Heterosexuality is unnatural

[devils_reject]

Are you guys still bothering with this fuck tart faggot. He is actually trying to tell me that kissing another mans lips is more natural to me. I tried to tell him that it’s all based on "what turns you on" but he digresses. He was asking me stupid questions like “why do men like women is it because they are beautiful?” Obviously people like other people whether gay or straight for many reasons that belong to them. By length homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality, even animalism are all natural because every creature is from nature. What you prefer to lay with is your own idea and fantasy. I don't mind him claiming homosexuality is natural, but gong as far as saying heterosexuality is unnatural is just incredible. Besides fuck bag (buddah1) if homosexuality is more natural how then is it that it takes a man and woman to make more homosexuals, in other words how can natural come from artificial? I asked him this question but he digressed. And fuck bag (you know who you are) how can you claim to be a man and shaming your father by fabricating all this posts, do you think he will be proud of you? Which reminds me lets take this to the practical level. Go out and grab another straight guy's genitals for no reason and see what natural reaction you will get, start with your own father. And you keep talking about the West, last I remember the Middle East even crucify gay people in open courts. Look I am sure you are a nice guy and I don’t care what you are but stop annoying people with ridiculous lies and keep your opinion to yourself , what you are doing now is the same thing that has caused many conflicts.

 

[john smith]

A sincere discussion??? You dont know the meaning of term, if you did you would not have created a thread called Heterosexuality in humans too is unnaturl, what was all that about me being a wimp, and a girl, because i have a girlfriend? Thats not what i call i 'discussion, let alone a sincere one. Your argument is utterly, utterly flawed in my opinion, you resort to supposed insults (which by the way really do make me laugh), you call yourself a true man (or refer to that by saying im not one), you try using this as an insult, which to be honest, is truely histerical. Which is more of a man, the one who loves his girlfriend, and does what men do best, or bumming other men?? Man you need to grow up, maybe spend a few days in the 'evil, wicked west', you so seem to dispise. In the worlds of Ali G, "Batty boy"!!

 

[Giambattista]

You mentioned that certain differences have the potential to empower me "beyond belief." That's hard to believe. Tell me, though, how I can be empowered.

 

[RoyLennigan]

buddha1, is your argument against the social concept of heterosexuality, or the instinctual concept? i agree that heterosexuality is just a hyped up machoist type ideal that men generally exaggerate in extremity. but that doesnt change the fact that men want to have sex with women and women want to have sex with men.

the real argument isn't about sexuality, but about ego and self-image. other animals will instinctually try to have sex with the same species, regardless of gender. i've seen instances of a bull humping another bull, or the same with ducks and some other animals. the human social standards for what a man should or shouldn't do have kept same sex intimacy at bay for centuries, if not millenia. only recently, after a sexual revolution, has there been a large increase of homosexuality. this is due to social limits being broken. others see it done and find that the feelings they have repressed can be brought to light.

but then again. homosexuality is abnormal in all animals. even though it is quite possible and in some cases quite probable, it serves no purpose whatsoever besides pleasure. sex developed because it causes greater gene differentiation and increased survivability for the species. male and female minds have developed to be, in a way, like opposites that, when put together, form a whole. human communities have always developed such that they require a male and a female. the abilities of each are often complementary of the other.

homosexuality is not unnatural, but neither is heterosexuality. the real conflict is that our labels do neither justice. all people instincually want to have sex with the opposite sex. but through life experience and psychological predispositions to the ideal, some people prefer the same sex. hetero/homo-sexuality are just states of mind.

 

[john smith]

Where has Buddha1 gone, oh well i guess he had no other choice other than to run away, not suprising, posting such a remarkably arogant/ignorant thread.

 

[Giambattista]

HELLO???

Still there? Taking a break from all the chatter, I presume? Whenever you're ready to squawk, just say so!


Later

 

[Buddha1]

Giambatista, I do realise your impatience. But I am still working on the long post that I want to post about you. I am caught with so many things, and I give importance to your post, so I don't want to put that in a hurry. Do bear with me......I'll definitely get back to you.

