Where does ‘homosexuality’ come from?

[Underestimated Nutria]

Let me guess; no romantic experience irl, asocial, played games constantly, and the second you started acting gay you got a lot of attention and started jerking it to the idea? People are rating you as such because it's a given to furries. More or less the same case with me, which is why I'm of the belief that I more or less chose to be bi/pan/whatever. I acted like a gay kid in my teens and made friends and fun out of it, and as I realized sex is exhausting and full of human fluids, I got comfortable with the male aspect to that as well.

Since then, every younger furry I've met with a forced lisp and "Orh myu gaaawd~" behavior clearly decided to not be straight the same. Whenever they finally met with a furry friend or got a dildo, there was nothing natural about their reaction or interest herein. It's not "I wanna fit daddy's big tool in me~", it's "well it's how gays have sex so I should get familiar with it". Isn't the whole idea behind sex to be a natural reaction to being attracted to someone, not just deal with it, especially when your personality and your fandom of choice is based on sex and relationships?

Someone on here once wrote that in these fandoms people don't treat each other as friends but the beginning of a full romantic relationship. It can always be rev'd up to flirting and then RPing or sending pics and whatever. This is how furries behave, and no kid is safe from that kind of influence. On one hand it's good that sexuality is discussed and explored instead of assuming you're straight, but this is borderline predatory grooming. Mental 'rape' and the following rape victim rationalization of "guess this is me now".

I found this post extremely instructive, and I thank you for sharing your experience. If you could give any links or further detail, or suggest where I should look on this site, it would be very much appreciated!!

 

[Lemmingwise]

I’m on board with you about suspecting some mtf trans people of being nothing more than fetishists. (Yaniv comes to mind.) But there’s no absence of homosexuality in the wild. There are written accounts of it going as far back as ancient Greece.

Biological Exuberance documents instances of homosexuality in over 450 species. This includes wild animals that could choose between male and female partners.

Unless you’re using the word fag to exclusively reference trans people here, then your statement carries a little more weight. The book has examples of that as well, but not nearly as many.

Yes, certainly that is a purely scholarly documentation of homosexuality and not politically motivated (the book was used in the supreme court to end sodomy laws).

Here's a quote from the book.

The animal world--right now, here on earth--is brimming with countless gender variations and shimmering sexual possibilities: entire lizard species that consist only of females who reproduce by virgin birth and also have sex with each other; or the multigendered society of the Ruff, with four distinct categories of male birds, some of whom court and mate with one another; or female Spotted Hyenas and Bears who copulate and give birth through their 'penile' clitorides, and male Greater Rheas who possess 'vaginal' phalluses (like females of their species) and raise young in two-father families; or the vibrant transsexualities of coral reef fish, and the dazzling intersexualities of gynandromorphs and chimeras. In their quest for 'post-modern' patterns of gender and sexuality, human beings are simply catching up with the species that have preceded us in evolving sexual and gender diversity--and the aboriginal cultures that have recognized this.

It will be something interesting to dig into, though. I'll see what I can find in the following month.

 

[Surf and TERF]

Yes, certainly that is a purely scholarly documentation of homosexuality and not politically motivated (the book was used in the supreme court to end sodomy laws).

Here's a quote from the book.



It will be something interesting to dig into, though. I'll see what I can find in the following month.

Ver archivo adjunto 783498

Fair enough. Skepticism in regard to the creators’ motive is deserved, but I felt that the analysis following each study gives fair consideration and rebuttal to most “homophobic” arguments against their conclusions.

There will always be homosexuality in humans whether we understand it or not. I’ve argued against its validity too. The only thing that changed my mind was actually being gay while not wanting to be and having to deal with those feelings anyway. I gave heterosexuality a fair shot and that is what felt unnatural to me.

It’s cool if people genuinely believe it’s a real thing, but I can’t act betrayed if they express doubts. The mess that is LGBT pride only makes it look more fake.

 

[Lemmingwise]

Fair enough. Skepticism in regard to the creators’ motive is deserved, but I felt that the analysis following each study gives fair consideration and rebuttal to most “homophobic” arguments against their conclusions.

There will always be homosexuality in humans whether we understand it or not. I’ve argued against its validity too. The only thing that changed my mind was actually being gay while not wanting to be and having to deal with those feelings anyway. I gave heterosexuality a fair shot and that is what felt unnatural to me.

There will also always be crimes committed by humans. That doesn't mean we have to be open to committing crimes.
I do think we have an evolved natural aversion to gay men. Considering what vectors of disease they are (which is unsurprising when you know that about half of gay men have over 500 lifetime sex partners) as well as deleterious cultural effects and not to mention how rampant pedophilia is in the gay community (somewhere between 4x and 16x the rate of pedophilia compared to heterosexuals).

Though I also don't think homosexuality is always a choice either and there seem to be some genetic and epigenetic factors that effect homosexuality. Part of the reason for the globohomo groups, even within for example the catholic church, is likely because something that is innate is condemned. Why wouldn't one rebel against any current order that condemns it?

But much like the south african anti-apartheid movement was coopted and taken over by communists, the homosexual lobby seems to be coopted by an anti-fertility cult, set out by the eugenicist society (later named: the population council). The goal there is to push anything that promotes anti-fertility so the political goal of those that funded them (Rockefellers) was not so much gay acceptance as increased homosexuality.

I honestly don't know what position to exactly take. The fact that the common problems of homosexuality can't be discussed in any way besides homosexuality being fabulous makes the current status quo untenable. It is no great surprise that the child stripping for money, whichever one it was, desmond I think, happens in gay clubs. You would think more people present would raise a stink.

I don't think most gay men choose to be gay, but I do think that sexual abuse can turn someone more gay.

