Heterosexuality is unnatural

[Giambattista]

And those who you label bisexuals are not stupid. They have learned to survive under a hostile heterosexual environment. Won't you say they are leading a better life than you are.

Why would I say that they're leading a better life than me???

If they're happy with their mediocrity, than I guess they MUST be better! And I guess that all depends on how you define bisexuality. If I REALLY friggin cared a whole bunch, I could probably get along faking it, that is, pretending to be one of these people that's head over heels for the opposite sex (like I know some people who claim to be straight do).
But I can't be fake. The little attraction I have for women, SOME people would magnify and glorify it to no end. I personally can't. I DETEST procreation and anything to do with it. I detest this parade that society has made out of heterosexuality, and I won't march in it. Anything associated with either heterosexuality OR procreation I will have nothing to do with.

People are self-righteous about their heterosexual tendencies, as I'm sure you have seen.

I'm self-righteous about my oneness with my own kind. With my self. I don't need nor care for this ridiculous notion of the opposite sex being the OTHER that I DESPERATELY need to interface with.
I've read such pseudo-religious doctrines about complementarity between the genders and could care less. MALE and FEMALE he created them. Therefore you'll never be complete until you give up this selfish makeshift "love" that you claim is really love and experience love as it was meant to be, between man and woman.


And as far as so-called gay men are concerned, most that I've KNOWN were gay were overly effeminate, almost in an artificial manner. And I have no faith in those either. I have faith in pretty much nobody. And counseling and anti-depressants aren't going to change my attitudes.

I don't know and don't care about gay or straight identities in my world. Identifying as gay or homosexual doesn't automatically make a person effeminate. Clearly it does in some cases. But if you go to
http://www.straightacting.com/ there are apparently people who strongly disagree with the notion that you have to be effeminate to like other men.
Maybe you're too hung up on labels? Maybe not.

I have an acute sense of right and wrong, stupidity and sensibility. Nothing short of a divine miracle can convince me or change my mind about things.

It's sad, but I truly detest physical existence. I HATE procreation with a passion. All these "heterosexual" people that think procreation (as if all of them did it anyway!) is one thing that makes them superior to gay people... well, they're absolutely idiotic. And I don't care about contributing to this world or to the great edifices that they're constantly labouring over.

Hey! I don't hate people. I'm a very nice person. People tend to like me, even when I'm completely unaware of it. But all in all, I NEVER asked to come to this stupid planet, and I KNOW my parents had some kind of role or fairy tale fantasy in mind when they decided to procreate and give birth to me.

Roles and expectations as far as society goes are cheap, and their little tricks/mind control don't go too far with me.

What exactly are you implying? That I FORCE myself to be bisexual?

I don't really care about sex. I'm into friendship more!!!

Besides, I like cats! Cats are fuzzy and cuddly. That's where I stand!!!!!!!

 

[Buddha1]

Look, I know there are plenty of guys who would never call themselves gay, but if you were able to look inside their minds and see their true selves, then probably a TON of them would be labelled bisexual

I have this opportunity to look inside the minds of straight men. I had the opportunity to see their masks and feel their pressures because I was one of them.

This is why I want to share what I know with the world. Noone knows about tommorrow, and I don't want to die without sharing this important knowledge. Surely, I'm not the first one to see this truth, but I guess circumstances so far had been not so that people could challenge the whole system as directly as I have done in these days. Actually, I think people have been saying this trugh in their own words in each period, but the truth was censored by the powers that be --- be it Kinsey with his research on American sexuality, or Freud who said human beings are basically bisexual, or all those innumerous little known scholars, historians and scientists who have been hinting at the truth time and again. But the world was too busy heterosexualising the society to pay any notice.

But I think the time has come to uncover the truth.

 

[Buddha1]

And those who you label bisexuals are not stupid. They have learned to survive under a hostile heterosexual environment. Won't you say they are leading a better life than you are.

Straight men have been living isolated lives like other men, and had no way to look at the larger conspiracy. They have been responding to their day to day pressures to be heterosexual using the easiest or rather the only option they think they have.

