|
|
 |
|
Getting Real : Speak your peace
A Question For All Homophobes-and those who know them | from Shania - Saturday, April 17, 2004
accessed 3105 times I hardly know anyone on this site, and never really post anything, but I am having an extremely boring day, so I figured I would ask you all something I've always wondered about, in regards to a viewpoint that was shoved down our throats as we grew up, and that is the subject of gays. I know a number of men who are gay, or bisexual and refuse to admit it, because of the way they were raised or possibly because of fear of how their co-workers and family may react. For starters, I think this is sad, because life is too short not to have the type of sex you want. But more importantly, this is a big issue in the US in general, because so many people are raised religiously and are taught that it is this evil sin and they therefore need to supress it if they feel this way.
The theory I have come up with is that men that have tendancies and are disgusted with their own desire for other men, are the biggest homophobes. The men that I have had interaction with that scream with disgust every time they see some type of gay interaction, are the ones who really secretly wish they could try it themselves. I am curious to know if anyone else agrees that this could be true. Men that are comfortable with their sexuality usually do not have big "episodes" every time they see me watching Queer As Folk (by the way--greatest show ever)
The reason I am asking this is because I am becoming more and more convinced that homophobes are created from childhood. If you teach a child from a young age that two men or women together is vile, then they are going to grow up with that stigma. I remember being so "disgusted" at the thought of being with another woman, and as I have grown over the years I have come to the conclusion that if you haven't tried it, don't knock it. I am now a confident-in-my-own-skin bisexual woman and every time I think of my mom telling me how all lesbians are sickening and going to hell, I wonder whether or not she just deserpately wanted to ditch my dad to go sleep with women. Ha. I have now made it a point to teach my own kid that love is love, regardless of race, sex or anything in between. Hopefully he will not grow up being sexually racist.
Anyway, not an earth shaking question and I am sure I will reap the wrath of many men on this website, but hey, I don't really give a shit. |
|
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from Dissonant
Monday, November 12, 2007 - 16:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
I dunno, I never bash homosexuals and I am in total denial of my gayness. There goes your theory, sorry. You know, it could be that some people are just assholes.
Viva Los Hotos!
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | from com7fy8
Friday, September 21, 2007 - 14:12
 (Agree/Disagree?)
all right, shania...like your name...I'm a guy...I'd say if I really hate or despise or fear someone, it could be what's true about the person is true about me...so if I'm so upset about gays, it could be I don't like the competition? so, if we hate and are phobic about hypocrites.....yeah, in my case, this IS because I don't like their competition...sibling rivalry...a number of gays and fundies are sibling rivals, could find better things to do
(reply to this comment)
| from Sydney
Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 23:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
As a sydneysider ex-member SGA and an active Bi-sexual I am a GAY proud supporter!!
I am actively involved in volunteering for MARDI GRAS "the best fucking party in the world..." and gay rights events. (as well as partying there while i'm at it.)
And believe "all love should be equal" (as in let us have same sex marriages you fucking religious bastards!!!)
I think it's sad that so many people are made to feel ashamed and guilty about who they are or about realising they are gay or lesbian... because of their stupid up-bringing...
Seriously, though... if men weren't supposed to have anal sex as well as regular sex, why would they have their prostate most accessible through their ass???? In addition, do you know gay guys can have multiple orgasms without Cumming...anyone who’s gay or has ever had their prostate milked by someone using a rubber glove will know what I’m talking about… even straight guys love if they've had someone do it properly to them....hahahah
If there are any Gay or Lesbian ex-member SGA who ever feel like coming down to Australia for the biggest gay and lesbian dance party in the world...(500.000 people attend the parade and 16.000 the after party) your always welcome, i'll show you around town.
Oh and another thing... I reckon the reason why David Berg hated Gay men so much is cuz he was worried that if all you family boys started fucking each-other (and you started liking it...gasp horror)you might not spend as much time fucking the girls and getting them pregnant so that the family could "grow more little soliders for jesus" plus it wouldn't be going for gold!!! tsk, tsk, tsk....