But I really need to read that book and see how well it holds up.

 

[Surf and TERF]

There will also always be crimes committed by humans. That doesn't mean we have to be open to committing crimes.
I do think we have an evolved natural aversion to gay men. Considering what vectors of disease they are (which is unsurprising when you know that about half of gay men have over 500 lifetime sex partners) as well as deleterious cultural effects and not to mention how rampant pedophilia is in the gay community (somewhere between 4x and 16x the rate of pedophilia compared to heterosexuals).

Though I also don't think homosexuality is always a choice either and there seem to be some genetic and epigenetic factors that effect homosexuality. Part of the reason for the globohomo groups, even within for example the catholic church, is likely because something that is innate is condemned. Why wouldn't one rebel against any current order that condemns it?

But much like the south african anti-apartheid movement was coopted and taken over by communists, the homosexual lobby seems to be coopted by an anti-fertility cult, set out by the eugenicist society (later named: the population council). The goal there is to push anything that promotes anti-fertility so the political goal of those that funded them (Rockefellers) was not so much gay acceptance as increased homosexuality.

I honestly don't know what position to exactly take. The fact that the common problems of homosexuality can't be discussed in any way besides homosexuality being fabulous makes the current status quo untenable. It is no great surprise that the child stripping for money, whichever one it was, desmond I think, happens in gay clubs. You would think more people present would raise a stink.

I don't think most gay men choose to be gay, but I do think that sexual abuse can turn someone more gay.

But I really need to read that book and see how well it holds up.

The reason for the tendencies toward pedophilia escapes me, but this is an issue that seems more exclusive to gay men.

Promiscuity, on the other hand, is an issue for both gay men and women. I’ve never had a desire for anything but a genuine monogamous relationship, which is something that is frowned upon to express in the general LGBT community. Only “bigots” are so close minded. That’s the popular opinion, anyway.

The thing is, homosexuality may not be the issue. It's just viewed as one because of the assumption that it is the inherent cause of pedophilia and promiscuity. But is it really?

Maybe it’s just the depravity that often comes with being gay, or the consequence of being in a community where a significant number of people tell you, either though actions or words, that you’re a sick degenerate. Things are better now, I won’t deny that. But that doesn’t mean those points of view ceased to exist. They’ve just been getting stifled under the enormous social pressure to be accepting of everyone.

Unfortunately this pressure has made the LGBT community so polarized that you can’t acknowledge the issues that exist within it. I’m going to guess this is the reason why so many gays are hiding out on kiwifarms to talk about them.

 

[Lemmingwise]

The reason for the tendencies toward pedophilia escapes me, but this is an issue that seems more exclusive to gay men

Well certainly one of the reasons must be the lack of taboo there is on this in the gay world. There are easy to find videos of gay parties where people get interviewed and they'll either say, yes they did it, or yes they've seen it. I have trouble imagining many types of communities where even such an admission doesn't raise hellfire. The only three types I can think of where it doesn't are muslims, gays and certain upper class groups like in hollywood. I'd add the catholic church, but that too is gay groups.

I’ve never had a desire for anything but a genuine monogamous relationship, which is something that is frowned upon to express in the general LGBT community. Only “bigots” are so close minded.

Right. You seem to think this is not necessarily innate to gay people. And no wonder, considering you have the personal example where it's different. But why is the consensus on promiscuity? How did that become a goal/virtue in the first place? And why is there a huge difference in the amount of partners gay men have to lesbians (who average somewhere at 12 lifetime sexual partners IIRC)?

I think it says something about male vs female sexuality.

I do think there's something innate there, though not necessarily universal. By that I mean that the trend is not going to go away, even if there are outliers.

And here is just my personal observations rather than anything data driven. When you accept sex as for pleasure rather than reproduction, once you accept sterile forms of sex, it is likely to happen. I think gay sex world is an inevitability when you have a sexual environment without women as selective gatekeepers. Fidelity is rather common for lesbians, even if they say they don't believe in it. It's practically unheard of for gay men.

---

Those are my thoughts on it. You do say some things that make me curious.

You say the depravity that comes with being gay. What do you mean by that, in all its aspects? I'm familiar with the (unpersuasive) claim that it's due to lack of acceptance. I can tell you why I find it unpersuasive if you're interested. But what reasons are there besides that for "the depravity that comes with being gay"?

The thing is, homosexuality may not be the issue. It's just viewed as one because of the assumption that it is the inherent cause of pedophilia and promiscuity.

Regardless of the "inherent" cause, there is no doubt that right now they're an identifier where the behaviour is more frequent. Why redirect to a straw man and not focus on the problem itself?

They’ve just been getting stifled under the enormous social pressure to be accepting of everyone.

Unfortunately this pressure has made the LGBT community so polarized that you can’t acknowledge the issues that exist within it.

So the focus has generally been on making people accepting, rather than finding the source of these problems or fixing them. Have you ever asked yourself why? Do you wonder why exactly this view is the dogma?

It's sad but I have to almost give you kudos for even saying that, when that kind of openness should be standard.

Ps. What do you make of Joe Biden praising jewish leaders for having been responsible for creating gay marriage in the US at Jewish American Heritage Month?

 

[Surf and TERF]

Well certainly one of the reasons must be the lack of taboo there is on this in the gay world. There are easy to find videos of gay parties where people get interviewed and they'll either say, yes they did it, or yes they've seen it. I have trouble imagining many types of communities where even such an admission doesn't raise hellfire. The only three types I can think of where it doesn't are muslims, gays and certain upper class groups like in hollywood. I'd add the catholic church, but that too is gay groups.