I'm also having problems posting in your response, because sciforums will not upload pictures that I want to add to my posts.

 

[Buddha1]

HELLO???

Still there? Taking a break from all the chatter, I presume? Whenever you're ready to squawk, just say so!Later

You bet, I should know better than to bite the bait of those that want to disrupt my discussions and want to 'shut me up'. Can you now understand that there is a deep conspiracy in the society --- reflected in these discussions to stop the truth from coming out. Nothing else explains their reaction and the ways they adopt to silence.

It is this truth that they want to hide from you that has the potential to empower you. If you see what I mean. I mean what these people don't want to be known certainly must be of great value, for them to care so much. It is hiding this truth that has made your life one where you don't care for this life or the people in it. It is knowing the truth that will see you out of it.

 

[Buddha1]

Are you speaking of working in the office? Where a bunch of guys were coming on to you? If that's what you're referring to, I don't KNOW what to think of it, honestly! A little weird, perhaps. Wouldn't happen around here, I know that!

Or is it something else you're talking about?

It is not weird Giambatista, and that is what I want you to understand. It's the society that you live in is wierd. You have been living in a society that has totally marginalised male-male sexual behaviour.

It's only when you know that you are one with other men, your difference with them is only manmade, then you will find your true identity and understand why they behave the way they do. The pressures that you and they face are the same. Only for some reasons, which will be interesting to discuss, you have decided to choose a non-heterosexual identity, and they have chosen to accept it. This is one of the important key to your empowerment.

What I mentioned in the 'office' example is closer to the natural male behaviour, though it is still bound with intense social pressures. What is weird is heterosexuality (and homosexuality). And for god's sake, I'm not referring to sexual desire for women and sexual desire for men --- even when they are exclusive.

 

[Buddha1]

I think you're not trying to understand the definitions that I am using of the western terms like "homosexual", straight, heterosexual, etc. I've clarified my terms moreo than once on this board.

 

[Buddha1]

but that doesnt change the fact that men want to have sex with women and women want to have sex with men

But it does change the fact that men also want to have sex with men. And that both the sex have different time, value and purpose in a man's life, if he is allowed to live according to his nature.

If I'm able to prove myself, then it also changes the fact that men will naturally give preference to sex with men than with women --- but that's later.

 

[Buddha1]

the human social standards for what a man should or shouldn't do have kept same sex intimacy at bay for centuries, if not millenia. only recently, after a sexual revolution, has there been a large increase of homosexuality. this is due to social limits being broken. others see it done and find that the feelings they have repressed can be brought to light.

The entire concept of homosexuality is invented by the heterosexual society. Feminine male desire for men has always existed, just like feminine male's desire for women, and has been institutionalised into a persecuted category for long. This category has now been used as a dustbin to isolate masculine men who acknowledge their sexual need for men --- as a lesson to other straight men. But in natural/ biological terms it doesn't mean much.

 

[Buddha1]

the human social standards for what a man should or shouldn't do have kept same sex intimacy at bay for centuries, if not millenia. only recently, after a sexual revolution, has there been a large increase of homosexuality. this is due to social limits being broken. others see it done and find that the feelings they have repressed can be brought to light.

In fact there was widespread sex between men before the 'homosexuality' thing came about. The whole concept of homosexuality has been very effective in the purpose for which it was brought --- to wipe out male-male sexual bonds from the mainstream male society.

 

[Buddha1]

but then again. homosexuality is abnormal in all animals. even though it is quite possible and in some cases quite probable,

What is your definition of abnormal here?

it serves no purpose whatsoever besides pleasure

Sex with the same gender/ sex (not homosexuality) plays a very important role in the social lives of animal beings. Science doesn't want to see it because its basically a heterosexual institution.

It's been shown quite convincingly that strong sexual bonds with the same sex, both in males as well as females help mammals function better socially. It helps them in hunting, fighting enemies, emotional and sexual fulfillment and in finding a partner for procreative purposes. If it were not for such bonds, males would just fight each other off. Such bonds make them stronger as a gender. Males who fail to bond sexually with other males (like in bonobos) are weakened, disempowered males who are secondary to females and depend on them for their status in the society.

