Just what did Darwin say about homosexuality?

[volatile]

I already explained both.

No, you didn't.You said, cursorily, that vagina sex was "normal", but did not expain the criteria you use for determining normalcy. I invite you to do so now. What do you mean by "normal"? What do you mean by "proper"? What do you mean by "acceptable"?

And as for the second question, you haven't even attempted to answer it. So I'll ask again: in what way does other people doing something that you personally would not wish to engage in make you feel anything at all, let alone "uncomfortable"?

You also didn't answer my questions about cucumbers. If a vagina moistens to accommodate a cucumber, does that mean cucumber-insertion is normal and "proper"? By the definitions you've given so far, it would be - but I suspect given your broader stance that you'd disagree. So help me out here. Make your case. Clearly, and without recourse to fallacy.

 

[Furcifer]

Well purely nose picking is not deviant, in that 90+% of people pick their nose to remove dried nasal secreations. You are again mixing up distinct behaviors by linking nose picking to eating the results of nose picking.

You again are conflating two distinct and different behaviors. This is sloppy writting at the least.

Who are you kidding? You want to redefine deviance. Let's get a textbook definition shall we?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Who are you kidding? You want to redefine deviance. Let's get a textbook definition shall we?

Sure

I got this

Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.

If 90% of society does something it is not outside the accepted standards of that society.

As it applies to standards of society it is not at all surprising that it has a pejorative aspect to it.

Or are you strangely applying mathmatical definitions to this? That would be an inapropriate definition.

 

[sol invictus]

If you back off from that absurd position and simply assert that some reproduction is necessary for society to continue, what's normal then? Why not a 100% gay society in which women are artificially inseminated? Why not a society in which everyone is bisexual? Why not one in which some people are hetero and some are gay, and nearly all the time hetero couples use birth control, and some of both hetero and gay couples manage to reproduce... much like ours?

I suppose if we ever evolve to that state it will be considered the norm. Until then is remains a deviant sexual behaviour.

But.... we already have. The last sentence describes the world we - or at least I, I'm not sure on which planet you spend most of your time - reside on.

If you can't distinguish the difference between your finger and your penis in the context of this discussion I feel sorry for you.

So you cannot answer the question. Very well, I'll do it for you. There is no "proper place" for your fingers; the idea is completely absurd. And of course the same goes for a penis as it does for any other part of your body.

Normal is a man and a woman having vaginal intercourse.

And there we have it - you're simply a bigot. OK, that certainly makes this conversation simpler.

 

[ponderingturtle]

You also didn't answer my questions about cucumbers. If a vagina moistens to accommodate a cucumber, does that mean cucumber-insertion is normal and "proper"? By the definitions you've given so far, it would be - but I suspect given your broader stance that you'd disagree. So help me out here. Make your case. Clearly, and without recourse to fallacy.

He has been dodgeing my questions about how he classes oral sex as well.

 

[Furcifer]

He has been dodgeing my questions about how he classes oral sex as well.

That's a lie. I'm responding to 50 different posts on a 1.5"x2.0" screen. If it's in a post longer than a few lines it's almost impossible to reply to. I already explained that, if you feel it necessary to make claims like this please consider all the variables. All it does is aggrevate. I suppose that's your reason though now isn't it? You don't really want me to address things properly, you want to make it seem like I'm doing something I'm not.

 

[Furcifer]

And am I the only one who finds "thrust in my face" to be rather Freudian?

Well sometimes we choose our words carefully and sometimes we choose them even more carefully.

 

[volatile]

That's a lie. I'm responding to 50 different posts on a 1.5"x2.0" screen. If it's in a post longer than a few lines it's almost impossible to reply to. I already explained that, if you feel it necessary to make claims like this please consider all the variables. All it does is aggrevate. I suppose that's your reason though now isn't it? You don't really want me to address things properly, you want to make it seem like I'm doing something I'm not.

So why, then, did you just waste 83 words on whining when you could have used four to answer the question.

Oral sex is normal.

OR

Oral sex is not normal.

Which is it?

 

[ponderingturtle]

That's a lie. I'm responding to 50 different posts on a 1.5"x2.0" screen. If it's in a post longer than a few lines it's almost impossible to reply to. I already explained that, if you feel it necessary to make claims like this please consider all the variables. All it does is aggrevate. I suppose that's your reason though now isn't it? You don't really want me to address things properly, you want to make it seem like I'm doing something I'm not.

Not entirely accurate. I first posted it at 10:37 EST. You made a point that you had switched toa blackberry at 12:06 having posted numerous times between the two. At 12:06 EST you made a point that you had to run and were now on a berry so presumably you responded on some other instrument before than. You also made 4 responces between when I first posted about oral sex and when you first mentioned being on a berry.

Since then you have made 6 posts, and still have not addressed my short post from 10:37 EST. So you have not and as of this post still have not adressed my question asking about is oral sex deviant in your view.