That's probably a part of it, yeah. A lot of gay people believe that their identity entails being the antithesis of "heteronormative" culture, which they define as a traditional nuclear family with monogamous couples and sex only within marriage. I think that's the root of the problem. There's still this "us versus them" mindset and in order to be a part of the community, you have to make yourself the opposite image.

Right. You seem to think this is not necessarily innate to gay people. And no wonder, considering you have the personal example where it's different. But why is the consensus on promiscuity? How did that become a goal/virtue in the first place? And why is there a huge difference in the amount of partners gay men have to lesbians (who average somewhere at 12 lifetime sexual partners IIRC)?

I think it says something about male vs female sexuality.

I do think there's something innate there, though not necessarily universal. By that I mean that the trend is not going to go away, even if there are outliers.

And here is just my personal observations rather than anything data driven. When you accept sex as for pleasure rather than reproduction, once you accept sterile forms of sex, it is likely to happen. I think gay sex world is an inevitability when you have a sexual environment without women as selective gatekeepers. Fidelity is rather common for lesbians, even if they say they don't believe in it. It's practically unheard of for gay men.

I agree there is a difference. To be honest, I didn't want to speak for gay men and blame the promiscuity on the difference in sex drive between genders. I felt it might get misconstrued as misandry. There's a stereotype about lesbians hating men, after all.

Lesbians have learned to identify themselves by taking on the butch image, which I personally think is derived from male stereotypes. I don't think gay women are naturally like this. It's just something they've developed as a method of identifying each other in the wild. The same applies for flamboyant gay men. Both identities are actually pretty sexist imo.

I'm curious, if you think it's bad to sterilize sex, does that mean you are against contraception? I don't believe in God, but I do think there is something sacred about it. Not because of its reproductive value, but because of its usefulness as a tool for strengthening emotional bonds. I think it's unhealthy to abuse it for other purposes.

Those are my thoughts on it. You do say some things that make me curious.

You say the depravity that comes with being gay. What do you mean by that, in all its aspects? I'm familiar with the (unpersuasive) claim that it's due to lack of acceptance. I can tell you why I find it unpersuasive if you're interested. But what reasons are there besides that for "the depravity that comes with being gay"?

I'll bite, why do you think the blame on lack of acceptance is unpersuasive? I do think that it plays a role in causing one to repress their sexuality, which in turn makes them more vulnerable to using devious behaviors as an outlet. This conclusion was inspired by Catholic priests.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm getting the impression that your solution for homosexuality is to repress it altogether, meaning that gay people would either have to be alone forever or force themselves into a heterosexual marriage. Both of these solutions seem impossible to me. I don't want to be alone and heterosexual sex is repulsive to me. Assuming you're straight, imagine the same disgust you would feel at forcing yourself to have sex with another man (or woman, if you're female).

Regardless of the "inherent" cause, there is no doubt that right now they're an identifier where the behaviour is more frequent. Why redirect to a straw man and not focus on the problem itself?

I'm not sure how this is a strawman. I never denied there was a correlation, I'm just saying that it doesn't equal causation.

So the focus has generally been on making people accepting, rather than finding the source of these problems or fixing them. Have you ever asked yourself why? Do you wonder why exactly this view is the dogma?

It's sad but I have to almost give you kudos for even saying that, when that kind of openness should be standard.

If I understand correctly, you're asking me why the LGBT community won't be critical of itself?

I think LGBT isn't really LGBT anymore. Not that the old community was much better, but its population actually represented its label. However, I haven't lived through that era so I can't comment too much on it. I think the overbearing inclusivity of the LGBT brand has allowed its voice to be hijacked by exhibitionists and kinksters who capitalized on the stereotype that gay = sexual deviancy in every form. A good chunk of them are probably straight as well.

So any gay person who turns to this community for help only gets pressured to comply with that image, even if they weren't originally prone to promiscuous behavior.

Ps. What do you make of Joe Biden praising jewish leaders for having been responsible for creating gay marriage in the US at Jewish American Heritage Month?

I don't keep up with this area of politics to have an informed opinion about it.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I hope you like text.

I'm curious, if you think it's bad to sterilize sex, does that mean you are against contraception?

I identify sterile sex as something unhealthy when viewed in broader cultural context, kinda like not exercising is unhealthy, or eating fast food, only with more serious consequences. I'm not blanket against contraception, but I do think contraception leads to unhealthy relationships towards sex and unhealthy relationships with people as a result.

To give one example of how I arrived at that point of view, girls that are on the pill are attracted to different men than when they're not on the pill. They tend to seek closer connection to genetically same rather than similar (including brother/father and other family). Then when they go off the pill, they don't feel that kind of attraction. Suddenly the partner they chose while on the pill, is no longer attractive when off the pill. Particularly the smell is "off" suddenly, apparently. Yet despite no longer being attracted to that person, they may have built a life with that person. They have emotionally bonded with that person. They've arrived at a unhealthy situation as a result of sterile sex.

I'm not sure if I see it the same for sterile sex when people already have children and are like 40+ or something.

I really do think we're somewhat living in a world described in brave new world, where people are encouraged to early and often engage in sex for recreation and I don't think it's making people happy and I don't think it's building a healthy society.

---

I agree there is a difference. To be honest, I didn't want to speak for gay men and blame the promiscuity on the difference in sex drive between genders. I felt it might get misconstrued as misandry. There's a stereotype about lesbians hating men, after all.

Don't you get tired of not speaking your mind for fear of it being misconstrued as a kind of prejudice? You know your heart. You know how you mean it. You are allowed to have your own perspective on gay men. Sometimes some groups aren't completely honest with themselves or others and they need others to point out the flaws. No, I could go further; almost always all groups aren't completely honest with themselves and others.

