Just what did Darwin say about homosexuality?

[ponderingturtle]

That's a lie. I've never been uncomfortable around homosexuals. Nor would I ever. I'm uncomfortable around homosexual liars perhaps. But not because they are homosexual, because they are liars. Like you.

No it is a logical inferance from this post of yours.

OK. I said I was tired of homosexual behaviour being thrust in my face as normal. I was (but I'm seriously not any longer, that time has come and past) uncomfortable with anal sex. I just didn't get it. You want to love another dude, fine, but at the end of the day, how you express your love for one another seems a little convoluted. I get hetero sex, it makes sense. But if I was relegated to putting my penis in a womans rectum I'd be like "WTF?" This doesn't make sense. There's a perfectly good place to be doing this, it looks right, and hey it seems to be ready for me. Now if I was with a dude, and I wanted to share my love, I'd be pretty damned confused. Over here you got a straight dude, and he's got the Cadillac of places to put his thing, and then there's me, looking at not such a good place to put my penis. Are you following me here? Do you see what I'm saying? I'm not sure you are, because there have been a bunch of people posting here like the rectum is such a good place to insert your penis into. It isn't. It might be your thing and you might be totally into it, but trust me IT AIN'T THE REAL THING. I'm getting pretty tired of telling these people what the difference is, and why the vagina is the right place. If you don't get it, then you don't get it. The rest of us, WE GET IT.

And screw all of you, I don't care. There's white chocolate, and then there's chocolate. Nobody is going to convince me white chocolate is anywhere as good. IT AIN'T CHOCOLATE. There's milk and then there's varying shades of dark, but white ain't chocolate. It is something, and you might even like it more, but brother, it isn't chocolate. You might say that it has 75% sugar, and chocolate has 75% sugar so it must be the same thing, but it isn't. And you might say it melts in your mouth and not in your hands, but that doesn't mean it's chocolate. Hell, you might even dye it brown, but it's still not gonna be chocolate. I know what it is and semantics isn't going to change that.

How was homosexuality being thrust in your face? The only way that makes sense is that seeing any act of homosexual affection made you unconfortable. So you seem to say, "I am OK with gays as long as they are totaly closeted around me". This is a homophobic attitude. You want homosexual couples to act differently than heterosexual couples.

???-Is this in relation to Micheal Jacksons alleged homosexual relationships with young boys? Or are you trying to tie in Micheal Jacksons propensity for nurturing children with this "Gay Uncle" theory? I'm not sure what you are getting at here, because Micheal Jackson never hid the fact that he was African American.

No, his plastic surgery and changing skin color.

 

[ponderingturtle]

You have a "feeling" or you know? I suspect you know.

Well I know I have never threatened you, only insulted you. And I would be very very suprised if the other posters who argued with you here would do that either, given their past posting history.

This just makes you seem paranoid.

 

[ponderingturtle]

No it isn't. It's gay sex.It might be perfectly normal to you, or someone you know, but from a biological, statistical or societal point of view it isn't. Homosexuals should certainly be allowed to express their feelings in the same fashion as heterosexuals.

As long as it is out of sight right?

It's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. And who are you kidding? If I said "I prefer it" You'd be screaming at me "Why because it's better!!!" And then simply rant on and on like you have this entire thread about how do I know what's better or proper or preferred.

You are entitled to your opinions, just like someone who thinks that blacks are worth less than whites is entitled to their opinions. I will still call both bigots.

You are also missing that no one here has made a serious effort to convince you to have anal sex. No one cares if you have anal sex or not, but you seem to care rather a lot if others have anal sex or not. And you make sure that they know your feelings for how wrong anal sex is.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I suppose you should be, you're the one that did

No, I just had the guts to put it into blunt langauge that you refused to. The defintion of a pervert is a sexual deviant. You class homosexuals as sexual deviants so homosexuals are perverts.

What is wrong with that logic chain?

A->B

C->A

Therefore

C->B

Were A is sexual devaint, B is pervert and C is homosexual.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Courtship, sex and habitation are behaviours, are they not? So if an animal did all those to a mate of the same sex, it would by definition be homosexual behaviour.

