Heterosexuality is unnatural

[Buddha1]

No i didn't make the comment in haste. Homosexuality is a dead end in evolution except in a few species.

There are enough scientific evidences now to throw away that motivated theory alongwith darwin.

But it's ok, I wouldn't want to use this space to discuss homosexuality. I will come round to discussing it --- one day. Then I'd ask you to submit proofs!

Let's be finished with heterosexuality first.

 

[c20H25N3o]

If you are really sincere about what you're saying (your last posts definitely point otherwise, because you showed attitude typical of those caring badly for the power the heterosexual identity carries), then I'd say you are among a minority of men who are closest to the term 'heterosexual'.

I can further divide those who are closest to the term heterosexual as follows:
The first ones are the problematic ones --- those who are the real wimps and who are holding the rest of the guys to ransom, as the enearned enormous social powers has gotten to their heads. Most of them are meterosexuals, but it does not mean that all meterosexuals are bad. These men actually may or may not feel sexual desire for other men (most of them do, but will deny it vehemently), though they are incapable of bonding with men. It is their willingness to submit to the masculine female and force the entire male race to throw their destiny under the authority of women (with the help of the heterosexual ideology which they so vehemently protect!)

The second ones are the genuine men who are capable of sharing an emotional bond with women, and it is not a power issue for them. They are in a minority -- no doubt, and most of them transgendered. But if I take your word for it (and you are probably true!) then there are exceptional men who are straight as well as capable of bonding with the female (and inability to be attracted by men) --- and they are probably the third lot. But again like I said it is not a power issue for them. They are part of nature --- of nature's scheme of things unlike the upper group who are driving everyone against their nature!

If you are from the third lot, then my advice to you would be to stop relating with the oppressive heterosexual identity --- at least don't do it so sinerely. It's unreal, being a natural person, you should not give your stamp of approval to an unnatural identity. As such you should be on our side not theirs. You belong in the natural scheme of things along with other straight and transgendered men, irrespective of who you love or bond with!

As long as you --- even ignorantly, use and thus uphold the heterosexual identity you will have to share the blame for the harm it has caused to the world.

Most men I know are what you would term as the 'second lot'. These are peace loving men with wives and children. Heterosexual men who feel no need to assert their sexuality. Indeed to assert your sexuality when you are married and settled and are trying to raise kids, would be a little inappropriate to say the least because for you the dance of courtship is over.

Let us not despise the young men for whom the dance of courtship and the display of peacock feathers is all part of growing up. These same young men will put away their feathers at the appropriate time also.

There is no harm other than in your mind. Sure you will have the odd case of homophobic rage but in cases such as these, the homophobia is used as an excuse for a person's rage full stop. My challenge to you is to be objective. Tell me something positive about the dance of courtship that young men display, that display of their feathers so proud.

peace

c20

 

[Avatar]

Just because you are irritated by someone's point of view doesn't make that point of view wrong.

Mon deu, of course no!! I just don't agree with it, because I see much more important things in life than getting a bonding partner. Alas you for some reason make the issue extremely important.
But our both views most likely are subjective.

 

[duendy]

Mon deu, of course no!! I just don't agree with it, because I see much more important things in life than getting a bonding partner.

me))))who tehell would put up wid ya, weirdo?? go checkout my pffer in MY thread 'what is consciousness'!

Alas you for some reason make the issue extremely important.
But our both views most likely are subjective.

you confuse you subjectivity wit intellience and then create havok wid yer big mouth

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Well, I can't really take you serious anymore can't I if you state that there is enough scientific evidence to throw away the theory of evolution. THE framework for ALL modern biological research. "nothing makes sense except in the light of evolution" (probably slightly misquoted).

The same thing is valid for homosexuality.

But I bid this discussion farewell now. It would be all rather pointless to say the least.

 

[Buddha1]

Most men I know are what you would term as the 'second lot'. These are peace loving men with wives and children. Heterosexual men who feel no need to assert their sexuality. Indeed to assert your sexuality when you are married and settled and are trying to raise kids, would be a little inappropriate to say the least because for you the dance of courtship is over.c20

The second lot is of transgendered men. peace

You are very mistaken if you think that most men are in the 'second lot' (I'm sure you mean the third lot). I don't know men you know, but you can't be living away from the rest of the humanity.

Most men, believe me are not in any of the three lots described above. They are just not heterosexual or near the thing. They have a sexual desire for women, but they also have a sexual desire for men --- + are inclined to bond with men rather than women.

