Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Don't ask, don't tell, don't persueFollow

#2102 Jan 11 2012 at 7:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,171 posts
Religion and the afterlife becomes so much more fun when you toss reincarnation into the equation.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#2103 Jan 11 2012 at 7:23 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Kelvyquayo wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Created sick and commanded to be well. Makes sense to me.



It is the point of sentience and free-will..
Trees and quasars were created without those things. In your context "sick" merely means we think for ourselves but that is what separates us FROM trees and quasars.
We have a choice to GET well: getting well in our case mean eternal perfection... everything else in the universe has no choice of that and will burn away without emotion. That is why(and how) we more than just animals, vegetables, and minerals.


So then I said; I never want to catch you sniffing there AGAIN, MOM!!



No we don't. We have the choice to ignore those things and submit. Kind of defeats the whole purpose of free will if you're supposed to throw it away to be seen as "well".

____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2104 Jan 19 2012 at 8:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,913 posts
Quote:
Abstract

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 **** 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.


More liek hetero man gets aroused at homosexual stuff and feels icky, and ickyness leads to anger, and anger leads to hate, amirite, Amalieque?
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2105 Jan 22 2012 at 12:49 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
Quote:
Abstract

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 **** 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.


More liek hetero man gets aroused at homosexual stuff and feels icky, and ickyness leads to anger, and anger leads to hate, amirite, Amalieque?


Hetero men don't get aroused at homosexual men stuff... that would probably put you in the **** category.. try again. Actually, don't try again, drink Clorox.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2106 Jan 22 2012 at 1:03 AM Rating: Excellent
Alma wrote:
Hetero men don't get aroused at homosexual men stuff... that would probably put you in the **** category.. try again. Actually, don't try again, drink Clorox.


That's not the point, **** The point is that homphobes are aroused by **** porn & they're either unaware that it turns them on or are denying it.

Which explains post 206 completely.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the **** out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#2107 Jan 22 2012 at 1:36 AM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Also: Being turned on by a sexual scene, no matter who the participants, is not necessarily indicative of sexual preference.

Someone who thinks it is... well. That says a lot about that person, I suppose.
#2108 Jan 22 2012 at 7:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,281 posts
Belkira wrote:
Also: Being turned on by a sexual scene, no matter who the participants, is not necessarily indicative of sexual preference.

Someone who thinks it is... well. That says a lot about that person, I suppose.

Virgins get a lot of things wrong about sex.
#2109Almalieque, Posted: Jan 22 2012 at 8:15 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Give me a scenario when it wouldn't be an indication.
#2110 Jan 22 2012 at 8:18 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,369 posts
Autophobia.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2111 Jan 22 2012 at 9:44 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,460 posts
You can't be a homophobe and practice homosexuality.? Why not?

____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR **** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS **** SHITTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#2112 Jan 22 2012 at 11:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Alma wrote:
You can't be a homophobe and practice homosexuality.


Sure you can, you just deny it's gay. Like all those dudes that do **** stuff on the downlow, like how prisoners raping other prisoners don't see themselves as gay, like how preachers get blowjobs from **** prostitutes...& the list goes on. The outlet for the shame they feel for those acts is their outward homophobia.

Alma wrote:
The "homophobe" must be a heterosexual, which means he can't be attracted without being gay.


Actually, the study seemed to imply that only the heterosexuals were conclusively not gay, and only homophobes were actually turned on by homosexual behavior. Does getting turned on by **** dudes doing it make you gay? Maybe, I guess it all depends on how turned on.

Guilt about being turned on by the same **** seems to be the leading cause of homophobia!
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the **** out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#2113 Jan 22 2012 at 12:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
rdmcandie wrote:
You can't be a homophobe and practice homosexuality.? Why not?

Don't tell the Republicans this.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2114 Jan 22 2012 at 12:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,913 posts
Belkira wrote:
Also: Being turned on by a sexual scene, no matter who the participants, is not necessarily indicative of sexual preference.