Gay,BI, Hetro, whatever... we are all equal.
(reply to this comment)
| from
Friday, April 22, 2005 - 05:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
I have an entire family of men who are the most homophobic of any I know. They get desgusted with the slightest sympathy toward the gay community and they are practially vomitting. As a result, I am sure to watch NBC'S "Will & Grace" everytime they come around.
I don't think if someone is necessarily homophobic that means they're gay. I could be wrong. My brothers are anything but. Interestingly enough, they are all still in TF and believe strongly in its teachings. I believe TF's position on gay/lesbian relationship is one of the clearest hypocrisies I have seen to date.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from I swallowed a booger.
Thursday, April 21, 2005 - 23:43
| from i agree
Thursday, April 21, 2005 - 23:17
(Agree/Disagree?)
Of course, considering homophobia isn't a genetical trait, it would have to be learned during childhood. But no fear, i have found it to be one of the easiest "cultraits" to get rid of. After all, what are the arguments against it? That it's not natural? In that case, since sex is purely for procreation, why do women have a clitoris, or a G spot? It's "disgusting": well well, for all i know a woman's posterior is quite similar to that of a male, perhaps save a few hairs. And since love is supposedly "all encompassing" ( or something like that ), why couldn't any two ( or more ) consenting adults do and love as they please?
as you stated, i also believe most homophobes are simply afraid of their own sexuality, much like prude religious girls are so "sex only after marriage, and only because i have to be a good wife and bare children to my husband"...
may every man woman and donkey have a pleasurable life!
(reply to this comment)
| from Jasper
Monday, March 14, 2005 - 00:33
  (Agree/Disagree?)
How can people continue to defend the homosexual lifestyle, or deathstyle as it as come to be? Have you read the latest updates on AIDS? Apparently the disease has mutated among the homosexuals and a new strain was reported recently in San Diego, which kills within three months and is resistant to all forms of treatment. When are people going to wake up and realize it is God who ordains what is morally valid, and not people? Homosexuality is part of the prevailing culture of death which pervades the western world, along with abortion, euthanasia, birth control and self-abuse. These acts are in and of themselves intrinsically wrong because they thwart God's purpose for humanity in His grand scheme of creation and salvation. Satan is anti-life. Berg was such a satan and did his work on earth. People need to face reality. The plagues of the apocalypse are seemingly upon us now. Just look at the state of the world, and how closely it conforms more than ever to what was written in the book of Revelation. Supporting homosexuals in their perverse, sinful lifestyles is counter-productive and makes people partakers in their sin for encouraging and supporting them. If we truly love and respect these people, the best way to deal with it is to be up front and openly seek their conversion. Remember what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah.
(reply to this comment)
|  From figaro
Monday, November 12, 2007, 11:50
(Agree/Disagree?)
let me ask you something, if you believe the Bible and Sodom and Gomorrah were cities filled with nothing but gays then how did they exist past one generation? Gays don't get pregnant, so how did the city continue on once all the original population of non reproducing gays died?
And Lot, being a straight man with at least 2 daughters that we know of, how did he come to live in a city of nothing but gays? Wouldn't he have known that his daughters wouldn't find husbands and his line would die off?
Maybe you should go back and read the story again, maybe you will notice that the reason God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah (that is assuming the bible is true) was not because of the gay population, but because the way that they treated the Angels when they came to the city, and Lot was spared not because he was the only straight man, which is ludicrous. But because he was the only one who was KIND to the angels, enough so that he even offered his two daughters to the crowd outside instead, THAT is why he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, THAT is why he spared Lot, it had NOTHING to do with them being gay, which they COULDN'T have all been anyway! IDIOT!!(reply to this comment) |
| | From StringTheory-ex-member
Saturday, November 10, 2007, 21:08
(Agree/Disagree?)