I think it would be wrong to call so-called bisexuals (I use the word straight) stupid. If anything they have been cowards so far. But then again, they did not have much choice. When the society puts such a reward on 'sex with women', and such extreme penalties on 'sex with men', even if they have an iota of sexual interest in women -- or even none at all, it makes sense --- if you don't want to live your life facing indinity loneliness and depression, to hang on to that small sexual feeling for women --- for it can give you an access into the powerful straight world.

But once men get wiser, it would be really a cowardice on their part if they fail to stand up for their right to be men.

 

[Buddha1]

Why would I say that they're leading a better life than me???

Being honest with yourself in matters like this in a hostile heterosexual society has enormous social costs. You get isolated, abused, exploited. Sometimes it's just not worth it.

I think people who are honest with themselves learn a lot about life, but pay a heavy price for it. So all this effort is worth anything only if with their experiences they make life better for others. If you have to burn, then it is better to illumiinate.

Otherwise it will be a life wasted, and it is better to live like the rest --- faking it, running down 'fags' and enjoying loads of social power and status.

 

[Buddha1]

I DETEST procreation and anything to do with it. I detest this parade that society has made out of heterosexuality, and I won't march in it. Anything associated with either heterosexuality OR procreation I will have nothing to do with.

People are self-righteous about their heterosexual tendencies, as I'm sure you have seen.

Gosh, you really gotta work on that!

Hate procreation. Why! Children are the most beautiful thing that you can experience on this earth. I think you have an intense hate for heterosexuality. That's understandable. But when you relate procreation with heterosexuality --- you taking their bite. In fact if you confuse male-female sex with heterosexuality you are taking their bite.

Procreation does not involve men who have no sexual attraction for men. In fact so-called 'bisexual' men are more virile and perhaps that also means better genes than the heterosexual ones (the virile part has been proven by studies!). Heterosexuals have been claiming procreation as their 'thing' but have been able to gain power because they fooled others into believing that procreation cannot happen without them. But you would be more of a fool to allow them that. If anything 'heterosexual's keep looking for ways to avoid 'procreation'. It's the masculine men who have sex only for procreation.

And similarly for male-female sex. I don't think its fair to hate male-female sexual desire or the sexual act itself. What is detestable is the heterosexual identity, the heterosexual system which forces men, especially straight men to have sex with women.

Marriage is a bit inconvenient, and I guess its all right to hate it, but as long as it is limited to a few men, its alright.

 

[Giambattista]

Gosh, you really gotta work on that!

Hate procreation. Why! Children are the most beautiful thing that you can experience on this earth.

Believe me, I mean what I say! I don't dislike children. I like them, and I value their youth and their innocence.

However, there are WAY TOO MANY of them on this earth. Millions of them starve each year in non-American (I know, it sounds funny) countries, and yet people think it's their DUTY to make more of them. And let's not forget what a GIANT influence parents are on children.
Stupid parents generally breed stupid children. And there's plenty of less than ideal parents in this world.
What's wrong with shunning that aspect of society?

I haven't eaten meat in a number of years, because I don't like the whole raising-animals-for-slaughter business. I'm not an animal rights extremist, and I don't really pay attention to them, but I don't feel alright supporting the mass slaughter of animals so that McDonalds can have cheap hamburgers.
Some cultures more or less require meat because of their climates and lifestyles, and couldn't get along without it. That's fine. But the way it is in alot of western countries, America especially, these animals are COMPLETELY taken for granted. How many animals die needlessly each year because of all the meat that's thrown away or wasted??? I say this because EVERY new child brought into this world has the potential to be a part of this destitution.

One MUST MUST MUST take into account this and MANY OTHER facets of life BEFORE actually bringing a new life into this world when the world is nearly bursting at the seams with a population that's having trouble sustaining itself as it is.
And most people DON'T think about this AT ALL!!! All they can see is some fantastic and rosy future that may or may not be real, but betting all the while that things are going to turn out just so. The differences between this FANTASY world that parents dream up about their offspring and the REAL WORLD are often stark.