 

[Furcifer]

I also note you didn't answer the questions:

Firstly - what is your definition of "normal"? And secondly, in what way does other people doing something that you personally would not wish to engage in make you feel anything at all, let alone "uncomfortable"?

Normal is a man and a woman having vaginal intercourse.

Did I stutter?

Well if it sees an increased flow of blood and begins to secrete lubrication in anticipation it's probably the "proper" place for a penis.

I see reading isn't your strong point. Shall we simply skip to the illustrations?

 

[Furcifer]

Not entirely accurate. I first posted it at 10:37 EST. You made a point that you had switched toa blackberry at 12:06 having posted numerous times between the two. At 12:06 EST you made a point that you had to run and were now on a berry so presumably you responded on some other instrument before than. You also made 4 responces between when I first posted about oral sex and when you first mentioned being on a berry.

Since then you have made 6 posts, and still have not addressed my short post from 10:37 EST. So you have not and as of this post still have not adressed my question asking about is oral sex deviant in your view.

Well I'm back on a PC. So what was it oral sex? Is it deviant? No.

 

[volatile]

Did I stutter?




I see reading isn't your strong point. Shall we simply skip to the illustrations?

So, it's also a proper place for a cucumber, a popsicle, a dog's penis and a fist? At the same time?

By your logic, yes. By your broad moral stance, no. So either you're holding two contradictory positions at the same time, or your "reasons" for considering a sex act proper aren't really based on lubrication at all, but you are using the smokescreen of a pseudo-scientific argument to justify your baseless prejudices. I don't see any other option.

 

[volatile]

Well I'm back on a PC. So what was it oral sex? Is it deviant? No.

Why not? It doesn't fit into your previously given definition, which was "normal is a man and a woman having vaginal sex".

Do you now retract the only definition you've given as to what you consider "normal", leaving us with even less clue as to exactly what your argument might be?

 

[Furcifer]

So why, then, did you just waste 83 words on whining when you could have used four to answer the question.

Oral sex is normal.

OR

Oral sex is not normal.

Which is it?

I thought you wanted to know about cucumbers? I can't even find that post now. It's buried. Oral sex is fine, male on male oral sex makes me cringe. Sorry, but it does. Actually, the thought of Barbra Walters pleasuring me makes me cringe as well. Think about that.

 

[volatile]

Did I stutter?




I see reading isn't your strong point. Shall we simply skip to the illustrations?

That is NOT defining what you mean by normal. It's giving an example of what you think normal is. Not the same thing. I could say "normal is penguins juggling", but it wouldn't tell you anything about the way I have determined normal, would it?

By what metric is "vaginal intercourse between a man and a woman" "normal"? What do you mean by "normal"? Is it a numbers issue - that is, is it normal because most people do that? Is it a reproductive / naturalistic issue - it's normal because that's the way babies are made? What?

 

[volatile]

I thought you wanted to know about cucumbers? I can't even find that post now. It's buried. Oral sex is fine, male on male oral sex makes me cringe. Sorry, but it does. Actually, the thought of Barbra Walters pleasuring me makes me cringe as well. Think about that.

Why does it make you cringe to think about what other people do? Why are you extrapolating what you enjoy to judge what others enjoy?

 

[Furcifer]

Why not? It doesn't fit into your previously given definition, which was "normal is a man and a woman having vaginal sex".

Do you now retract the only definition you've given as to what you consider "normal", leaving us with even less clue as to exactly what your argument might be?

I found this:

"A statistical definition identifies deviance as a departure from conventionally predictable behaviour - in other words, any behaviour that is statistically infrequent. Absolutist definitions are based on general principles and values that are assumed to be universal: deviance, in this perspective, constitutes a violation of such principles and values. A reactivist definition would regard a deviant act as the result of a specific prohibition, be that formal or informal. In this view, deviance is a conduct that society and institutions define as such, and against which they react. Finally, a normative definition tautologically describes deviance as a violation of a norm, namely of a standard conduct to which most people feel they have to conform."

Feel free to explain how homosexual behaviour doesn't fall into these definitions. Thanks.

 

[Furcifer]

Why does it make you cringe to think about what other people do? Why are you extrapolating what you enjoy to judge what others enjoy?

Your questions are becoming banal and a tad absurd. I never judged my parents for having sex, but I certainly cringe when I think about it. Why? You tell me.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Well I'm back on a PC. So what was it oral sex? Is it deviant? No.

Why? I found a report from the Kinsey institute from 91 that made a point that even then almost 50% of married couples had experiment with anal sex, so why is it so deviant if by now it is likely more than 50% have experimented with it?

 

[ponderingturtle]

That is NOT defining what you mean by normal. It's giving an example of what you think normal is. Not the same thing. I could say "normal is penguins juggling", but it wouldn't tell you anything about the way I have determined normal, would it?

I think he is using what is a fairly common definition of normal "what I do is normal, what I would not do is perverted".