No I don't remember what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah I wasn;t there. As far is it being biblically accurate, maybe. Fact remains that this time around the "fires of hell" that will consume all the fags/lesbians/everyone else won't come from from the hand of God like they supposedly did last time (and they didn't). They will come from self righteous Christians who are fundamentalist or their sympathetic islamic counterparts (two sides to the same coin). And the "fires" of hell will descend from the self fulfilling prophecy full of dogmatically impaired irrational wastes of life that is the religious right in this country and more than likely those "fires" that will serve the prophecy will come on the head of nuke or something. That is the problem with delusion isn't it? Once the Christians create the problem they see their answer as the only solution to it..... The problem is after the "answer" you end up with fallout and a bunch of dead people.
I don't expect most "conservative" christians will really grasp what I am saying because if they could they would quit forcing people to ruin their lives emotionally/physically in the name of "life".
Culture of life? Cmon go watch Apocalypto you nutcase, that is a perfect illustration of the self fulfilled prophecy I am talking about.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From Sydney
Wednesday, March 08, 2006, 23:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
Jasper...would you like me to get all medical with you and give you the fuckign facts!!! more straight people have AIDS the gay people.... by millions of times over.... it is not just a gay disease !!!!
The only reason why it effects and spreads easier and “is more noticed” in the gay community
is in Sydney for instance some gay men are pretty sluttty (and I mean that in a nice way)
They party… they are often like little boys who have never grown up... usually because they never got to express themselves as a child having to hide the fact they were gay...
party drugs when you take E, GBH and other drugs like this it lowers your ability to often make simple choice like using s condom… plus you’re body is usually telling you your so fuckign horny that in a moment of abandonment you have un-protected sex in the spur of the moment....
The membrane in the rectum is easily torn through anal sex... unlike the vagina which is a little bit more durable...plus even if you use a condom because the rectum is tighter if you don’t use lube breakages can be common.
So if you are having unprotected sex with a man...and you are a little rough then if you have aids it is easier for the virus to find an entry point.... that’s a short brief on who it’s spread from man to man…
But just because they first discovered AIDS in GAY men doesn’t mean it’s a GAY diseases!!! Let go blame the first person who ever got any disease and discrimanate against them why don't we??? because clearly all illnesss are cause by GOD to punish us for our wickedness (not)
Ok Jasper but for you point to be valid are you saying that all those millions of people in Africa that have AIDS are gay???????? Pull you head out of your ass and go
Educate yourself DUMBASS
http://www.acon.org.au/acon/index.cfm?doc_id=1273&cat_id=16
oh by the way what did happen to Sodom and Gomorrah????? you still really believe that story....that it was burned to the ground because of the gays??? oh please....!!!
(reply to this comment) |
| | From bugs bunny
Wednesday, September 28, 2005, 14:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh jeez jasper! That was sad! How can you say that homosexuallity is unnatural and evil? Are animals evil all of a sudden? But let's not go there, I think you know what I would tell you so seeing as I don't have much time at the moment, why don't you go and read some nature books.... Oh by the way,it was totally normal for men a few 100 years ago to have sex with other men.. they were christian too.(reply to this comment) |
| | From bugs bunny
Wednesday, September 28, 2005, 14:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh jeez jasper! That was sad! How can you say that homosexuallity is unnatural and evil? Are animals evil all of a sudden? But let's not go there, I think you know what I would tell you so seeing as I don't have much time at the moment, why don't you go and read some nature books.... Oh by the way,it was totally normal for men a few 100 years ago to have sex with other men.. they were christian too.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Cosmicblip
Monday, March 14, 2005, 16:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
Christianity changes. In a hundred years (hopefully sooner), homosexuality will be a non-issue to Christians (& will sooner be a non-issue to everyone else). Take, for example, slavery. It was previously condoned & practiced by Christians, possibly promoted by them as well. One would be hard pressed to find a Christian nowadays who promotes slavery, even if he or she were to argue that slavery was allowable as long as the slaves weren’t mistreated—try telling that to an African American. That being said, I do not see you as a Christian claiming that slavery is still acceptable. I do not see you heading to South-Central wearing a t-shirt stating your views on the subject, delivering your soul as it were.