Someone who thinks it is... well. That says a lot about that person, I suppose.
This reminds me of a Youtube vid I saw of a twelve year-old girl doing a "harem" dance. The choreography was extremely complex. Her footwork intricate. Her varied arm movements very graceful and all her movements were hitting the beat of the music precisely. She was doing the requisite belly rolls and hip shimmying of the usual remarkable muscular control, but they certainly didn't feature above the leg and arm work. The choreography looked very traditional and tribal as opposed to sexual. Lots of hand gestures up in the air, and out to the side. She'd obviously had dance lessons for a long time. She wore a bright happy smile, and had bright, happy eyes. Her hair was loose down her back. If she was wearing make-up, it wasn't obvious.

She wore a gorgeous costume in shades of pale green. The Harem pants were opaque, extremely voluminous, completely hid her legs, were heavily beaded around the hips, and high riding. Her bodice, while cut in a traditional, "adult" shape, was so heavily beaded it completely covered her torso half way up to her neck, and almost all the way down to the top of her pants. None of her dance movements flashed more bare skin.

And yet, in between the comments complementing the girl for such technically brilliant and happy dancing, the comments section was full of diatribes against her mother for dressing her like a whore.

Edited, Jan 22nd 2012 1:41pm by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2115 Jan 22 2012 at 1:01 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,369 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
Youtube vid [...] the comments section
Diagnosed the problem.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2116 Jan 22 2012 at 2:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Also: Being turned on by a sexual scene, no matter who the participants, is not necessarily indicative of sexual preference.

Someone who thinks it is... well. That says a lot about that person, I suppose.


Give me a scenario when it wouldn't be an indication.


Every scenario where a completely heterosexual person is turned on by the image of a same-sex couple in a sexual encounter...?
#2117Almalieque, Posted: Jan 24 2012 at 6:12 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) A man being aroused by watching two men having sexual encounters is not heterosexual. If he says he is, then he is in denial. He's Bi-curious at a minimum.
#2118 Jan 24 2012 at 7:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Alma wrote:
A man being aroused by watching two men having sexual encounters is not heterosexual


Again, I counter with "how aroused?"

Quarter mast: Inconclusive. Penises sometimes have a mind of their own.
Half mast: 50-50. "Glass is half full" gay.
Full Mast: odds are they're at least kind of into it.
full mast + rubbing: the homophobic **** of shame
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the **** out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#2119 Jan 24 2012 at 9:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Almalieque wrote:
If he says he is, then he is in denial.

And therein lies the root of all homophobia. Welcome to the point.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2120 Jan 24 2012 at 11:06 AM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If he says he is, then he is in denial.

And therein lies the root of all homophobia. Welcome to the point.
Self-loathing isn't in his GRE flash cards because it's sort of like two words
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#2121 Jan 24 2012 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Are you saying that you don't see anything wrong with a grown man getting off on his child **** collection because that necessarily isn't an indication that he's into little children? Really?


You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
#2122 Jan 24 2012 at 2:23 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,369 posts
Figured that out on page one.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2123 Jan 25 2012 at 12:49 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Are you saying that you don't see anything wrong with a grown man getting off on his child **** collection because that necessarily isn't an indication that he's into little children? Really?


You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?


I guess you're not going to answer that question. It's ok if you don't see a problem with grown men getting off on kiddie **** because it's not the children, it's the act. Whatever.. that's absurd and you know it.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2124 Jan 25 2012 at 1:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Are you saying that you don't see anything wrong with a grown man getting off on his child **** collection because that necessarily isn't an indication that he's into little children? Really?


You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?


I guess you're not going to answer that question. It's ok if you don't see a problem with grown men getting off on kiddie **** because it's not the children, it's the act. Whatever.. that's absurd and you know it.


Get back to me when you understand what it is about "kiddie porn" that turns adults on. Until then, you might want to keep your mouth shut, as you have no idea what you're talking about.
#2125 Jan 25 2012 at 3:32 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If he says he is, then he is in denial.