This is honestly my own experience with gay friends; is that if shit were to hit the fan, as it seems it might in about a decade, I wouldn't really count on them on helping me survive and carve out a sanctuary somewhere. They're kinda weakminded when it comes to conflict. Of course most people are these days, but it seems to be more true for the gay men I know. This despite them being on average more physically built, though those are just small samples of course, just curious if you've observed something similar or the reverse.

Isn't it better to be able to talk about these things openly?

I'll bite, why do you think the blame on lack of acceptance is unpersuasive? I do think that it plays a role in causing one to repress their sexuality, which in turn makes them more vulnerable to using devious behaviors as an outlet. This conclusion was inspired by Catholic priests.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm getting the impression that your solution for homosexuality is to repress it altogether, meaning that gay people would either have to be alone forever or force themselves into a heterosexual marriage. Both of these solutions seem impossible to me. I don't want to be alone and heterosexual sex is repulsive to me. Assuming you're straight, imagine the same disgust you would feel at forcing yourself to have sex with another man (or woman, if you're female).

You bring up two seperate issues worth addressing; first the blame of lack of acceptance, and second my "solution for homosexuality". Let's start with the latter.

I'd like to have a solution, but I don't have one. I just know the current situation is as untenable as was the catholic solution that you describe. I do know that getting to a better solution requires viewing the problem with as much clarity as possible. The fact that many of the societal ills, including STD's and promiscuity are verboten topics in regards to discussion about homosexuality makes it impossible to improve these situations.

----

The other issue is putting the blame on lack of acceptance. It started for me when looking at suicide stats for transgenders. They're so high it's insane. One is driven to ask: why?
The official answer is that it's because people aren't accepting of transgenders. It seems to me that transgenders in general have unrealistic expectations to how they're received. Right now people are bending so far backwards that when a (notable) transgender threatens violence, or doxes someone, even on live TV, they're defended. I had a youtube account that kept getting banned at one point, even when I recreated it. So without doxing myself, I changed the name from let's say "Joe" to "Trans Joe" and photoshopped a mrs pacman style bow on the head and with the exact same content it was the first out of four channels that didn't get banned and is still up.
What is this telling me? Some people are ridiculously accepting of transgenders.

I had a friend that wanted to get a sex change. But he's been a guy that was always jumping from one cult into the other, one time trying to get me into a turkish cult of bible-copiers or something. He said he had started wearing women's clothes sometimes and that people in his life were cheering for him (again- not unaccepting).

I told him: people will get tired of cheering for it in a months time and a lot of people that transition deeply regret making that choice. Do you know the statistics on the amount of people that end up ending their life after making that choice? He got angry with me. Accused me of having low opinion of him, as if he already didn't know that. I told him that he just accused me of not saying it with the best of intentions towards him, which I did. 6 months later I found out he decided not to do it. He seems pretty happy when I see him. I asked him then if he could identify his prime motivation for wanting to transition sex. He said: "I saw how badly they were treated, and I thought I could be a good shield and example for them as a social, well adjusted-person".

I think the reason nobody else warned him, is because people are afraid of not being accepting of transgenders. They go out of their way to be as accepting to the point that if you want a lot of extra positive attention, you can announce you're trans. I don't know if transgenderism really is an innate thing, but if it is, I suspect that transtrenderism is far more common, like 95% of the cases.

Now what does this have to do with homosexuality acceptance? Everything. It's the same script. Heck, Kevin Spacey was able to take some heat off the fact that he abused a kid by "coming out" as gay. Is that really an example of something that is not very accepted? American conservatives often try to show how good they are by being accepting of gays, like with the whole Milo thing. Is that an example of a culture that's unaccepting of gays? Not to shit on the areas where you might run into prejudice; we all do for all parts of our identity, but when speaking about broader culture I'd say it's hard to speak about it like you're a jew in auschwitz.

So with that degree of high acceptance, it makes no sense that transgenderism has as high a suicide rate as ever. The real reason is probably that an underlying cause creates both transgenderism and suicide (and that the sex change operations have horrific results on one's life, with the demands on dilation and the daily pain and mental results of that pain).

If it's used as a lie to promote transgenderism, why wouldn't it be used as a lie to promote homosexuality?

It's the perfect way to push it forward. You focus everyone on eliminating any resistance to its hegemony. It creates a positive feedback loop: People become gay (or trans), they experience friction and some problems result (let's say they get aids), people want to use this to warn others, they get attacked for not being accepting, this makes people less likely to warn people, more people do it, more people cause problems.

Now I don't think everyone that criticizes homosexuality is good intentioned either, but that's beside the point. People that do want to help are made silent. For example; and this is just spitballing, you could do the same things as you do with smoking. There could be a move to have gay shows have a disclaimer that engaging in non-monogamous homosexual sex is dangerous to your sexual health. I don't think I would support that specifically, but it's completely unthinkable in the current pro-homo culture. I think we both know that.

If I understand correctly, you're asking me why the LGBT community won't be critical of itself?

I think LGBT isn't really LGBT anymore. Not that the old community was much better, but its population actually represented its label. However, I haven't lived through that era so I can't comment too much on it. I think the overbearing inclusivity of the LGBT brand has allowed its voice to be hijacked by exhibitionists and kinksters who capitalized on the stereotype that gay = sexual deviancy in every form. A good chunk of them are probably straight as well.

So any gay person who turns to this community for help only gets pressured to comply with that image, even if they weren't originally prone to promiscuous behavior.

Have you never asked yourself why it became a defense of sexual deviancy in every form? Why did those who lead the charge create a culture of "overbearing inclusivity"?

I like that term, overbearing inclusivity. It's apt.

I'm not sure how this is a strawman. I never denied there was a correlation, I'm just saying that it doesn't equal causation.

