Heterosexuality is unnatural
- Thread starter Buddha1
- Start date
- Status
Buddha1 said:
john smith said:
john smith said:
john smith said:
Buddha1 said:I sure am scared to meet real men!!Especially if you class yourself as a real man!!!
john smith said:
john smith said:
john smith said:
Buddha1 said:
Empty forceofchi said:
Huwy said:
C20 said:
I rest my case!Huwy said:
Is that so! Thank you for that information. Adds to my list of evidences.Huwy said:
Certainly, the ancient Mayan people with their simplicity and "weird" animalistic behaviour know more about human nature than the modern west with all its sophistication and "normal" heterosexual behaviour which has no parellel anywhere in the animal world.
What makes you think you have the right to call me fag or gay, and I don't have the right to call you a wimp?john smith said:
If you answer that convincingly I'll apologise!
Otherwise stop complaining!
As for persuading people, I thinkfor most people evidences that I provide will speak for themselves. As for the true heterosexauls (the negative meterosexual lot!) you can shove the truth in their face, they will refuse ot acknowledge it. That's one of the ways they have always adopted (I'm talking about the outside world!) to deal with facts. They can afford to do it after all because heterosexuality has a stronghold on the western society.
Bhuddah1 said:
For the millionth time. Please back that up! If you proved this single assertion to everyone's satisfaction then it would be easier to put the rest of your posts into context.
I am NOT trying to be difficult. Would you rather your assertions were not challenged at all?
peace
c20
I would rather that you first deal with my contentions that I've laid down, and treat this statement just as my opinion if you don't want to believe it. None of my three main contentions are dependant on this statement, viz.c20H25N3o said:
1. Heterosexuality is unnatural in humans
2. Heterosexuality is queer
3. Heterosexuality is harmful, unethical and immoral.
Or is it just your 'strategy' to not look at the evidences I'm providing, but insist on something that I want to take later!
And you say you are not disrupting!
Why should I give any evidence when you would just not consider them. Not even care to respond to them. And then coolly go on about asserting the heterosexual propaganda?
1. Heterosexuality is unnatural in humans
Me: No it is not. It seems natural to me everywhere I look.
2. Heterosexuality is queer
Me: No it is not. It seems to be natures way of procreating a species.
3. Heterosexuality is harmful, unethical and immoral.
Me: I see no evidence of this. Sure there are bigots and bullies in every society but these people are perhaps insecure and you must not generalise about heterosexually biased people because of this minority. Generally speaking though, heterosexuality in and of itself is not harmful or unethical or immoral but rather the personal choice of most and it works!
EDIT: Since you do not want to provide evidence for the statement you made regarding 95% of men have STRONG sexual desire for other men, but would rather I take it as your personal opinion, can I not postulate that the rest of your 'evidence' is biased to fit your 'opinion' which has no evidence to support itself because it just isn't the case?
peace
c20
Me: No it is not. It seems natural to me everywhere I look.
2. Heterosexuality is queer
Me: No it is not. It seems to be natures way of procreating a species.
3. Heterosexuality is harmful, unethical and immoral.
Me: I see no evidence of this. Sure there are bigots and bullies in every society but these people are perhaps insecure and you must not generalise about heterosexually biased people because of this minority. Generally speaking though, heterosexuality in and of itself is not harmful or unethical or immoral but rather the personal choice of most and it works!
EDIT: Since you do not want to provide evidence for the statement you made regarding 95% of men have STRONG sexual desire for other men, but would rather I take it as your personal opinion, can I not postulate that the rest of your 'evidence' is biased to fit your 'opinion' which has no evidence to support itself because it just isn't the case?
peace
c20
Last edited:
Huwy said:
That's quite a cunning move to, at one go, validate your stupid social concepts, and at the same time to marginalise what I'm saying as 'gay'. But that I'm afraid won't work!c20H25N3o said:
None of the evidences, experiences or contentions that I've presented relate to the gay world. I'm talking about the straight world upon which the likes of you have no natural right to occupy.
As far as the oppressed homosexuals are concerned --- their plight is nothing when compared to those of oppressed straight men or that of transexuals in the heterosexual world. In fact it is homosexuality which is an integral part of heterosexaulity which oppresses straight men. Homosexual men have a great support system, especially in the west, lots of political power, lots of money and lots of sex. They couldn't ask for more. No wonder they oppose me!
They not only accept the heterosexual ideology, but derive their existence from that ideology. Unless the society is heterosexaulised, there would be no 'gays'!
It's the meterosexuals who have divided the entire world between themselves --- as heterosexuals and homosexuals. The rest --- which is the majority suffers in silence, trying to fit into these artificial worlds.
As individuals yes. Unless they can get evidence to show that the entire straight male population is genuinely heterosexual.c20H25N3o said:
.....and not to mention that there is no such thing as pressure to be heterosexual.
......and that men do not lie about their 'heterosexaulity' or have no reason to!
Buddha1 said:
I would say about 3% of straight males (by your classification) have underlying desires for other men. Just my opinion. like your claim that 95% of men have strong sexual desire for other men was just your opinion.
As for there being pressure to be heterosexual. Well that's kind of a genetic imperative if we are to survive as a species. Willy in bum dont make no babies. No babies = end of species. End of species makes all this 'talk' rather irrelevant dont you think?
To use one of your famous caveats, I reckon 'SOME MEN' do lie about their heterosexuality because they fear persecution. Because they fear persecution is no guarentee that they would be persecuted. As Huwy points out, the west is incredibly tolerant to lifestyle choices, perhaps more tolerant than anywhere else!!!!
peace
c20
95% of men have a sexual need for other men, but homosexuality is artificial
O.K. Here is my assertion that people think is not possible to prove:
"95% percent of men have a sexual need for other men"
O.K., it's not possible to talk about exact percentage, but let's say a majority of men have a sexual attraction for men. And if we talk only of straight men (meaning masculine( then this figure would be something like 100%.