And therein lies the root of all homophobia. Welcome to the point.


That makes no sense. There is no correlation with hatred and/or fear of something and actually being that something. According to your theory, all Klansmen hate minorities because they are indeed the said minorities that they hate.

It is highly possible to just hate or fear something out pure ignorance and that probability is much higher than the probability of someone hating or fearing something because of who they are..
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2126 Jan 25 2012 at 3:38 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Are you saying that you don't see anything wrong with a grown man getting off on his child **** collection because that necessarily isn't an indication that he's into little children? Really?


You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?


I guess you're not going to answer that question. It's ok if you don't see a problem with grown men getting off on kiddie **** because it's not the children, it's the act. Whatever.. that's absurd and you know it.


Get back to me when you understand what it is about "kiddie porn" that turns adults on. Until then, you might want to keep your mouth shut, as you have no idea what you're talking about.


If you don't want to answer the question, then fine, but stop trying to accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about.

You said the following
Belkira wrote:
Also: Being turned on by a sexual scene, no matter who the participants, is not necessarily indicative of sexual preference.


So I asked a simple question. Do you or do you not see anything wrong with grown men getting off on kiddie pr0n? According to your theory, you shouldn't because they are aroused of the activity, not necessarily the people involved.

So, if you support watching kiddie **** (not the creation of), just say so, else retract your statement.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2127 Jan 25 2012 at 4:26 AM Rating: Excellent
We're bending over backwards to tell you that we don't think a slight change in penile arousal is neccisarily a definitive indicator of sexual preferance: whether it's gay/straight/bi/cp/beastiality...etc.

What IS in indicator, is what you DO with that arousal. I maintain that if you jerk off to it, you're into it.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the **** out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#2128 Jan 25 2012 at 5:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,913 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If he says he is, then he is in denial.

And therein lies the root of all homophobia. Welcome to the point.


That makes no sense. There is no correlation with hatred and/or fear of something and actually being that something.
...aaaaaaaaaaaaand reading/reading comprehension fail again. Or simply non-belief in the scientific process.

Just remember, just because some x are y, that doesn't not automatically mean all x are y.

Edited, Jan 25th 2012 6:45am by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2129 Jan 25 2012 at 7:09 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
11,909 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Are you saying that you don't see anything wrong with a grown man getting off on his child **** collection because that necessarily isn't an indication that he's into little children? Really?


You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?


I guess you're not going to answer that question. It's ok if you don't see a problem with grown men getting off on kiddie **** because it's not the children, it's the act. Whatever.. that's absurd and you know it.


As long as they aren't hurting a child, I don't really care what they are getting off on. Some degree of monitoring, along with hitting distributors does have social good, however.
____________________________
"Observe what happens when you force a man to change"
Just as Planned.
#2130 Jan 25 2012 at 8:02 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If he says he is, then he is in denial.

And therein lies the root of all homophobia. Welcome to the point.


That makes no sense. There is no correlation with hatred and/or fear of something and actually being that something.
...aaaaaaaaaaaaand reading/reading comprehension fail again. Or simply non-belief in the scientific process.

Just remember, just because some x are y, that doesn't not automatically mean all x are y.

Edited, Jan 25th 2012 6:45am by Aripyanfar



Exactly, but when you respond with "some x are y" as a counter, you are implying that the probability of that happening is worth mentioning. In this case, it isn't, so it's silly to even bring it up.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2131 Jan 25 2012 at 9:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Unforkgettable
*****
13,201 posts
Well, this last page has been mighty entertaining.
____________________________
Banh
#2132 Jan 25 2012 at 10:00 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,369 posts
His autophobia isn't any more entertaining this page than any other page.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2133 Jan 25 2012 at 10:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Unforkgettable
*****
13,201 posts
I don't know, the whole "if you're a homophobe, that totally means you can't possibly be gay" argument was particularly amusing to me.
____________________________
Banh
#2134 Jan 25 2012 at 10:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Unforkgettable
*****
13,201 posts
Like if you don't want to be gay, all you have to do is hate them, and it'll cancel those urges right the **** out.
____________________________
Banh
#2135 Jan 25 2012 at 10:24 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,369 posts
Okay, him basically admitting it is a little more entertaining, so you're right.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2136 Jan 25 2012 at 10:52 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If he says he is, then he is in denial.

