Either, those guys are gay, or, sexuality is more complex than the confines that modern definitions try to squeeze it into.
So, you are saying that it is a choice then?
Did you really mis-understand that so badly or are you playing around?
A little of both. The question was a bit sarcastic as I knew that wasn?t his point. But I was making the point that his case supports the notion of choice.
ZEB was contending that homosexuality is a choice because homosexuals can go either way.
Cockney “contradicted” by saying at least some straight men could physically perform as a homosexual.
To me that makes the idea of sexuality as a choice more likely than the case ZEB presented, as there are people attracted to males that choose a heterosexual lifestyle.
ZEB?s argument of heterosexuality being bread in (heterosexuals can?t choose to be gay in his argument), while homosexual activity is a choice doesn?t hold water in my mind. If it truly is a choice there would have to be bisexuals on both side of the fence. People with a choice would never statistically all choose the same side.
Not saying I agree, just trying to logically determine the merits of cockney?s information.
[/quote]
Actually I don’t think I ever said it wasn’t a choice. In part it is a choice. In part it appears to be genetic.
However it certainly isn’t a binary gay/straight thing as Zeb seems to think.
It is also worth noting that someone could be physically turned on but mentally disgusted.
Women appear to get physically aroused during rapes. Doesn’t mean they are enjoying it, just that their body is designed to try and prevent itself from getting injured during a rape (which from an evolutionary point of view makes a lot of sense.)
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.
Oh I’m aware that the topic has been discussed. What I’m not aware of (and no one else is either as far as I know) is who did this study, how big was it, who sponsored it, when was it done and several other questions regarding this suspect information.
If you’d care to post the specifics that would nice.
At this point I don’t think there are any heterosexuals that are buying into that nonsense it at this point.
It isn’t nonsense. In fact I believe it has been
As I said before, feel free to do the google search. I will certainly not be carrying out that search from work.[/quote]
I searched through google and only found studies that prove that gay men are physically attracted to men and straight men are physically attracted to women (and little to no overlap)
Adams, H.E., Wright, R.W. & Lohr, B.A. (1996). “Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, no. 3, pp. 440?445.
[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Most Greeks did not practice pedophilia. This sickening practice was performed by some of the elite. Also, as stated previously it was looked down upon (as was homosexuality) by the majority of Greeks, not unlike the view of the majority of Americans.
So you’re saying the Wikipedia source is wrong when it says most Greek men had same sex relationships? On the basis that you personally find it disgusting, and couldn’t possibly conceive of any other straight male engaging in it, despite the cultural norms at the time? [/quote]
What my above post clearly states is that “most Greeks did not practice pedophilia.” However, as long as you brought it up far more reliable sources than Wikipedia state that most Greeks did not practice homosexuality. Is this the part of the Internet debate where we each post multiple web sites backing our assertions? If it is I’m ready.
Are you stating that child molesters are in fact homosexuals? Why don’t you tighten up that statement for all of us.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.
Oh I’m aware that the topic has been discussed. What I’m not aware of (and no one else is either as far as I know) is who did this study, how big was it, who sponsored it, when was it done and several other questions regarding this suspect information.
If you’d care to post the specifics that would nice.
At this point I don’t think there are any heterosexuals that are buying into that nonsense it at this point.
As I said before, feel free to do the google search. I will certainly not be carrying out that search from work.[/quote]
I can’t blame you for not wanting to research any of that information from work. So let’s just pretend that you never made such an outlandish and obviously wrong statement to begin with.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Adams, H.E., Wright, R.W. & Lohr, B.A. (1996). “Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, no. 3, pp. 440?445.
The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
[/quote]
The above is called “The Henry Adams Study”. Adams questionable background and reason to launch such a study should first be questioned. There is obviosuly a built in bias which makes the study worthless. But it is also worthless for other reasons.
The “study” included 35 so called “homophobic” men. Funny, no where can anyone find the criteria for calling someone “homophobic”. Anyway, even when you read about real studies which can actually be duplicated (they could never duplicate the Adams study) there is always a caveat, “further research needs to be done”.