We do tend to think that the the rest of the world is like us (you can't blame me for that, because I'm speaking here based on by work experience -- not by indivisual experiences...alone!), especially, when the rest of the guys outwardly seem to be, well....like us. We wouldn't know anything about what they are going through in reality because on the outside they are wearing masks --- masks, that we know nothing about, because we never had to wear them, and we don't even know exist. So we, in all sincerity believe those masks to be the true face of those men. Time to see the reality!

Let us not despise the young men for whom the dance of courtship and the display of peacock feathers is all part of growing up. These same young men will put away their feathers at the appropriate time also.

What I'm most concerned about is the young men --- the majority of them go through immense hardships in order to fit themselves into these masks. And this is coming through my work experience. Trust me, as I have trusted you with what you've told me about yourself. (I think we do carry this mutual wavelength!)

There is no harm other than in your mind. Sure you will have the odd case of homophobic rage but in cases such as these, the homophobia is used as an excuse for a person's rage full stop. My challenge to you is to be objective. Tell me something positive about the dance of courtship that young men display, that display of their feathers so proud.

You are blissfully ignorant of what pain people go through and have been going through (for centuries). I have seen it all. And I'm full of anger. That I'm still being logical and open, is something I should be given credit for. You are asking me to trust that everything I have seen so far is unreal? years and years of work, meeting thousands and thousands of men from all walks of life. Why don't you for once, come out of your limited individual experience and talk to a few people on this board who have been on the receiving end. The dance of courtship that young men display will start looking meaningless to you, when the others are burning to sustain that dance.

You could only accuse me of not being objective if I were just speaking in the air or out of my individual experiences (as I can accuse you of!). My points are up for discussion, and you can bring in all the evidences or other stuff (need not be scientific or even logical!) that can show that it's all in my mind.

And once again, my suggestion to you is to disown the heterosexual identity and just be a natural man, if you don't want to be hurt. Because, my fight is against the heterosexual ideology. And it would help if you stop seeing the world divided between heterosexuality and homosexuality and see my fight as that of homosexuality and my enemy as 'homophobia'.

I can't forever go on explaining these things to you, if you stubbornly refuse to see what I am saying!

My challenge to you is to be objective. Tell me something positive about the dance of courtship that young men display, that display of their feathers so proud.

I have seen one dance of courtship that young men often display that you have no idea of. But it's done in fear of the society, and very very discreetly -- such intense is the dance, yet so disceet that it becomes irritating at times. But it still is beautiful. So beautiful that it is worth fighting the society for!

 

[Buddha1]

Well, I can't really take you serious anymore can't I if you state that there is enough scientific evidence to throw away the theory of evolution. THE framework for ALL modern biological research. "nothing makes sense except in the light of evolution" (probably slightly misquoted).

The same thing is valid for homosexuality.

But I bid this discussion farewell now. It would be all rather pointless to say the least.

Well, I guess you need an excuse to quit!

 

[jayleew]

Oh, please keep posting, I'll just take my time to respond. It is the one's who are disgruntled with the society who can give more valuable inside information about it than those who perfectly fit in.

Why?

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Well, I guess you need an excuse to quit!

I will continue if you can present evidence that dismits the theory of evolution.

 

[jayleew]

Which makes me wonder. When conservative Christians write about homosexuality (and it's almost always negative, because they already know what the Bible declares to be true, so they have support that view, however they see fit and with whatever "evidence" they can gather) they will usually somewhere along the line bring up the so-called 10% MYTH. No! Ten percent are not GAY! Kinsey was a sodomite, and possibly a pedophile as well, so how can we trust him. NO! Only 1 or 2% are gay.
What about the guy I just described (and the countless others like him). These surveys that show such low percentages for gay people are usually the ones that ask right out if someone is gay or straight. Do you think this person I described would, especially at that time, have declared himself to be gay. He was one of those people who is straight in ACT only. But apparently ACT goes really far in this society.
Like you yourself said, the mouth may blabber one thing, but the inner mind is something completely different.

Yes, the Bible does tell its believers that homosexuality is wrong. Why did God dislike it? In order to dislike something, it has to exist, right? So, obviously God knew it existed because he disliked it.

So, it would stand to reason that homosexuality is a natural thing because it exists, just as heterosexuality is a natural thing because it exists.

Yet, why did God say, "don't be a homosexual"? Why did God say, "don't be a thief"?

Are both of these things that people are motivated to be, natural things?

Society concedes on what is natural and America's society doesn't like people stealing and people committing homosexual acts, and we must abide if we wish to be a part of that society...or change that society, which is what is happening today.

It wouldn't surprise me if homosexuality is natural because it is natural for humans to be who they want to be, which are selfish, instinctive, beings slightly more "civilized" than apes. God commanded me to not be natural and be not of this world, so I am not a homosexual, and no longer a thief.