I CANNOT promote procreation because of these reasons. My judgements are sound, no matter what preconceived notions anyone has about the matter. Unless you're a Catholic or someone of similar mind for whom procreating is to be accomplished at all costs. For those people, nothing will change their minds!

 

[Giambattista]

Gosh, you really gotta work on that!

I may sound cold, but my views on breeding and overpopulation (or population in general) stem from logic and good sense.

And the WORLD is COLD. Period. Sure, there's love. There's goodness in the world. But how many people can't see it? How many people WANT it, but never find it??? How many people see it happen for others, but NEVER for themselves? People rarely ask these questions before they go ahead and make more people to add to the mess.

Take ME for example. I sound bitter, because I am. What are we talking about? Sexual identity, to keep things tidy!

I'm forced by my very nature to stick to my convictions that I'm very attracted to my own gender and I CRAVE someone like me to be a part of my life. But this world like I said is EXTREMELY COLD to people who see no point in the pointless games that most people enjoy. Chasing after women doesn't appeal to me. Fathering children is even LESS appealing.

You don't conform to the role of being attracted to women and all that entails (and some of those rituals are pretty stupid!) and you've taken away a BIG CHUNK of normalness that gives life "meaning."

Add to it a fiercely independent and nonconformist mind, and you have an outstandingly unique person that unfortunately is NOT going to have much luck finding happiness in the world because it is BUILT AND DESIGNED to support people who CONFORM, sexually and otherwise.

I tried to illustrate in my previous posts that YEA though I'm very attracted other guys, I'm not satisfied with sexual relations. I could completely give up all chances of sexual intercourse if I could meet someone that I REALLY LOVED, who REALLY LOVED me back. This then rules out me deriving satisfaction from silly little sexual encounters.

I'm not, and cannot, be satisfied with substandard. My standards may be high, but most people's seem to be exceptionally low.

My chances of meeting this person are almost zero. Someone even half-perfect is a slim chance. It's not necessarily a bleak gray world for everyone, but for some of us it's pretty much like living in hell.

And to mention procreation again, I could NEVER NEVER NEVER do this or make this atrocity possible for someone else. I DO NOT care what people have to say, whether they mean well or not. It's like playing Russian roulette with someone else's life.

 

[Buddha1]

I've carried this discussion forward from the thread Heterosexuality is Queer , because this really suits here. It shows how heterosexuality harms individuals.

Believe me, I mean what I say! I don't dislike children. I like them, and I value their youth and their innocence.

However, there are WAY TOO MANY of them on this earth. Millions of them starve each year in non-American (I know, it sounds funny) countries, and yet people think it's their DUTY to make more of them. And let's not forget what a GIANT influence parents are on children.
Stupid parents generally breed stupid children. And there's plenty of less than ideal parents in this world.
What's wrong with shunning that aspect of society?

O.K., I agree with you! Eventhough I love babies and children, I hate the heterosexual ideology that sources its enormous powers out of a misplaced claim to be responsible for procreation, when in fact all its thrust is on casual, non-procreative male-female sex, while its the traditional men who really couldn't careless for the power male-female sex brings --- who actually procreate and look after children.

And yes, the world has had far too many of them. LIke I said if 'God' could speak to us today he would make it a sin to "Lie in the bed as one lies with another man" and a sin to marry --- especially seeing how the heterosexual few has exploited the others using so-called 'God's promclamation'. But he would exempt a few just so that human generation will survive. I guess those few will be the ones who deserve and desire it the most --- the transgendered.

And that is what the society should do. I mean look at all the bursting population of the world today. The society's obsession with procreation has gone too far. Procreation brought power of numbers, but now it has become a burden. It's the greed of the human civilisation for unlimited power that resulted in unfairly empowering the heterosexual.