And the animals are clearly violating societal standards and are thus deviants.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yes. But even the homosexuals I know consider exclusivity a key characteristic of homosexuality. Especially gay men. But I don't have a large enough sample to go by, nor am I certain they weren't just kidding around.

The problem here is that you are anthropomorphising animals, and having massive goalpost shifting. You are being accused of homophobia from you views on homosexual acts not the homosexual orientation.

Agruments about what sexual orientation really mean, and how much they are biological vs cultural structures is a whole other thread.

 

[Furcifer]

How was homosexuality being thrust in your face? The only way that makes sense is that seeing any act of homosexual affection made you unconfortable. So you seem to say, "I am OK with gays as long as they are totaly closeted around me". This is a homophobic attitude. You want homosexual couples to act differently than heterosexual couples.

Well I'm a heterophobe then too by your standards because I'm not really comfortable talking about hetero sex that conjures up images I'm not comfortable with. But that would be stupid, and makes about as much sense as your arguement here.

When I lived in Vancouver I attended several Pride marches. Have you? Or are you just some altruistic heterosexual that likes to fight the fight from behind an anonymous username because they're too afraid to deal with their own insecurities in public. I've never seen the intolerance you've displayed here by an actual gay person. You obviously feel guilty about something.

Which brings me to the question of why you decided to bring up race. I suppose you couldn't have known I have black family members. I don't think you could have known how ignorant and stupid you were to infer "blackness" was or could be an issue. It looks to me like you've had to deal with some very prejudiced family members in your time.

I'd suggest to you that not everyone comes from a world of bigotry and hate. Before you start shooting of your mouth you really should listen and get to know people and stop "inferring" things because of your own prejudiced past. Otherwise it just makes you look like a prejudiced jerk yourself.

 

[Furcifer]

No, I just had the guts to put it into blunt langauge that you refused to. The defintion of a pervert is a sexual deviant. You class homosexuals as sexual deviants so homosexuals are perverts.

What is wrong with that logic chain?

A->B

C->A

Therefore

C->B

Were A is sexual devaint, B is pervert and C is homosexual.

I already showed you why "pervert" is not the correct term. Go back, look at the definition, and learn something. It's not the correct term, you're just using it as an inflamatory. Not surprising really, that's all you've done this entire thread.

 

[Furcifer]

You are also missing that no one here has made a serious effort to convince you to have anal sex. No one cares if you have anal sex or not, but you seem to care rather a lot if others have anal sex or not. And you make sure that they know your feelings for how wrong anal sex is.

Are you kidding me? I can't quote on the berry but Volatile said "Seriously, go get an anal toy and try it out", then others said something about stimulating the prostate, and that it was an immature attitude etc. Plus there's nothing "wrong" with it. There's nothing "wrong" with anal sex, and there's nothing wrong with people doing it, gay or straight, black or white, tall or short.

Are you actually going to read this, or are you just going to carry on making incorrect assumptions?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Are you kidding me? I can't quote on the berry but Volatile said "Seriously, go get an anal toy and try it out", then others said something about stimulating the prostate, and that it was an immature attitude etc. Plus there's nothing "wrong" with it. There's nothing "wrong" with anal sex, and there's nothing wrong with people doing it, gay or straight, black or white, tall or short.

Are you actually going to read this, or are you just going to carry on making incorrect assumptions?

Wow. I decide to get into this thread, and this is the first I see.

Now I'm really looking forward to reading the last posts to settle in.

What was that post about, anyhow? Does 3bodyproblem have an issue with the fact that the male g-spot is up our butts?

I'm not understanding the reference to bisexual behaviours in a small percentage of animal pairings as having anything to do with homosexuality in humans?

Let me guess - he said it was unnatural, someone pointed out to him it exists all over the animal world, and now he's pretending he never brought up the natural/unnatural question in the first place?

He said in half a million years, your penis will be as useless as your appendix.

Good thing I'll be dead by then.