You may not think that slavery ever was/is permissible. But Christians did. You voluntarily & purposely align yourself with Christianity—a religion that has been egregiously wrong in the past. There is an astronomically high chance that you & Christianity are very wrong again.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From ack
Monday, March 14, 2005, 09:19
(Agree/Disagree?)
Actually Berg was pro rampant reproduction, like yourself.
Did you know that in a heterosexual relationship it's the woman most at risk for contracting the HIV virus? Maybe god has a thing against gays AND women?
Maybe god is just playing with aids because he got bored of his bubonic plague toy! And where the hell did he leave his polio and siphilis? In your opinion what demographic may I ask is god punishing with these? Surely not the butt stretchers, that would not be economical for god you know.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From Sir Rantalot
Monday, March 14, 2005, 04:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
Well, I think that there are too many damn people on this earth, so hearing of a strain of AIDS that kills within 3 months is good news indeed. Hopefully it will be mortal to all but 0.9% of the population, those left will have more space to breathe and generally do whatever the fuck they please. No, I don't mind if I'm not in that 0.9% segment, it's quality, not quantity that counts.
You and your rampant, primitive survival instincts turned religion is so 6000 BC, how did you get here? Came across a mad scientist with a time machine?
May I recommend electro-convulsive therapy and a good shave, you probably have quite some body hair.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Appalled!!
Monday, March 14, 2005, 04:12
(Agree/Disagree?)
This is sick!! It's so disgusting to think there are still ignorant, selfrighteous people who would actually believe this utter rubbish. And for your info, you can't "convert" gays, it is a sexual preference which they are born with and no amount of "conversion" will change that. Or do you actually want to condemn someone to a life of denial? If so, you are truely a coldhearted human being!(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | from A.
Thursday, February 10, 2005 - 16:43
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm no expert in this area but my thoughts on the matter are that all children are born polymorphously perverse, which is defined as a "marked disposition to oppose and contradict" ( in this case, contradit the sexual norm)- their sexual desires can be drawn toward any object - and it is their childhood experiences that cause their sex drive to be directed to members of the opposite or the same sex.
Homosexuality results from the specific patterns of interaction with parents and the complex and universal processes through which the naturally bisexual became an adult. Homosexuality, then, like heterosexuality, in fact resulted from an inhibition of the sexual drive.
I don't think that homosexuality could be "cured" because that would mean a complete restructuring of the most important part of the human psique that has to do with how we choose our objects of affection, which, we do as children.
If we think of the way we learn everything else in our lives,it's clear to see that we are products of our environment, although that doesn't mean that we are not free thinking individuals but, that our upbringing and all the experiences we lived through as children, are influencing factors as to who we are. Most of what happened to us as children was a result of our surroundings and our reactions to the stimulants derived form them so, the "choice" of homosexuality, is just as unconcious as our choice of heterosexuality. Of course, a person who has homosexual tendencies will, in the most part, try to find an explanation or excuse for his/her choice, or in many cases deny those homosexual desires, not because they want to but because it's frowned on by society.
(reply to this comment)
| From anovagrrl
Friday, April 22, 2005, 06:54
(Agree/Disagree?)
You've more or less expressed the Freudian view. There's no reason to discredit this theory simply because Freud also developed some other hypotheses about infantile sexuality that have been discredited. The most current scientific thinking is that there are multiple sexualities with multiple etiologies. There is no single explanation for homosexuality in men or women. For that matter, there's no single explanation for heterosexuality. And what about people who are asexual? Is a arousal preference for children its own kind of sexuality or a variation of homosexuality or heterosexuality? How does science explain the full range of human sexual expression? Creationists and other absolutists argue that sexualities that deviate from central tendancy (heterosexuality) are sinners or defective deviates. Social scientists, biologists and other process-oriented people argue that sexual minorities (people on the margins of the distribution) are both adaptive and maladaptive variations in the human population. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | from Muni
Friday, December 17, 2004 - 04:17
(Agree/Disagree?)