And therein lies the root of all homophobia. Welcome to the point.


That makes no sense. There is no correlation with hatred and/or fear of something and actually being that something. According to your theory, all Klansmen hate minorities because they are indeed the said minorities that they hate.

It is highly possible to just hate or fear something out pure ignorance and that probability is much higher than the probability of someone hating or fearing something because of who they are..

Not really the same thing. This is really basic psychology. Here, I'll hold your hand and give you some reading material. Here's the study.

The abstract wrote:
Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.



Yaaay, Science!

You'll find most racism comes from fear of inadequacy. You'll find racist people say things like "them **** for'ners. Comin' over here and TEKKIN' MAH JAWB! derpa derr!" or the like. Doesn't even have to be immigrants, a lot of racism stems from a fear of being marginalised, at least in whatever ethnic group happens to be in power of any given country.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2137Almalieque, Posted: Jan 25 2012 at 11:36 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) That is purely stupid and if you believe homophobia is based on denial, then you're implying that all problems with homosexuality are caused by homosexuals. Since you don't believe one can not support homosexual progress without being homophobic, then all homophobes are the cause. Since you're saying that all (or at least most) homophobes are secretly homosexuals in denial, then homosexuals are the reason why SSM isn't legal in all 50 states.
#2138 Jan 25 2012 at 11:47 AM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Are you saying that you don't see anything wrong with a grown man getting off on his child **** collection because that necessarily isn't an indication that he's into little children? Really?


You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?


I guess you're not going to answer that question. It's ok if you don't see a problem with grown men getting off on kiddie **** because it's not the children, it's the act. Whatever.. that's absurd and you know it.


Get back to me when you understand what it is about "kiddie porn" that turns adults on. Until then, you might want to keep your mouth shut, as you have no idea what you're talking about.


If you don't want to answer the question, then fine, but stop trying to accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about.

You said the following
Belkira wrote:
Also: Being turned on by a sexual scene, no matter who the participants, is not necessarily indicative of sexual preference.


So I asked a simple question. Do you or do you not see anything wrong with grown men getting off on kiddie pr0n? According to your theory, you shouldn't because they are aroused of the activity, not necessarily the people involved.

So, if you support watching kiddie **** (not the creation of), just say so, else retract your statement.


When did "watching X is not necessarily indicative of sexual orientation" turn into "watching and/or making kiddie **** is ok?" Your leaps in what you consider "logic" are astounding.

If you get off on watching kiddie porn, you're probably a pedophile. When you can understand that pedophilia isn't so much a "sexual preference" as it is a need to get off on overpowering another individual, then you'll get what I mean when I say you have no idea what you're talking about.

And to add to that: When we're specifically talking about someone being a homosexual because they get aroused watching **** porn, then that's what we're talking about. And you know that's what we're talking about. Normal people know how normal conversations go. You know that in this context we're talking about **** porn versus straight porn. We're not talking about donkey shows. We're not talking about illegal kiddie porn. This **** is what makes talking to you annoying as fuck.

And I am 110% sure that you don't pull this "I'm right at any cost, so I'll take the normal rules of conversation and twist them around until I can prove that I'm right" in conversations outside of the board.
#2139Almalieque, Posted: Jan 25 2012 at 12:03 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) If that's what you meant, then why did you say "no matter who the participants"? "No matter who the participants" isn't restrictive to your made up criteria and YOU KNOW THAT.
#2140 Jan 25 2012 at 12:27 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Almalieque wrote:
If that's what you meant, then why did you say "no matter who the participants"? "No matter who the participants" isn't restrictive to your made up criteria and YOU KNOW THAT.