Things like this cannot be proved with surveys and by asking. If you ask a person who is not 'gay-identified' he will never own up to his sexual need for men, and its understandable given the pressures and the negative consequences.
Proving the above is difficult if not impossible.
But if there are enough indications that this indeed might be true, then Heterosexuality has a very weak case, and so-called champions of the heterosexual ideology must prove that indeed heterosexuals form a majority to be called 'straight' or to have the entire society be structured according to their needs.
I'll use evidences from the following sources that will strongly point to the fact that the majority of men have a sexual need for other men:
- from the nature --- the wild life, especially the mammals.
- from the history.
- from traditional societies still functioning.
- from the modern heterosexual west.
- from tribal societies still functioning according to their original forms.
I pray to god to give me success in this important endeavour to bring out the truth.
If you directly want to go to the evidences, you can click below:
1. Evidences from the nature (animals)
2. More evidences from the animals as well as from traditional societies.
O.K. Here is my assertion that people think is not possible to prove:
"95% percent of men have a sexual need for other men"
O.K., it's not possible to talk about exact percentage, but let's say a majority of men have a sexual attraction for men. And if we talk only of straight men (meaning masculine( then this figure would be something like 100%.
Things like this cannot be proved with surveys and by asking. If you ask a person who is not 'gay-identified' he will never own up to his sexual need for men, and its understandable given the pressures and the negative consequences.
Proving the above is difficult if not impossible.
But if there are enough indications that this indeed might be true, then Heterosexuality has a very weak case, and so-called champions of the heterosexual ideology must prove that indeed heterosexuals form a majority to be called 'straight' or to have the entire society be structured according to their needs.
I'll use evidences from the following sources that will strongly point to the fact that the majority of men have a sexual need for other men:
- from the nature --- the wild life, especially the mammals.
- from the history.
- from traditional societies still functioning.
- from the modern heterosexual west.
- from tribal societies still functioning according to their original forms.
I pray to god to give me success in this important endeavour to bring out the truth.
If you directly want to go to the evidences, you can click below:
1. Evidences from the nature (animals)
2. More evidences from the animals as well as from traditional societies.
Last edited:
I'll leave the latter part --- about homosexuality being artificial to be discussed in a another thread.
Of course by homosexuality I don't mean male-male sex. I am not even referring to a feminine male's desire for other males. I'm referring to the heterosexual ideology of homosexuality that marginalises, feminises and denigrates male-male sexual need into a minority group on the fringes. But guys please, that's for later.
Of course by homosexuality I don't mean male-male sex. I am not even referring to a feminine male's desire for other males. I'm referring to the heterosexual ideology of homosexuality that marginalises, feminises and denigrates male-male sexual need into a minority group on the fringes. But guys please, that's for later.
Buddha1 said:
I think it is a perfectly reasonable counter to your assertion that society puts undue pressure on people to be heterosexual. I assert that the pressure comes from within to pass on your genetics through heterosexual reproduction. The fact that you see it as absurd means you havn't even thought it through!
I look forward to the rest of your 'evidences'
c20
Bhuddah1 said:
If the survey was anonymous, what pressure would there be on anyone to lie? It seems to me that an internet survey would be a very good way for you to collect data Bhuddah1. Why don't you start by holding an anonymous poll/survey here?
Question for Heterosexuals : Do you have or have you had strong sexual feelings for other men?
Yes or No?
peace
c20
Evidences of General all-pervading pressure through subtle and disguised hostilities
The following is an example of how the social hostility generated by the society pressurises people and makes them appear averse to same-sex feelings --- thus fuelling the 'heterosexual majority" image. This is a female instance, but the phenomena is intensified a thousand times, because (social) manhood means much more to straight men than to women or the real homosexuals and real heterosexuals --- men often take to forceful denying, verbal abuse and even violence to hide their fears of being found out as even harbouring these feelings:
Newpaper report:
Portia De Rossi refused to do a gay sex scene with Angelina Joli in Gia because she feared she'd have to 'come out' as a lesbian. The star, who reportedly hated being part of Ally McBeal when the show went gay, was intent on hiding her lesbain tendencies. "I would't even drive down Santa Monica Boulevard (gay capital of Los Angeles) in fear that someone would look and think I was gay. Contact music quoted her as telling gay magazine "The Advocate".
(This is a case from your society Jaylee, and though it is one case it clearly points to an immense social pressure and hostility created --- which is extremely subtle and works indirectly, while outwardly it accepts same-sex feelings in those who take on the stigmatised 'gay' label)
The following is an example of how the social hostility generated by the society pressurises people and makes them appear averse to same-sex feelings --- thus fuelling the 'heterosexual majority" image. This is a female instance, but the phenomena is intensified a thousand times, because (social) manhood means much more to straight men than to women or the real homosexuals and real heterosexuals --- men often take to forceful denying, verbal abuse and even violence to hide their fears of being found out as even harbouring these feelings:
Newpaper report:
Portia De Rossi refused to do a gay sex scene with Angelina Joli in Gia because she feared she'd have to 'come out' as a lesbian. The star, who reportedly hated being part of Ally McBeal when the show went gay, was intent on hiding her lesbain tendencies. "I would't even drive down Santa Monica Boulevard (gay capital of Los Angeles) in fear that someone would look and think I was gay. Contact music quoted her as telling gay magazine "The Advocate".
(This is a case from your society Jaylee, and though it is one case it clearly points to an immense social pressure and hostility created --- which is extremely subtle and works indirectly, while outwardly it accepts same-sex feelings in those who take on the stigmatised 'gay' label)
- Status