Just what did Darwin say about homosexuality?

[ponderingturtle]

I think it's odd because gay people are seldom involved in said conversations, and because contrary to what's been posted so far, homosexuality does not mean "anal sex." I personally know a few gay guys who aren't interested in it, and I doubt it's common among lesbians. But to read this thread, you'd think that anal sex is what homosexuality is all about.

Bigots regularly link homosexuality to anal sex, why should it be surpsing that it happened again?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Um, no. Been running with vagina from the get go. Even before this thread. I think I was 14, maybe 15. Very consistent. Haven't swayed in that regards.

Then why is oral sex proper? And not improper and deviant?

 

[Furcifer]

I already posted a definition of deviance, taken from a sociology textbook. It made no mention of pervert.

"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."

You're the one that's brought the conversation to perversion here. And you've brought it to this by continuously changing my words to suit your personal interpretation.

You have an agenda. You've mentioned asylums and electroshock therapy. Was someone you know put into an institution because of some perverted behaviour?

 

[Furcifer]

Then why is oral sex proper? And not improper and deviant?

Becauyse we are considering the number of people who engage in oral sex on a rountine basis. You've already pointed out that women rarely achieve orgasm through vaginal stimulation alone. Men and Women both engage in oral sex routinely. They don't "experiment" with it.

This has been explained before, just not to your satisfaction. You keep asking questions waiting to hear what you want, and don't listen to what's being said.

 

[volatile]

I already posted a definition of deviance,

That's four definitions, none of them co-extensive.

Which one are you using, specifically?

 

[volatile]

Becauyse we are considering the number of people who engage in oral sex on a rountine basis.

Earlier on, you were defining "proper" anatomically and (!) evolutionarily. Do you now wish to retract this and go, instead, with "what most people do"?

 

[Furcifer]

Earlier on, you were defining "proper" anatomically and (!) evolutionarily. Do you now wish to retract this and go, instead, with "what most people do"?

That was in regards to the place to put a penis, remember?

You two can't keep anything straight.

 

[Furcifer]

And anyone who is secure in it is moraly wrong too, don't leave that out now.

Why would you say that? Are you a bigot?

 

[Furcifer]

That's four definitions, none of them co-extensive.

Which one are you using, specifically?

Why don't you tell me which one is right and we'll use it.

 

[volatile]

That was in regards to the place to put a penis, remember?

You two can't keep anything straight.

Yes, it was. You said anal sex wasn't "proper", because anatomically and evolutionarily "the vagina is the proper place for the penis".

Is the mouth the "proper" place for the penis on the same grounds? Or are you changing your definition of the word proper as you go along?

 

[volatile]

Why don't you tell me which one is right and we'll use it.

You brought it up. Which one best defines the way in which you're using the term. In other words, what do YOU mean by "deviant"?

Sheesh.

 

[Furcifer]

You brought it up. Which one best defines the way in which you're using the term. In other words, what do YOU mean by "deviant"?

Sheesh.

Use the normative one.. I already told you that.

 

[Roboramma]

That was in regards to the place to put a penis, remember?

You two can't keep anything straight.

That's his whole point. You use one definition when it suits you, and when that definition is shown to fail to stand up, you simply switch definitions!

It's as though I said, "I am superman." And you called me on it:
"You're not superman, superman can fly, and you can't."
"I mean I'm super, man. As in, I'm really good."
"Oh, okay. Anyway, let's get going."
"Yeah, oh, I'm driving."
"Why? It's my car."
"For safety! I mean, who better to drive, you, or superman?"
"What? What does you being "super" have to do with anything."
"Everyone knows that superman's reflexes and sense of perception are much better than those of normal people!"
"But you said that you weren't "superman", you're just, "super", man."
"Yeah, what's your point?"

etc. etc.

 

[Furcifer]

Yes, it was. You said anal sex wasn't "proper", because anatomically and evolutionarily "the vagina is the proper place for the penis".

Is the mouth the "proper" place for the penis on the same grounds? Or are you changing your definition of the word proper as you go along?

No the mouth isn't the anatomoically proper place to put the penis, and no that doesn't mean oral sex is improper.

 

[volatile]

No the mouth isn't the anatomoically proper place to put the penis, and no that doesn't mean oral sex is improper.

OK then. So tell me why anal sex isn't proper.

 

[Roboramma]

No the mouth isn't the anatomoically proper place to put the penis, and no that doesn't mean oral sex is improper.

Is this deviant behavior:

 

[Furcifer]

That's his whole point. You use one definition when it suits you, and when that definition is shown to fail to stand up, you simply switch definitions!

It's as though I said, "I am superman." And you called me on it:
"You're not superman, superman can fly, and you can't."
"I mean I'm super, man. As in, I'm really good."
"Oh, okay. Anyway, let's get going."
"Yeah, oh, I'm driving."
"Why? It's my car."
"For safety! I mean, who better to drive, you, or superman?"
"What? What does you being "super" have to do with anything."
"Everyone knows that superman's reflexes and sense of perception are much better than those of normal people!"
"But you said that you weren't "superman", you're just, "super", man."
"Yeah, what's your point?"

etc. etc.

What? I suppose that makes sense to you.

You still haven't answered why that 2 girls 1 cup reaction works the way it does. Based on your failed logic it shouldn't bother anyone. You don't have any clue what you are talking about, at all.

 

[Roboramma]

What? I suppose that makes sense to you.

You still haven't answered why that 2 girls 1 cup reaction works the way it does. Based on your failed logic it shouldn't bother anyone. You don't have any clue what you are talking about, at all.

I don't know what it is and youtube is blocked in china, so I can't view whatever video it is you want me to look at.
Can you explain it?

 

[Roboramma]

Um, no. Been running with vagina from the get go. Even before this thread. I think I was 14, maybe 15. Very consistent. Haven't swayed in that regards.

Your "vagina definition" isn't a definition of proper, it's an example of proper.

If you have no meaningful definition of what is proper, I don't see why you care whether something is proper or not. You might as well say "homosexuality is cluud"

 

[volatile]

You still haven't answered why that 2 girls 1 cup reaction works the way it does.

Are you genuinely interested in an answer to this, and why it doesn't help your case at all?

Google Scholar search for "mirror neurons".