 

[RoyLennigan]

The entire concept of homosexuality is invented by the heterosexual society. Feminine male desire for men has always existed, just like feminine male's desire for women, and has been institutionalised into a persecuted category for long. This category has now been used as a dustbin to isolate masculine men who acknowledge their sexual need for men --- as a lesson to other straight men. But in natural/ biological terms it doesn't mean much.

so you are saying that my exaggerated desire to have sex with women and my exaggerated uncomfort associated with the thought of having sex with men is just a product of the environment i've grown up in. that if i had grown up in an isolated environment in which sex was intimacy between two people regardless of gender, that i would have no notion of homo or hetero -sexuality?

i think there is much truth to that, but i think there is more to it. obviously there is an innate desire for feminacy in a mate from the male perspective. and women have some very distinguishing features in this respect. therefore i would posit that, in a totally isolated community of humans that had no idea what sex was or anything about how one might think it "should be", they would, because of hormones and instinct, have sex (obviously), and that, although there would most likely be "homosexuality" as well as "heterosexuality", they would soon find out that male-female sex works out best. its naturally developed that way. i dont think they would have any concept of "heterosexuality" being right and "homosexuality" being wrong--in fact they'd probably have huge orgies quite a bit--but it would become obvious to them that sex was meant (or developed) for a man and woman. the opposing hormones that act on each other's brain as a natural aphrodesiac; the instincual desire in men for curves (and the childhood fetish of breasts); how the male and female bodies seem to compliment each other.

 

[Buddha1]

sex developed because it causes greater gene differentiation and increased survivability for the species.

I am assuming that you have not seen this discussion on "Is heterosexuality unnatural" (not created by me, I swear! ) which flies flat in the face of what you're saying.

 

[RoyLennigan]

What is your definition of abnormal here?

its abnormal because it happens much less often than heterosexual encounters.

Sex with the same gender/ sex (not homosexuality) plays a very important role in the social lives of animal beings. Science doesn't want to see it because its basically a heterosexual institution.

It's been shown quite convincingly that strong sexual bonds with the same sex, both in males as well as females help mammals function better socially. It helps them in hunting, fighting enemies, emotional and sexual fulfillment and in finding a partner for procreative purposes. If it were not for such bonds, males would just fight each other off. Such bonds make them stronger as a gender. Males who fail to bond sexually with other males (like in bonobos) are weakened, disempowered males who are secondary to females and depend on them for their status in the society.

where is the study for this? i might agree with some points, but i feel that many of them are unsubstantiated.

 

[RoyLennigan]

I am assuming that you have not seen this discussion on which flies right in the face of what you're saying.

might you explain more, lest you leave me in the dark bodhisattva?

 

[RoyLennigan]

ok so sex has developed due to the mutation which put a large amount of nerve endings where the genitalia are.

sexual reproduction developed because it causes greater gene differentiation and increased survivability for the species.

are what we call homosexuality and heterosexuality just side effects of sexual reproduction, then?

 

[Buddha1]

its abnormal because it happens much less often than heterosexual encounters.

where is the study for this? i might agree with some points, but i feel that many of them are unsubstantiated.

Oh they are quite substantiated. And the studies are widely talked about on the net. Perhaps you've never explored this subject before.

There is a book by the wild life scientist "Bruce Bagemihl" (I hope the spelling is right!) and he has come out with a water mark study of animal sexual behaviour that has shown more than 90% of male-male behaviour amongst mammals. The book is titled "Biological exuberance".

I don't always agree with his conclusions (I've not read the book!) but the evidences are right there! And most of it have been collected over the period of 200 years by different scientists.

He has also documented how scientists have been hiding and misreporting such evidences because it went against the 'darwin' theory, and because of their own biases. Equally apalling is the fact that they would easily make wrong assumptions when they found two (let's say) elephants who are mating in a distance --- and assume one to be female, because, that's what they think should happen.