Ok Shania, its understandable that ur bi, but: 'pro-gay'? plz
(reply to this comment)
| from Baxter
Monday, May 24, 2004 - 13:50
(Agree/Disagree?)
I consider myself a reformed homephobe. I always imagined gay men to be weak, woman-like and pathetic. But when I was in the Army I had an instructor who was hard as nails. He knew everything ther was to know about soldiering, he was one of the best soldiers I ever met, and the men respected him absolutely. He went and passed selection for the SAS, but he got booted out of the Army when it became apparent that he was gay. He now runs a gay club in Sheffield. It was my contact with this man that demonstrated rather directly that my assumptions as to gay behaviour were completely debunked. He was one of the toughest, strongest, most masculine blokes I have ever met.
This actually brings me to another point. If you had seen most of our behaviour, or indeed the behaviour of soldiers, I imagine, anywhere, you would probably thought we were living in a gay haven, and yet these men were still overtly homophobic. There is something inherently homoerotic about much of male machismo and male fraternal behaviour. One might imagine a good degree of repressive sexuality amongst men in these circles. When I remember much of it, I remember it as implicitly male behaviour, and yet I rmember having this conversation with soldiers wondering if someone else might be gay, or perhaps (God forbid!) they might themselves have a gay streak.
When I remember Sgt Bell, I wonder if it was actually his repressed sexuality that made him a more popular, even a better leader. His priorities were always towards his men, and we would have followed him anywhere. Being in the company of young men might have been his motivation for being an instructor, but I never remember him making any inappropriate suggestions towards me or anyone else, except in passing jest (perhaps another indication of his sexuality).
There have been suggestions that Montgomery & Kitchener, among others, were repressed homosexuals. This, to me, makes sense as an explanation to the motivations of men who seek to lead men, or who crave the company of men. In any case, I am now convinced that the distinctions of sexuality are much less well defined than I had once imagined.
I still don't like effeminate men, as they annoy my delicate sensibilities as to how men are meant to behave.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from straight man
Saturday, April 24, 2004 - 16:50
(Agree/Disagree?)
i think you already gave an answer to the question yourself. it is obvious that you agree with the theory (in psychological terms) of compensation. however, there is another theory which deals with "self definition". in my opinion, one has to define oneself, specially in the gender field. in other words, if we apply your logic, it wouldn´t be far from reality to thing that you do like people from your same gender. think about it, and define yourself in that matter (with all my respect, of course)
(reply to this comment)
| from straight for life
Monday, April 19, 2004 - 14:52
(Agree/Disagree?)
You have a good point. I personally don't see anything bad about folks choosing to be gal or lesbian. I'll be real honest with you though. I'd have to be pretty damn drunk to "eat pussy".
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | from cagey
Monday, April 19, 2004 - 11:57
(Agree/Disagree?)
Gay people can be just as intolerable in thier views towards straight people or breeders as I’ve heard them referred to. Communities of completely gay men have been known to dislike lesbians or bisexuals. Is someone really more liberated because they have boxed themselves into a different sexual category? Would a gay man or woman be thrilled or tolerant at the news of his X dating
the opposite sex?
I think the main difference is the fact the most gay couples don’t have children. And therefore start to have less in common with their childhood friends.
I heard someone once say ‘drop the bitch and make the switch’, so much for tolerance.
(reply to this comment)
| from Joe H
Monday, April 19, 2004 - 10:30
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm going to give this article the "Well DUH!" award. What is with you girls that think your opinions are so interesting and original? First Capri and now you Shania. It's common knowledge that homophobes are insecure in their sexuality - why don't you write an article about how birds go tweet?
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | From figaro
Monday, November 12, 2007, 17:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
You know, only a SMALL percentage of gay men do that, I would say the percentage of gay men doing that is smaller then the percentage of straight women who do the same thing. So judging all of them based on the actions of a few is extremely ignorant. But then again you have done nothing but put your extreme ignorance on display with every comment you have made, so I guess me pointing it out is somewhat redundant! (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From Kelly
Sunday, April 03, 2005, 16:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
Jasper you said: "Your comment is absolutely untrue." --Being that you "Know" what is untrue, does this mean that you know the truth--and if it is true that you "know" the the truth Jaspper how do you know that you know? Ferthermore, how do you know that others don't "know"--Did someone tell you? Did you read it somewhere?--Just curious.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Shania
Monday, March 14, 2005, 11:57
(Agree/Disagree?)