You have a unique gift to see past the sex of a person to desire intimacy with a beautiful individual who is beautiful as you see them. Sex is sex, it is just an act and can bring the same pleasure from many ways: men, women, beasts, hand, toy (friction is friction, no matter how you make it). It is the way and with whom that makes the moment intimate and more satisfying sexually. So, what are you doing with that? Do you believe in God?

I know I don't have that gift because I could never be "turned on" by the male anatomy. I had a one-eyed snake touch my anus and I was so repulsed that I wanted to puke. One touch in that manner and I knew that it was not a natural experience. I am a sexual being, so I probably would enjoy even a man touching my genitals (but I would never give in that relationship) because friction is friction. That was the last time I experimented with homosexuality when I was young.

 

[Giambattista]

You have a unique gift to see past the sex of a person to desire intimacy with a beautiful individual who is beautiful as you see them. Sex is sex, it is just an act and can bring the same pleasure from many ways: men, women, beasts, hand, toy (friction is friction, no matter how you make it). It is the way and with whom that makes the moment intimate and more satisfying sexually. So, what are you doing with that? Do you believe in God?

What do you mean by "What are you doing with that?"???

You seem to be telling me on one hand that you for some reason "experimented" with homosexuality, but that God obviously doesn't like it and neither do you, but then you say I have a unique gift (I assume you were referring to me) to see past the sex/gender, and that "sex is sex" no matter what kind. You go from being apparently opposed to apparently indifferent about homosexuality in a few sentences. Hmmm. Tres bizarre.

As far as "So, what are you doing with that?" are you asking about what I do sexually, with people, if at all? Because I don't have sex. Just because I'm predominantly attracted to my own gender doesn't make me a maniac about "gay sex". Same gender attraction doesn't make my life a 24 hour sexcapade.

And "gay sex" doesn't in any way restrict itself to anal sex, to address your little one-eyed snake statement. Does love = sex? Or is that what people assume is true of homosexuality?

 

[Giambattista]

And to answer your question of belief in God: yes, I believe in a higher being/existence/afterlife. And that includes certain morals. However, those morals do not dictate to me that man + woman = PERFECTION or THE ONLY WAY.
I'm VERY familiar with what the Bible says (or purports to say) about homosexuality.
The Apostle Paul's argument "from Nature" against male-male relationships leaves something to be desired. In a similar vein, according to Paul, "Nature" tells us that it is wrong for a man to have long hair. However, biology, which is a big part of nature, tells me that if a man OR a woman doesn't cut their hair, then it will indeed be long.
Some people hold the Bible to be infallible and perfect. In other words, it's never wrong. However, if this were truly so, then I HIGHLY DOUBT there would be so many different opinions on the meanings of certain passages.
That's all I'll say about that.

 

[jayleew]

What do you mean by "What are you doing with that?"???

You seem to be telling me on one hand that you for some reason "experimented" with homosexuality, but that God obviously doesn't like it and neither do you, but then you say I have a unique gift (I assume you were referring to me) to see past the sex/gender, and that "sex is sex" no matter what kind. You go from being apparently opposed to apparently indifferent about homosexuality in a few sentences. Hmmm. Tres bizarre.

I am opposed to homosexuality in the sense of having sex, and I know it is not what nature intended, both from personal experience and from the Spirit of God. Obviosuly, sex exists in nature for the purpose of procreating. If procreation was not necessary, sex and sex organs would not be necessary. However, the sensations experienced and chemicals released in the brain can do many things emotionally for beings, so animals and humans use the activity for many reasons from expression to satisfaction, but mainly for fullfillment. I am trying to understand homosexuality, that is why I am indifferent to it. At this point, it appears to be nothing more than an intimate relationship that has overstepped its bounds because of nature's creation.

Homosexuality itself is unnatural by the requirement of heterosexuality (for most species) as necessary for procreation, but the impulse to have homosexual relationships is natural because of what nature has created, and that is the chemicals released during sex (not just at the climax). The only valid reason anyone could have to not practice homosexuality is that God says it is wrong, in his word. The Bible is clear in its stance against fornication, natural and unnatural. Fornication is clearly defined as any sex outside of marriage, and marriage is clearly defined as a bond between a man and a woman. There is no evidence that supports homosexuality in the Bible either. Yes, the Bible is open to interpretation, it is fallible. But, the truth is still in there, and we cannot toss it away because this or that interpretation does not fit our set of morals (and homosexuals in America reject the interpretation and claim that their interpretation is better, but an interpretation is still an interpretation). Besides, as far as we know, the Bible might be literal. The bottom line is we must be objective when interpreting the Bible and not once think, "that verse is not talking about MY sin." Because the Bible is the law and is meant to condemn every one of us to death, but the second part of the book is a love letter and the ending is happily ever after if you believe in God and his sacrifice for us.