My point is that it doesn't matter whether it's correlation or causation; it's still a vector through which we identify a very significantly increased level of pedofilia, promiscuity and STDs. The fact whether some people erronously view it may have bearings on your personal experiences, which I'm sure can be dissatisfying, but it doesn't have bearing on understanding the issue.

It is still a datapoint that demands answers. What are your views on why there is correlation and what makes you think that it isn't/ might not be causation?

 

[Surf and TERF]

Isn't it better to be able to talk about these things openly?

Because people stop listening if they think the speaker belongs to a group that is impossible to reason with. It happens with LGBT people the moment you say something critical about their community, and it happens here the moment people get a whiff of progressive thinking and assume you’re an SJW. I’m already toeing the line by being openly female and gay. All I need is a negative comment about men to tip the scale. It has nothing to do with censoring my thoughts or a fear of conflict. I’m being careful with my word choice for the sake of allowing the conversation to exist.


But ok, I’ll be more open. I think your point about male versus female sexuality could be a factor in almost every problem with the gay community.

I think gay sex world is an inevitability when you have a sexual environment without women as selective gatekeepers.

Promiscuity, STDs, infidelity- these are all consequences of an unfettered male sex drive. It's an issue with gay men, not women. This goes for the trans community as well. Have you noticed that almost all of the trans people in rat king are mtf? So many of them are just perverted incels who can’t stand it when women don’t want their feminine penises.

For the record, I don’t get along with most gay people, regardless of their gender. Lesbians have their faults too, but these aren’t the main issues that come to mind when the LGBT community is criticized. I'll say something negative about them anyway, just to even the score. I hate the tendency that gay women have of letting themselves go, getting edgy piercings/tattoos and keeping goofy hairstyles. However, I’m starting to have doubts about whether a lot of these women are truly gay. As I roll further up in my 20s, I find that the exceptional behavior has been thinning out with my age group. Smaller lesbian communities that aren’t as open to trans people have been the most reasonable.

just curious if you've observed something similar or the reverse.

I have two gay friends that I’m in regular contact with. One is a family member and the other is someone that I grew up with. We all live our lives straight-passing and outside of pride, so there’s no consistent stereotype about conflict avoidance that I’ve had the opportunity to pick up on.

I don't know if transgenderism really is an innate thing, but if it is, I suspect that transtrenderism is far more common, like 95% of the cases.

I suspect the same thing, but I’d say the number is probably a bit lower. I know a ftm transgender person irl that is an entirely different breed than what you find online. He lays low and just wants to live a normal life. Knowing him before the transition process and seeing how painful it was to change (hormones, surgery, etc.) has made me believe that it's something he wouldn’t have done unless the dysphoria was really that bad.

That being said, I’ve also seen plenty of trans people who I think are bullshitting.

Now what does this have to do with homosexuality acceptance? Everything. It's the same script. Heck, Kevin Spacey was able to take some heat off the fact that he abused a kid by "coming out" as gay. Is that really an example of something that is not very accepted? American conservatives often try to show how good they are by being accepting of gays, like with the whole Milo thing. Is that an example of a culture that's unaccepting of gays? Not to shit on the areas where you might run into prejudice; we all do for all parts of our identity, but when speaking about broader culture I'd say it's hard to speak about it like you're a jew in auschwitz.

If homosexuality were truly accepted, then it would be considered normal enough to not warrant a second glance. It wouldn’t be possible to earn pity points with the label and people would be able to talk about LGBT issues without walking on eggshells. The way things are now, the label can abused as a shield for bad behavior. All you have to do is find a way to crawl under the LGBT umbrella (which isn’t hard at all).

This is somewhat unrelated, but I think the label is also abused by people who want to perceive themselves as special or strong. There is a lot to gain just by identifying with a marginalized group that the public can’t openly criticize. This is why so many exceptional individuals are attracted to LGBT.

Have you never asked yourself why it became a defense of sexual deviancy in every form? Why did those who lead the charge create a culture of "overbearing inclusivity”?

In part, I pin the blame on the hijacking kinksters and exhibitionsists.

But are there really any leaders here? Or just extremists who drown out the voices of others?

It’s more beneficial to be marginalized nowadays than not. Overbearing inclusivity allows a broader group of people to perceive themselves as victims, which gives them access to the shield that comes with the label. Most people, especially those who weren't truly LGB to start with, find this setup to be more beneficial to their personal desires, so it's more attractive than having a critical conversation and building a healthy LGBT community.

What are your views on why there is correlation and what makes you think that it isn't/ might not be causation?

LGBT people haven’t had the opportunity to grow into a healthy community. If it could start over with established, reasonable leaders, I think it would look very different.

What we have now is something that started with the most marginalized members, people who took a contrarian approach with their identity (aka, those who frequented Stonewall Inn and similar bars) and since then, the community has been led by… who, exactly? And were those leaders predominantly male or female? Did the leaders who influenced LGBT laws really have the voice to establish behavioral standards as well?

Most importantly, where does the community’s public image get established now? Twitter? TV shows? These are platforms for cows. The more exceptional you are, the more attention (and consequently, reach) you get.

LGBT is so fractured that it’s not even a community so much as a buzzword. The full acronym is now LGBTQIA+, which is ridiculous because there’s a world of difference in the life experience that comes with every one of those letters. If any of them could be grouped into a functioning community, it would be LGB.

If there are gay people who act normal, how are we supposed to be aware of them? Their very nature prevents them from having a voice in this environment.

Correlation doesn't equal causation because there are too many environmental factors influencing these issues.

 

[Lemmingwise]

But are there really any leaders here? Or just extremists who drown out the voices of others?