 

[Buddha1]

PRESSURES on men to be heterosexual

Men face innumerous and intense pressures to change/ mutilate/ hide their natural sexual needs and urges (including the need for emotional intimacy and bonds) and create those that don't exist naturally. These pressures are created by a strong social mechanism of male oppression developed by the society at least two thousand years ago. This mechanism consists of various pressures that force men to exaggerate their sexual interests in women (even where it is not present at all!), and depending on which society you are in --- to hide, suppress, mutilate, deny, hate and ignore their sexual need for men. In a heterosexual society this mechanism translates into innumerous and intense pressures to be heterosexual.

A contention important to this discussion is the fact effectively hidden by the heterosexual societies that almost 95% of men have a sexual need for other men, most of it a strong need. But proving this is outside the scope of this discussion, I'm creating a new one for it. just wait. And if this is true, then you can judge the enormity of the injustice and pain this mechanism brings on men, particularly straight men.

(Please note that I'm not using the western definitions of these terms because they are designed to mislead. For a renewed terminology click here

These pressures can be classified based on the nature of pressures as:

· Pressures that seek to reward and thus encourage heterosexuality

· Pressures that seek to punish and thus discourage men when they do not conform to heterosexuality

These pressures can also be classifed as follows:

Explicit and External Pressures:

These pressures come in various blatant, open and obvious forms to exert the pressures of heterosexuality, whether it is to exaggerate/ fake sexual interest in women or to suppress sexual need for men or to wear other fake symbols of masculinity.

Although these pressures have a strong psychological effect on men, they primarily seek to physically or materially harm men when they oppose heterosexaulity or to physically or materially benefit them when they conform.

These presssures work on all biological genders of men --- feminine, masculine or meterosexual.

Some examples of External and Explicit pressures:

Religious injunctions,
e.g. the persecution of men for loving other men by Christianity and Islam.
or the institutionalisation of heterosexual marriage, etc.

Legal injunctions, e.g., state laws that punish men who have sex with men,
state laws that don't give state recognition or benefits to unions between two men.
state laws that prevent so-called homosexuals from entering the army, etc.

Social measures and injunctions: Denigrating, abusing, ridiculing, threatening, harming, being violent to men who don't conform to heterosexuality.
Respecting, glorifying, rewarding, praising, benefitting men who conform to heterosexuality.


Implicit, Disguised and Internal Pressures:

These pressures are by far the strongest pressures that men face. One thing about them is that they are hidden. They are not easily seen for what they are --- as oppressive measures. It is difficult to pinpoint their existence. But they work on the psychologiy of men, often inculcating great psychological fear and obedicance in them. At the same time they psychologically make men who conform to heterosexuality feel extremely superior --- and this acts as a pressure in itself.

Although these are the stronges pressures of heteroseuality, their existence has so far not been acknowledged, and thus any studies researches etc. that have sought to understand or assess male sexuality have convenintly assumed the outer behaviour to be denoting the natural needs and aspirations of men.

Some of the internal and implicit pressures are:

Pressures of Social Masculinity: These are the strongest pressures exerted by far and are basically meant to control the sexual behaviour of straight men. Since straight men are the strongest human gender, external force will not work on them in the long run. Therefore, the society uses cunningness and treachery to nail them in --- by manipulating social mascuilinity, isolating them from each other and thus making them weaker and thus making them vulnerable by exploiting their need for social power.

Feminine males whether they classify themselves as 'homosexual' or live as 'straights' due to their 'heterosexuality', experience this pressure only superficially, and are not aware of its existence or how it can exert pressure on men and change their outer behaviour. Women are blissfully unaware of these pressures and are gullible to believe in the image that men present of themselves as true.

Other Social pressures: e.g. dividing the society cunningly into heterosexual and homosexual to institutionalise heterosexuality,
intense propaganda by the media to showcase heterosexuality as masculine and so-called homosexuality as feminine.
Glorification of casual male-female sex by the media and showcasing it as powerful.
Heterosexualisation of social spaces, including forcing them to be mixed gender.
Removing all social opportunities for straight men to positive sexual bonds with other men, without leaving the 'straight' space.