You basically put your foot in your mouth and now are too stubborn to admit to being wrong.


No. I basically made two mistakes. One was talking to you at all. The other was assuming, once again, that you would follow the basic rules of a conversation. My bad.

ETA: Also, if you get off on watching rape porn, that doesn't mean you're a rapeasexual. It means you get off on watching another person get overpowered and hurt. That is not a sexual preference, you moron.

Edited, Jan 25th 2012 12:30pm by Belkira
#2141 Jan 25 2012 at 1:14 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,262 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Quote:

Yaaay, Science!

You'll find most racism comes from fear of inadequacy. You'll find racist people say things like "them **** for'ners. Comin' over here and TEKKIN' MAH JAWB! derpa derr!" or the like. Doesn't even have to be immigrants, a lot of racism stems from a fear of being marginalised, at least in whatever ethnic group happens to be in power of any given country.


That is purely stupid and if you believe homophobia is based on denial, then you're implying that all problems with homosexuality are caused by homosexuals. Since you don't believe one can not support homosexual progress without being homophobic, then all homophobes are the cause. Since you're saying that all (or at least most) homophobes are secretly homosexuals in denial, then homosexuals are the reason why SSM isn't legal in all 50 states.

Somehow, that doesn't make sense. Given the fact that the majority of the population is heterosexual, then that isn't mathematically possible. This is because if the heterosexual isn't FOR homosexual progress, then they MUST be a homophobe (i.e. for DADT). That would make them a homosexual, which would make most of the population homosexual.

That is absurd and it's sad if you believe that there is any percentage of homopobhic homosexuals that exist to matter in any argument. Mainly because that is highly unlikely to be ACTIVELY homosexual and homophobic at the same time....

You're confusing two different concepts. Denial is passing through some M on M action, being interested, but forcing yourself not to watch to "stop" being homosexual. However, if you're actively participating, then you're no longer denying, you're just lying. Attempting to stop smoking and continuing to start back smoking is different from constantly smoking and saying you're quitting. One is denial and the other is plum lying.

Smiley: facepalm Becoming aroused at homoerotic imagery does not make you homosexual. Having the desire to peruse a sexual and emotional relationship with someone of the same **** as you, is what makes you homosexual.

You don't read so well, do you? What the study indicates, is that there is a strong link between an individual becoming sexually aroused by homoerotic imagery, becoming disgusted with themselves or whatever, and the hugely overcompensating in their day to day actions. Resulting in an outward hatred/bigotry towards homosexuals. The kind you display, weirdly.

____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2142 Jan 25 2012 at 1:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Unforkgettable
*****
13,201 posts
He probably thinks that if you have an **** while being raped, it means you really like it.

Edited, Jan 25th 2012 2:37pm by Spoonless
____________________________
Banh
#2143 Jan 25 2012 at 2:34 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If that's what you meant, then why did you say "no matter who the participants"? "No matter who the participants" isn't restrictive to your made up criteria and YOU KNOW THAT.

You basically put your foot in your mouth and now are too stubborn to admit to being wrong.


No. I basically made two mistakes. One was talking to you at all. The other was assuming, once again, that you would follow the basic rules of a conversation. My bad.

ETA: Also, if you get off on watching rape porn, that doesn't mean you're a rapeasexual. It means you get off on watching another person get overpowered and hurt. That is not a sexual preference, you moron.

Edited, Jan 25th 2012 12:30pm by Belkira


Your subjective definition of "rape" is irrelevant of this discussion.

There are only two choices..

1. The participants of a sexual interaction plays a part in your arousal

or

2. The participants of a sexual interaction plays NO part in your arousal.

Just answer the question.. Which one is it? All you're doing is changing back and forth depending on who the participants are. By definition, you are accepting #1, but you're too stubborn to admit to it because that contradicts your original claim of #2.