You see, when it comes to the homosexual movement any sort of “study” will do if it might cast a bad light on any group that opposes homosexual marriage etc. And if there are no studies dog gone it, they’ll make one up. Let’s haul out that Adams thing and show how all those “real men” are actually homosexual. Yes, it makes perfect sense those who find homosexuality repulsive are in fact attracted to the act of homosexuality. In other words, when you hate something, you actually love it. Makes total sense to me how about you?
Anyway, there are others who have brought this bogus study into question for other reasons.
Ever see a penis machine?
The device that they used to read mens arousal is highly questionable. They strap something called a “plethysmograph” to a mans penis. Ouch. The device (by most accounts) is unreliable, some call it quack science at its best.
the majority do not feel that plethysmography has any usefulness as a diagnostic tool or as a reliable predictor.
Plethysmograph: a disputed device – Transgender Map
Contrary to the laughable “Adams Study” to date there is not one shred of respectable science that proves men who find homosexuality disgusting are in fact attracted to homosexuality.
What a very stupid premise. But one that would serve its purpose of silencing any who may be outspoken advocates for traditional marriage.
As I’ve stated many times the powerful gay lobby will stop at nothing to push their agenda and to silence those who oppose them. The “Adams Study” is one more tool in their bag of deceptive tricks.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
However, as long as you brought it up far more reliable sources than Wikipedia state that most Greeks did not practice homosexuality.[/quote]
You don’t even have to prove that the majority of Greeks didn’t practice pederasty. Show me a single “reliable source” proving that not even one straight Greek male ever had sex with another male. Because it only takes one example to invalidate your personal theory about how straight men would find it impossible to have sex with another man.
How about answering the question instead of dodging it as usual?
You’ve admitted that at least the “elite Greeks” practiced pederasty. Do you seriously want us to believe that every single “elite Greek” was in fact gay or bisexual? That none of them, not a single one, was straight?
[quote]forlife wrote:
Adams, H.E., Wright, R.W. & Lohr, B.A. (1996). “Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, no. 3, pp. 440?445.
The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.[/quote]
So, if you find yourself labeled as a homophobe, in order to avoid being labeled a self-loathing homosexual, be violent.
For the record, I score about a 92 on the Homophobia test (>100 phobic, <50 phyllic).
Aggression-wise:
Physical:27(45 maximum)-Slightly above average
Verbal:23(25 maximum)-Surprise!
Anger:16(35 maximum)-Slightly below average
Hostility:32(40 maximum)-Very above average
Overall:99(145 maximum)-Very above average
I wonder if there were any sort of real controls (can’t have many with such a small n) placed on the test subjects in the Adams study like age, hormone levels, relationship status, non-erotic sexually-oriented material, non-erotic non-oriented material, etc.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
forlife wrote:
Adams, H.E., Wright, R.W. & Lohr, B.A. (1996). “Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, no. 3, pp. 440?445.
The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
The above is called “The Henry Adams Study”. Adams questionable background and reason to launch such a study should first be questioned. There is obviosuly a built in bias which makes the study worthless. But it is also worthless for other reasons.
The “study” included 35 so called “homophobic” men. Funny, no where can anyone find the criteria for calling someone “homophobic”. Anyway, even when you read about real studies which can actually be duplicated (they could never duplicate the Adams study) there is always a caveat, “further research needs to be done”.
You see, when it comes to the homosexual movement any sort of “study” will do if it might cast a bad light on any group that opposes homosexual marriage etc. And if there are no studies dog gone it, they’ll make one up. Let’s haul out that Adams thing and show how all those “real men” are actually homosexual. Yes, it makes perfect sense those who find homosexuality repulsive are in fact attracted to the act of homosexuality. In other words, when you hate something, you actually love it. Makes total sense to me how about you?
Anyway, there are others who have brought this bogus study into question for other reasons.
Ever see a penis machine?
The device that they used to read mens arousal is highly questionable. They strap something called a “plethysmograph” to a mans penis. Ouch. The device (by most accounts) is unreliable, some call it quack science at its best.
the majority do not feel that plethysmography has any usefulness as a diagnostic tool or as a reliable predictor.