When it comes to social movements, it's the extremists that gather a following that are the leaders. It means the same thing. If they weren't "extremist" they wouldn't have a message of change and they wouldn't garner a following.

LGBT people haven’t had the opportunity to grow into a healthy community. If it could start over with established, reasonable leaders, I think it would look very different.

This is just blue sky thinking. Everything could be healthy if completely torn down and then starting with reasonable leaders, even flat earth or enter your own preffered group to shit on. And they couldn't really be established, otherwise they'd already be there. The leaders you envision were rejected by the status quo and they're the radicals, like you. Not saying that to shit on you. It's just a reality check to who are the established ones and who are outsiders to the established status quo.

What we have now is something that started with the most marginalized members, people who took a contrarian approach with their identity (aka, those who frequented Stonewall Inn and similar bars) and since then, the community has been led by… who, exactly? And were those leaders predominantly male or female? Did the leaders who influenced LGBT laws really have the voice to establish behavioral standards as well?

Yes. Joe Biden told you who the leaders were. Don't take it from him or me. Do a little research to confirm that he is right. The same group has a pretty huge influence in establishing behavioral standards by having the ability to blast their ideas into people's minds in various ways. It's not perfect control, it's influence.

Besides I think "LGBT community" is a newspeak kind of concept to begin with, and the image of specific bars like stonewall inn is part of that. LGBT community is no more a community than kiwifarms or any youtube channel is a community. Do they come round to help fix your roof? It's a word to give a nice and homely feeling to a group of political activists and a way to gain new members simply by identity politics of sexuality.

edit: oh hey you seem to agree that LGBT community is a bullshit buzzword.

To more fully answer your last question; yes, they may not have had full control over behaviour, but they did have the influence to establish behavioral standards (assuming they didn't create too much protest).

Most importantly, where does the community’s public image get established now? Twitter? TV shows? These are platforms for cows. The more exceptional you are, the more attention (and consequently, reach) you get.

Without Will and Grace giving an image of a nice gentle gay man, there would never be wide acceptance of homosexual man as there is now. You can argue whether that's a good or bad thing, but that's where it was established, right in the last years where TV still had that influence, before the torch passed to youtube, netflix and HBO.

There are a lot more ways to push a channel or show besides the inherent quality or strangeness of the show itself.

If there are gay people who act normal, how are we supposed to be aware of them

Gay people can talk openly about their relationship or sexuality without being exceptional. And there are plenty of people who don't need to advertise it, are pretty normal, but still obviously homosexual, like the two women living together down the street. Neither of them is a butch either.

Correlation doesn't equal causation because there are too many environmental factors influencing these issues.

Right, but now you're just dodging any conversation or observation about the topic. This is a way to stop thinking about it rather than produce any sort of clarity. You seem to agree that the results of more STD's is a function of unfettered male sex drive, but not why it's a topic that is not allowed to be discussed. You also did not touch on the pedofilia thing at all.

All I need is a negative comment about men to tip the scale. It has nothing to do with censoring my thoughts or a fear of conflict. I’m being careful with my word choice for the sake of allowing the conversation to exist.

I get that. To be honest, I probably wouldn't have gotten into this talk if I had known you were female.

 

[kadoink]

Homosexuality comes from the butthole. Heres a 1 minute documentary that gets in depth with this new scientific discovery.

Seriously, between the nature vs Nurture argument I suspect that the answer is in between the two.

 

[Local Wordmason]

I honestly believe that being homosexual is akin to a fetish. I don't think it has any kind of genetic marker or something as population control. I feel that people who are homosexual probably have same sex experiences at a young age and some people repress it and some people embrace it. You ever see that guy that's SUPER into feet and all he gets off to is feet? Sometimes you have those people who shamefully whack it to feet, and you get the people who are secretly into it but don't acknowledge it, and may even be hostile to people who openly enjoy it. You can apply that to any fetish, and I also believe that fetishes are formed from your early sexual experiences. This explains why some people are so hostile, but some are so into it.

Obviously this isn't a negative conclusion and I do think that you don't choose to be gay much like how a lot of the time you don't get to choose what turns you on. It's just how much people are into boning the same sex. I think the hang ups came from Abrahamic religions and one guy being so insecure about liking dudes, he made it a meme to think it's gross.

tl;dr - You should care about people being homosexual about as much as you'd care about someone being into feet, which is, not much. Because its just a fetish essentially, nothing more.

 

[Zeke Von Genbu]

The other issue is putting the blame on lack of acceptance. It started for me when looking at suicide stats for transgenders. They're so high it's insane. One is driven to ask: why?
The official answer is that it's because people aren't accepting of transgenders. It seems to me that transgenders in general have unrealistic expectations to how they're received. Right now people are bending so far backwards that when a (notable) transgender threatens violence, or doxes someone, even on live TV, they're defended. I had a youtube account that kept getting banned at one point, even when I recreated it. So without doxing myself, I changed the name from let's say "Joe" to "Trans Joe" and photoshopped a mrs pacman style bow on the head and with the exact same content it was the first out of four channels that didn't get banned and is still up.
What is this telling me? Some people are ridiculously accepting of transgenders.

I had a friend that wanted to get a sex change. But he's been a guy that was always jumping from one cult into the other, one time trying to get me into a turkish cult of bible-copiers or something. He said he had started wearing women's clothes sometimes and that people in his life were cheering for him (again- not unaccepting).

I told him: people will get tired of cheering for it in a months time and a lot of people that transition deeply regret making that choice. Do you know the statistics on the amount of people that end up ending their life after making that choice? He got angry with me. Accused me of having low opinion of him, as if he already didn't know that. I told him that he just accused me of not saying it with the best of intentions towards him, which I did. 6 months later I found out he decided not to do it. He seems pretty happy when I see him. I asked him then if he could identify his prime motivation for wanting to transition sex. He said: "I saw how badly they were treated, and I thought I could be a good shield and example for them as a social, well adjusted-person".