The above pressures work on all genders of men, but they have the most devastating effect on masculine (= straight) men.

 

[c20H25N3o]

Bhudda1 - Is your diatribe not putting pressure on heterosexual men to feel that they are indeed 'queer' for being heterosexual. How is what you are doing any more paletable than say the pressure you believe society put on males to be heterosexual?

Aren't you just trying to create a balance using an opposing but equally ridiculous set of pressures?

A contention important to this discussion is the fact effectively hidden by the heterosexual societies that almost 95% of men have a sexual need for other men, most of them a strong need.

These 'facts' are pulled straight out of your butt. There is just no evidence to support this. Now you will say 'There is no evidence because it is 'hidden'. Comon, it just is not true, not hidden. Heterosexuals cannot even contest your words without being 'liars' or 'repressed homosexuals'. Just accept that there are all kinds of people in the world and stop patronising them by second guessing their real motives and desires. Each will live according to their conscience, no more, no less.

peace

c20

 

[Buddha1]

These 'facts' are pulled straight out of your butt. There is just no evidence to support this. Now you will say 'There is no evidence because it is 'hidden'. Comon, it just is not true, not hidden. Heterosexuals cannot even contest your words without being 'liars' or 'repressed homosexuals'. Just accept that there are all kinds of people in the world and stop patronising them by second guessing their real motives and desires. Each will live according to their conscience, no more, no less. c20

You're a fan of mine I must say!

By the way, I don't just 'blame' or put contentions without evidences on my side. Even though the evidences have been carefully hidden, destroyed, misrepresented, but a careful analysis can still prove the above contention and many others beyond doubt.

 

[Buddha1]

Giambatista,

that's quite a tongue twister, but still is interesting feels good to pronounce.

I'm taking this discussion with you to the following site because I think it will fit here perfectly:

Heterosexuality is unethical, immoral and harmful

Do join me there!

 

[Giambattista]

Giambatista,

that's quite a tongue twister, but still is interesting feels good to pronounce.

I'm taking this discussion with you to the following site because I think it will fit here perfectly:

Heterosexuality is unethical, immoral and harmful

Do join me there!

No! I refuse to join you there! Okay. I guess I'll do it. But I didn't like those peoples' attitudes. I read through quite a bit of it, but they those people in there seemed pretty dense in the head. Of course, the whole topic is of a confrontational nature, and people are bound to get dumb.

 

[Giambattista]

I've carried this discussion forward from the thread Heterosexuality is Queer , because this really suits here. It shows how heterosexuality harms individuals.


O.K., I agree with you! Eventhough I love babies and children, I hate the heterosexual ideology that sources its enormous powers out of a misplaced claim to be responsible for procreation, when in fact all its thrust is on casual, non-procreative male-female sex, while its the traditional men who really couldn't careless for the power male-female sex brings --- who actually procreate and look after children.

And yes, the world has had far too many of them. LIke I said if 'God' could speak to us today he would make it a sin to "Lie in the bed as one lies with another man" and a sin to marry --- especially seeing how the heterosexual few has exploited the others using so-called 'God's promclamation'. But he would exempt a few just so that human generation will survive. I guess those few will be the ones who deserve and desire it the most --- the transgendered.

And that is what the society should do. I mean look at all the bursting population of the world today. The society's obsession with procreation has gone too far. Procreation brought power of numbers, but now it has become a burden. It's the greed of the human civilisation for unlimited power that resulted in unfairly empowering the heterosexual.

I see some partial agreement with me. Most people, ESPECIALLY those who have already had children and are now getting grandchildren, won't touch this sacred cow. All I hear is, "Children are wonderful! Children are the future!" That may well be, but what kind of future will it be?