As far as "So, what are you doing with that?" are you asking about what I do sexually, with people, if at all? Because I don't have sex. Just because I'm predominantly attracted to my own gender doesn't make me a maniac about "gay sex". Same gender attraction doesn't make my life a 24 hour sexcapade.

And "gay sex" doesn't in any way restrict itself to anal sex, to address your little one-eyed snake statement. Does love = sex? Or is that what people assume is true of homosexuality?

If there was no sex, your relationship should be defined as a friendship to an intimate relationship, depending on the level. When sex enters the picture, it becomes a sexual relationship and defined as homo or heteosexual relations. Yes, many people say love = sex, but that is not true, any mature person should realize that.

 

[Buddha1]

Why?

Well, I guess because they have a deep vested interest in continuing the things as they are, and they are unable to see its drawbacks (and even when they see to acknowledge the drawbacks), which those who have to pay the price for keeping that system in place would know!

But are you trying to avoid the real issues, by involving me into such petty details.

 

[Buddha1]

Yes, the Bible does tell its believers that homosexuality is wrong. Why did God dislike it? In order to dislike something, it has to exist, right? So, obviously God knew it existed because he disliked it.

Please, no more preaching, where is your objectivity now. We all know what Christianity believes. Tell us something new.

Society concedes on what is natural and America's society doesn't like people stealing and people committing homosexual acts, and we must abide if we wish to be a part of that society...or change that society, which is what is happening today.

In any case we have been through the 'stealing' thing before and I and others showed you how you were wrong. So not that all over again! Anything but that.

You have a unique gift to see past the sex of a person to desire intimacy with a beautiful individual who is beautiful as you see them. Sex is sex, it is just an act and can bring the same pleasure from many ways: men, women, beasts, hand, toy (friction is friction, no matter how you make it)

O.K., so why can't so-called 'heterosexuals' see past the sex of a woman to desire intimacy with a beautful infividual who is as beautiful as you see them. Why do they need to date without any intention to procreate or even to marry that girl? Why do they make a power statement of their sexuality --- publicly displaying it all around? Why is your T.V., media and movies full of male-female sex between non-married people. Why are there so many single mothers in your country with such a huge population of so-called god ordained heterosexual men.

Why don't you save your preaching for the 'heterosexuals'. For homosexuals are only, what....2% or 5%? Why don't you clean your own room before you preach others to clean theirs.

In any case, I can blow Christianity apart within minutes as a farce of a religion. You guys have fooled this world for long. So beat it!

 

[Buddha1]

I'd very violently react to any guy that would make any fluffy, physical advances towards me.
Or at least ridicule over him. Pathetic people ruled by their dick.

If a macho guy made advances to you honey (assuming that you are worth it (that's a big question mark!)), you wouldn't have much chance to ridicule him, let alone be violent . It would be commendable if you could mumble out a few words to make an excuse and save your ass! And if this happens inside a prison or army or a college fraternity..... well god save your honour!

 

[Avatar]

I'm a martial artist, baby, I know how to treat men (and women).
p.s. 3 gay guys have already done that. Must be my leather clothing and jewlery.
Good that my vocal reply has been enough.

 

[Buddha1]

I'm a martial artist, baby, I know how to treat men (and women).
p.s. 3 gay guys have already done that. Must be my leather clothing and jewlery.
Good that my vocal reply has been enough.

Well that's because they were gay!

See, big macho guy is a different matter altogether, martial art or no martial art!

 

[Buddha1]

I will continue if you can present evidence that dismits the theory of evolution.

I didn't even talk about the theroy of evolution.

But a big part of Darwin's theory --- the sexual selection theory --- and that reproduction is the primary drive of all individuals of a species is certainly trash and have been proved to be so.

But if you want to discuss that you can start another thread about it and I'll join you! I wouldn't want to divert from the basic contention of this thread, i.e., heterosexuality is queer, unnecessarily. To discuss homosexuality + the theory of evolution in this thread will completely disrupt the original issue. In any case, after I'm through with this I'm going to start a thread to discuss homosexuality.

Certainly you are not going to worry about all of my beliefs. If you can prove me wrong on the current issue!

 

[Buddha1]

I'm a martial artist, baby, I know how to treat men (and women).
p.s. 3 gay guys have already done that. Must be my leather clothing and jewlery.
Good that my vocal reply has been enough.

You shouldn't wear all that jewellery or you are going to attract more of those gay guys!

Although the jewellery will repel the macho guys and keep them away from you!