I think the reason nobody else warned him, is because people are afraid of not being accepting of transgenders. They go out of their way to be as accepting to the point that if you want a lot of extra positive attention, you can announce you're trans. I don't know if transgenderism really is an innate thing, but if it is, I suspect that transtrenderism is far more common, like 95% of the cases.

Now what does this have to do with homosexuality acceptance? Everything. It's the same script. Heck, Kevin Spacey was able to take some heat off the fact that he abused a kid by "coming out" as gay. Is that really an example of something that is not very accepted? American conservatives often try to show how good they are by being accepting of gays, like with the whole Milo thing. Is that an example of a culture that's unaccepting of gays? Not to shit on the areas where you might run into prejudice; we all do for all parts of our identity, but when speaking about broader culture I'd say it's hard to speak about it like you're a jew in auschwitz.

So with that degree of high acceptance, it makes no sense that transgenderism has as high a suicide rate as ever. The real reason is probably that an underlying cause creates both transgenderism and suicide (and that the sex change operations have horrific results on one's life, with the demands on dilation and the daily pain and mental results of that pain).

If it's used as a lie to promote transgenderism, why wouldn't it be used as a lie to promote homosexuality?

It's the perfect way to push it forward. You focus everyone on eliminating any resistance to its hegemony. It creates a positive feedback loop: People become gay (or trans), they experience friction and some problems result (let's say they get aids), people want to use this to warn others, they get attacked for not being accepting, this makes people less likely to warn people, more people do it, more people cause problems.

Now I don't think everyone that criticizes homosexuality is good intentioned either, but that's beside the point. People that do want to help are made silent. For example; and this is just spitballing, you could do the same things as you do with smoking. There could be a move to have gay shows have a disclaimer that engaging in non-monogamous homosexual sex is dangerous to your sexual health. I don't think I would support that specifically, but it's completely unthinkable in the current pro-homo culture. I think we both know that.

I'll bite on this one from the transgendered side and try to answer this as someone who isn't transgendered themselves, but has hung around a few different levels of crazy within that sort of circle from somewhat normal and wants to just be themselves to the typical activist you'll see on social media who hates drumpf.

So the thing about the lack of acceptance, is that it isn't the acceptance of the people that you do know are on your side, but the people you don't that spins fear both from that side but from your own. The other side is viewed as the really right wing hill billies who have guns and are willing to shoot, and they're aiming at "you" basically. That is the archetype transgendered people, at least in the US, are afraid of. Now why if murder is illegal and should in theory not cause that to happen unless you really really provoke it? Because there is a case of someone using the excuse of "Well I thought he was a she, so I went into a violent outrage and killed him so it is their fault." and they could have got off because they had a "Trans panic defense" stick. The victim was "Islan Nettles" who was killed because they were found out to be transgendered women. The only reason the defendant got sent to prison to my knowledge was because he pleaded guilty likely in a fit of actual guilt as he wasn't charged with manslaughter despite murdering someone, so he could have got off if he didn't break from his own guilt. That's the basis of the idea.

So we have a case from several years ago where some transgendered woman died and now everyone is more or less whipped into a frenzy in case they'll be next. I've heard it expanded into "many cases", but this was the only one I could find where the defense actual would have possibly stuck instead of failing and they got sent to jail anyway. Now once you transition, well you're stuck, this plus the hormone changes which from what I understand are more erratic in MtF than FtM causes people to just go absolutely mad in paranoia as you're an emotional mess as you get adjusted estrogen as best as you can if you ever do and don't have some other problem to make this worse. So with this theory of not only are you dead or going to die, but maybe you might not get your murderer charged with murder? That is in theory a valid reason to panic and fear that could absolutely destroy someone in a weak state like at the start of your transition, and even with what I think is effectively the overhyped story of these events I still think it is a valid reason to be afraid of the people who aren't on your side. It may not be completely rational as odds are that won't happen anyway and the murderer would be sent to jail, but that is the narrative.

You can have the entire world on your side, but if one random fuck can kill you and it appears as if the law is okay with that, well shit maybe I should just do it myself then. That and the whole erasure of trans thing because things like the law making you use your birth gender for some things to keep things simple for everyone, if you spin it just right well it looks like everyone is out to get you.

That is basically what I've been explained with some of my own thoughts and lightly stated opinions on these matters. I can't say with the greatest certainty how much of this is true, but I think just like with a lot of trans issues that could be discussed, it is a possible problem blown into world end proportions. One thing I do know with good certainty is the community itself creates this level of fear, I've known someone who was absolutely afraid of doing anything because of the stuff this community would tell them, ultimately they chilled out and are going to try to tough it out but ultimately I think they still carry that fear.

Once you act like the sky is falling, well it is hard to bring yourself or have someone else bring you back down. For one reason or another transtrenders people and actual trans people love to blow everything out of proportion and I know someone who did this for literal years to me when we used to be friends before I just got tired of it all. I support actual trans people, not trenders fuck them which I ultimately agree with your rough assessment of the amount that are trenders, but i just couldn't take the constant sky is falling stuff forever.

 

[Shibaru]

Personally, I Believe it comes from a Psychological event that happens in your Childhood/Teenage Years, whether it would be seeing a Certain character, Admiring someone who is Male, or even having it just occur in your brain one day, the Person has the opportunity at this stage to stop thinking about it or continue thinking about it, although it eventually leads to more thoughts in the brain and thus. Homosexuality in the Person begins.