Edited, Jan 25th 2012 10:43pm by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2144 Jan 25 2012 at 2:42 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,939 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Becoming aroused at homoerotic imagery does not make you homosexual. Having the desire to peruse a sexual and emotional relationship with someone of the same **** as you, is what makes you homosexual.


Almalieque wrote:
Denial is passing through some M on M action, being interested, but forcing yourself not to watch to "stop" being homosexual. However, if you're actively participating, then you're no longer denying, you're just lying. Attempting to stop smoking and continuing to start back smoking is different from constantly smoking and saying you're quitting. One is denial and the other is plum lying.


Nilatai wrote:
You don't read so well, do you?


My sentiments exactly.

Nilatai wrote:
What the study indicates, is that there is a strong link between an individual becoming sexually aroused by homoerotic imagery, becoming disgusted with themselves or whatever, and the hugely overcompensating in their day to day actions.


Read above.. You should reread my counter. To believe that there is a notable percentage of people who fall in that category is absurd based on post #2137.

Nilatai wrote:
Resulting in an outward hatred/bigotry towards homosexuals. The kind you display, weirdly.


Nu-uh.. No you...Smiley: oyvey Really? If you actually take the time to read post 2137, you'll see how any notable percentage of people falling in that category implies that homosexuals are the root of their own problems and further more that heterosexuals are the minority.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2145 Jan 25 2012 at 2:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
No, you moron. My argument is that getting turned on by **** porn doesn't make you gay. Period.
#2146Almalieque, Posted: Jan 25 2012 at 2:56 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) So, is that option 1 or option 2? That statement falls in one of those two options.
#2147 Jan 25 2012 at 4:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Actually, I amend my earlier statement. Being aroused by "kiddie porn" does not make you a pedophile. Raping a child makes you a pedophile. My mistake.

If you want to have an adult discussion about whether or. It **** porn makes you gay, let me know.

#2148 Jan 25 2012 at 4:35 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Belkira wrote:
Actually, I amend my earlier statement. Being aroused by "kiddie porn" does not make you a @#%^phile. Raping a child makes you a @#%^phile. My mistake.


That is, technically, untrue. Being aroused by that would, in fact, make one a pedophile. It's the quality of being sexually attracted to children. Raping a child makes you a pedophile, and a child rapist.

Apologies if I'm missing something here. I'm sure whatever you're discussing, Alma is wrong for a litany of other, valid reasons.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#2149 Jan 25 2012 at 5:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,174 posts
Some people are turned on by power, regardless of the age or gender of the victim (or "victim"). If that's what is arousing to a man, he may or may not be a pedo. He may or may not be a rapist. He may just be into dominance, and the form it takes is secondary.

For example.

I'm not the resident board expert on **** and sexuality, but this is my take on it: if it looks simple and easily explained, it probably isn't.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#2150 Jan 25 2012 at 6:14 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,635 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Actually, I amend my earlier statement. Being aroused by "kiddie porn" does not make you a @#%^phile. Raping a child makes you a @#%^phile. My mistake.


That is, technically, untrue. Being aroused by that would, in fact, make one a @#%^phile. It's the quality of being sexually attracted to children. Raping a child makes you a @#%^phile, and a child rapist.

Apologies if I'm missing something here. I'm sure whatever you're discussing, Alma is wrong for a litany of other, valid reasons.


I believe that wanting to stick your **** in a child is what would classify you as a pedo. You can't help if it arouses you, and it doesn't necessarily mean anything, unless seeing it arouses you AND makes you want to go out and **** little babies.
#2151 Jan 25 2012 at 7:00 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,562 posts
Pedophilia isn't merely being aroused by children, not according to the DSM. It's described as the primary or exclusive sexual interest in children to the point that they either act on it or it causes severe distress. One drink does not an alcoholic make.

Truth is, kids are capable of arousing psychologically healthy adults. And pretty much anything post-pubescence arousing an adult isn't even unusual.

Edited, Jan 25th 2012 7:03pm by Allegory
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 30 All times are in CDT
Aethien, kimewalk, Kuwoobie, Anonymous Guests (27)