EVERY HUMAN BEING is killing someone or something else JUST to be able to survive. People in the westernized Amazon cut down the rainforests so they can raise cattle. And from what I understand, in many or most cases, the soil becomes unusable after a year or two. Maybe someone's working on it, but maybe not.
Every human being produces pollution if they live in a civilized developed country. Gasoline for cars, factories, powerplants... garbage and refuse, landfills. No one can get past that. And sometimes (very often) the price of this unchecked and rather SELFISH breeding is one of utter destruction. And most of these people don't think twice about it.

There should be mandatory sterilization laws, but people are stupid. It's our RIGHT to destroy the earth. GOD gave it to us to trample as we see fit!

 

[Giambattista]

In case you're unfamiliar with Italian, the 'GIAM' in Giambattista is pronounced like Jom (in English) so it's basically Jom-buh-teesta if you were to use rudimentary English phonetic spelling. It's a shortened form of Giovanni Battista, sometimes spelled Gianbattista, replacing the 'm' with 'n'.

Or maybe you know a little Italian? Probably not. It's basically John the Baptist, a character from the Bible. VERY popular name, at least it was a few hundred years ago!

 

[Giambattista]

Mixed gender societies are unnatural

The first and formost thing tounderstand is that men and women as per their nature are not suposed to live together or share social spaces. A heteroseexual scietymixes them together in the extreme, completley breaking them from their own. This is the root cause of many of modern human societies ills, including heterosexuality.

If you leave a theartifica pressures, over a perid f time men and wmen wil naturay start eading searate lives and with that wi go all the artifically inculcated male-female bonds including dating, relationships, romance and even marriage.

I can't say I agree with this part. You don't seem to like heterosexuality and the indoctrination that causes it, but why are you intent on keeping the sexes isolated from each other? Is that not merely perpetuating these false ideas/roles/traits that you dislike?

 

[Buddha1]

Is that not merely perpetuating these false ideas/roles/traits that you dislike?

can you tell me what are those traits you are talking about?

 

[Buddha1]

I can't say I agree with this part. You don't seem to like heterosexuality and the indoctrination that causes it, but why are you intent on keeping the sexes isolated from each other? Is that not merely perpetuating these false ideas/roles/traits that you dislike?

If you have not guessed already, a heterosexuality is a direct fallout of a mixed gender society -- of course in the background of the society's over 'powerment' of male-female sex.

Men and women are supposed to lead separate lives. That's nature. Some amount of social interaction is healthy, but they still need to lead their lives separately.

I have always sensed that having grown in a society that has separate spaces for men and women. It gives both men and women a lot of freedom to be themselves. And especially when men have so many pressures of fake masculinity to do it with women, male only groups act as buffers. These spaces have comparatively less pressures of sexual roles. Mixed gender societies are especially harsh on men.

Homosexuality is also a direct fallout of a mixed gender society. There are no homosexuals in a male only society. Sexual relations between men are common and are not seen as a trait limited to a marginalised feminnie group.

Gay men find mixed gender settings especially empowering, and if you relate with the gay identity then you'd naturally find mixed gender settings a boon.

But why do you think a society seggregated on the lines of sexual orientation is o.k. while that on the basis of gender is not.

All societies close to nature live on the basis of seggregation of gender. All animals live seggregated into male-female groups.

 

[Buddha1]

No! I refuse to join you there! Okay. I guess I'll do it. But I didn't like those peoples' attitudes. I read through quite a bit of it, but they those people in there seemed pretty dense in the head. Of course, the whole topic is of a confrontational nature, and people are bound to get dumb.

I'll hate to do it if you feel uncomfortable there. If you like you can continue to discuss it here. Although this thread is no les confrontational. That's why I'm here to confront heterosexuality.

 

[Avatar]

Men and women are supposed to lead separate lives. That's nature. Some amount of social interaction is healthy, but they still need to lead their lives separately.

What nature? I don't agree, I've never liked male company - that regards both friends and family.
Actually I feel most comfortable among females and no, I have no preference for male-to-male sex, bonding or whatever.

You talk all nice and good, but your fancy theory doesn't apply to me, and since I'm a male I think you might have something wrong with it.

Mixed gender societies are especially harsh on men.

aaaw, poor males, snif!