 

[Lemmingwise]

So the thing about the lack of acceptance, is that it isn't the acceptance of the people that you do know are on your side, but the people you don't that spins fear both from that side but from your own. The other side is viewed as the really right wing hill billies who have guns and are willing to shoot, and they're aiming at "you" basically. That is the archetype transgendered people, at least in the US, are afraid of. Now why if murder is illegal and should in theory not cause that to happen unless you really really provoke it? Because there is a case of someone using the excuse of "Well I thought he was a she, so I went into a violent outrage and killed him so it is their fault." and they could have got off because they had a "Trans panic defense" stick. The victim was "Islan Nettles" who was killed because they were found out to be transgendered women. The only reason the defendant got sent to prison to my knowledge was because he pleaded guilty likely in a fit of actual guilt as he wasn't charged with manslaughter despite murdering someone, so he could have got off if he didn't break from his own guilt. That's the basis of the idea.

The trans panic defense is incredibly rare and incredibly rarely granted. I've been through this with someone online before, receiving 30 examples and in the end only 2 or 3 held up as being valid examples. It's one of those things that's used and paraded for an agenda.

If you have any stats to show that this isn't rarer than say, the percentage of abortion that is due to rape, be my guest, but I think you'll be disappointed if you look at the stats with any sort of rigor.

That is basically what I've been explained with some of my own thoughts and lightly stated opinions on these matters.

Yes, I've heard it many times before, but after my experiences, studies and observations of trans people, I really don't find it convincing.

One thing I do know with good certainty is the community itself creates this level of fear, I've known someone who was absolutely afraid of doing anything because of the stuff this community would tell them, ultimately they chilled out and are going to try to tough it out but ultimately I think they still carry that fear.

By doing anything do you mean sexual encounters or do you mean transitioning?


----

On the whole I'm not sure what you're trying to say. It's like we were discussing some of the nooks and crannies of what the bible meant in specific passages and you came here and gave the basic outline of what's in the bible. I thought we were beyond that in this discussion. I suppose we've veered pretty far from the original topic.

I actually never seen that blowing out of proportion from transgenders I've met, only online. The ones I've met live were usually quite unhinged; either depressed or just -off- somehow. I think I've only met one that seemed vaguely normal in their behaviour (if you call the drag-queen extravagent flirty type normal).

btw you also have not really addressed any of the topics or questions that we were throwing up. This is probably part of the reason why things like pedofilia proliferate. Because when you try to talk about something serious like that, people keep going back to the boilerplates.

 

[Zeke Von Genbu]

The trans panic defense is incredibly rare and incredibly rarely granted. I've been through this with someone online before, receiving 30 examples and in the end only 2 or 3 held up as being valid examples. It's one of those things that's used and paraded for an agenda.

If you have any stats to show that this isn't rarer than say, the percentage of abortion that is due to rape, be my guest, but I think you'll be disappointed if you look at the stats with any sort of rigor.

Yes, I've heard it many times before, but after my experiences, studies and observations of trans people, I really don't find it convincing.

I never disagreed with any of this personally, I merely was explaining what i've seen and been explained from various transgendered people I've talked to over the last decade or so. I'm not saying I agree with that narrative, I'm explaining what I've experienced to offer either you or someone else some insight, even if the summary is basically people blowing things out of proportion. I don't know what you've been explained or told beyond that someone told you that they aren't accepted enough.

My ending statement was me basically saying it was a possible issue worth talking about, because to me anyway, that defense should not be used to murder anyone just because they had sex with you. Just because you were tricked doesn't mean you should murder them. Maybe it was a little too drawn out and rambling, which might be why it seemed confusing or hard to follow.

By doing anything do you mean sexual encounters or do you mean transitioning?

Transitioning, they tried basically just being a crossdresser and even tried being basically a trap for years because the trans community, more specifically one person who had already transitioned, kept fear mongering them for half a decade. One of the biggest threats to actual trans people is the community, I know that is kind of a no duh to some people, but I felt I could expand that reason in a different direction with my own experiences. Which is the only reason I posted anything because I have nothing to really offer to the rest of your questions, I just saw one thing I thought I could offer a perspective on so I went for it.

 

[wrangled tard]

in a general sense, it seems like a lot of people are gay from molestation (regardless if they're willing to admit that or not). This of course brings up a 'chicken or the egg' situation, where one has to wonder about the roots of the abuse on the part of the actual molester. Some people have said it's a natural biological response to human overpopulation, which also seems credible

I'm not hetero and wasn't molested as a child that I know of at least and there are millions of gay people and highly doubt that even 25% of them were molested, I can't find a specific statistic to back that claim up so it's just an opinion.

I have my own completely unoriginal theory that homosexuality is a natural form of population control, it's pretty common even in animals so it certainly isn't just a human choice thing. That said, there are very blatant differences between normal gay people and the types that wear socks on their cocks and piss on people in public. The latter just comes down to repulsive human deviance.

 

[V0dka]

LGBT people haven’t had the opportunity to grow into a healthy community. If it could start over with established, reasonable leaders, I think it would look very different.

Why does their have to be a LGBT "community" exactly? I mean, straight people don't have the annual big titty chicks with guns riding muscle cars and tanks parade every year. In fact that would probably be shut down if someone tried it these days.

 

[Techpriest]

Homosexual behavior in animals - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Maxliam]

Why does their have to be a LGBT "community" exactly? I mean, straight people don't have the annual big titty chicks with guns riding muscle cars and tanks parade every year. In fact that would probably be shut down if someone tried it these days.

We should and honestly it's because being straight is the normal, right way to be. Being a member of the Let's Go Beat Those Queers (LGBTQ) is really an exercise in sucking unless you're like a hot chick who is bi or les. Holy shit that would be so awesome to be born a hot lesbian with big fat tits.