Plethysmograph: a disputed device – Transgender Map
Contrary to the laughable “Adams Study” to date there is not one shred of respectable science that proves men who find homosexuality disgusting are in fact attracted to homosexuality.
What a very stupid premise. But one that would serve its purpose of silencing any who may be outspoken advocates for traditional marriage.
As I’ve stated many times the powerful gay lobby will stop at nothing to push their agenda and to silence those who oppose them. The “Adams Study” is one more tool in their bag of deceptive tricks.
[/quote]
You have missed the point from my posts. I was not saying that the premise of the study was correct. I was pointing out that there is evidence that some people can get sufficiently aroused to perform sexually with a gender to which they would not claim to be attracted.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
ZEB wrote:
forlife wrote:
Adams, H.E., Wright, R.W. & Lohr, B.A. (1996). “Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, no. 3, pp. 440?445.
The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
The above is called “The Henry Adams Study”. Adams questionable background and reason to launch such a study should first be questioned. There is obviosuly a built in bias which makes the study worthless. But it is also worthless for other reasons.
The “study” included 35 so called “homophobic” men. Funny, no where can anyone find the criteria for calling someone “homophobic”. Anyway, even when you read about real studies which can actually be duplicated (they could never duplicate the Adams study) there is always a caveat, “further research needs to be done”.
You see, when it comes to the homosexual movement any sort of “study” will do if it might cast a bad light on any group that opposes homosexual marriage etc. And if there are no studies dog gone it, they’ll make one up. Let’s haul out that Adams thing and show how all those “real men” are actually homosexual. Yes, it makes perfect sense those who find homosexuality repulsive are in fact attracted to the act of homosexuality. In other words, when you hate something, you actually love it. Makes total sense to me how about you?
Anyway, there are others who have brought this bogus study into question for other reasons.
Ever see a penis machine?
The device that they used to read mens arousal is highly questionable. They strap something called a “plethysmograph” to a mans penis. Ouch. The device (by most accounts) is unreliable, some call it quack science at its best.
the majority do not feel that plethysmography has any usefulness as a diagnostic tool or as a reliable predictor.
Plethysmograph: a disputed device – Transgender Map
Contrary to the laughable “Adams Study” to date there is not one shred of respectable science that proves men who find homosexuality disgusting are in fact attracted to homosexuality.
What a very stupid premise. But one that would serve its purpose of silencing any who may be outspoken advocates for traditional marriage.
As I’ve stated many times the powerful gay lobby will stop at nothing to push their agenda and to silence those who oppose them. The “Adams Study” is one more tool in their bag of deceptive tricks.
You have missed the point from my posts. I was not saying that the premise of the study was correct. I was pointing out that there is evidence that some people can get sufficiently aroused to perform sexually with a gender to which they would not claim to be attracted.[/quote]
I don’t think I missed the point.
This is what you posted:
[quote]see zeb the problem is, as we have already discussed, that a proportion of ostensibly straight men do in fact become sexually aroused when they see gay porn.
So this leaves us with two options. Either, those guys are gay, or, sexuality is more complex than the confines that modern definitions try to squeeze it into.[/quote]
From the above one can only derive that you actually placed credence in that ridiculous study. You drew a false conclusion from that study that straight men are aroused by male/male porn. As I pointed out that tiny study has far too many flaws to even be quoted. In addition to that it has NEVER been duplicated.
Really, all of this nonsense about heterosexual men being able to have sex with other men is nothing but a smokescreen. It’s homosexual men (over 85%) who actually have sex regularly with either gender that is under reported. I would think that others (not just me) would find that quite odd. I’d like to spend some time discussing how this is possible given the fact that they claim to be homosexual and not bisexual.
Zeb, you freely admit that there are some men who identify themselves to be gay who are able to get aroused by either men or women.
Would it not make sense that there are some men who identify themselves as straight who are able to get aroused by either men or women?
That is all that I am saying. A study (how ever badly designed) seems to back up this fact, you have straigh men getting a boner watching gay porn. Doesn’t mean they are gay, just means that sexuality is pretty complex.
Christ, truck drivers have problems with priapism due to the vibrations in the truck cab giving them a boner. Doesn’t mean they are sexually attracted to truck seats.