You are just weird. You are obviously a immature individual if you thinik that gays just all have indiscriminate sex with dozens of men in one night. FOr starters, that is a blanket statement, and since you don't know much about the gay community, how the fuck would you know anyway? And I know a lot of playa guys who have a lot of indscriminate sex with multiple chicks--and most dudes will tell you that those guys are not psychologically depraved--just lucky bastards. Anyway, it is just fun to banter away at you--but your comments really are worthless. (reply to this comment) |
| | From Freud
Monday, March 14, 2005, 09:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
Wow, talk about close-minded. Since when does every gay guy alive have indiscriminate sex with 'dozens' of men in one night? Does your homophobic self actually know any gay men or women? You seem to be psychologically depraved yourself as your opinions are not based in reality or even common sense but in self-righteous, Christain hyberbole and doctrine. Homosexuality has been around since the beginning of time as we know it and has never (except in Christian and other ultra-religious societies) been condemned to the point it is by people like you.
You're the kind of person who probably cried tears of joy when Matthew Sheppard was gay-bashed to death and tied to a fence in sub-zero weather because of his sexual preferences. Where you do or do not stick your dick or other sexual anatomical parts is not a religious or moral debate. It is and always has been a personal choice between involved parties (not talking about rape here).
Do the world a favour and keep you homophobic ass quiet till you learn some tolerance for those with diverse sexual taste.
-A hetrosexual male(reply to this comment) |
| | From Freud
Monday, March 14, 2005, 09:31
(Agree/Disagree?)
Wow, talk about close-minded. Since when does every gay guy alive have indiscriminate sex with 'dozens' of men in one night? Does your homophobic self actually know any gay men or women? You seem to be psychologically depraved yourself as your opinions are not based in reality or even common sense but in self-righteous, Christain hyberbole and doctrine. Homosexuality has been around since the beginning of time as we know it and has never (except in Christian and other ultra-religious societies) been condemned to the point it is by people like you.
You're the kind of person who probably cried tears of joy when Matthew Sheppard was gay-bashed to death and tied to a fence in sub-zero weather because of his sexual preferences. Where you do or do not stick your dick or other sexual anatomical parts is not a religious or moral debate. It is and always has been a personal choice between involved parties (not talking about rape here).
Do the world a favour and keep you homophobic ass quiet till you learn some tolerance for those with diverse sexual taste.
-A hetrosexual male(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | from exister
Monday, April 19, 2004 - 07:55
(Agree/Disagree?)
"I think of my mom telling me how all lesbians are sickening and going to hell"
Which cult did you grow up in. It doesn't sound like the COG that I recall.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | from cassy
Monday, April 19, 2004 - 04:55
(Agree/Disagree?)
Though it might be true for some, I would be slow to make any generalized statements on this. There are a lot who are just honestly not comfortable or replused by the thought of anything sexual with the same sex. I myself find absolutely no attraction to another woman, so while I don't "hate" gays, it does take a lot of effort to be understanding and realize that some people might actually find it a turn on. I would say a lot of men feel the same as I do concerning males with males.
One of our students in our phsychology class said a similar opinion to you recently and our tutor was quick to set her straight that it's not backed up by any serious facts and that it's dangerous reasoning to immediately assume that because someone is vocal about something (as in against it) it actually means that deep down they are the opposite, or vice versa.
I'm not saying that it's not true in some cases, but definitely not in generalized terms can you apply that across the board.
(reply to this comment)
| From Vicky
Monday, April 19, 2004, 05:56
(Agree/Disagree?)
I would agree with you to some extent although I think the average homophobic male seems to have much stronger feelings of aversion regarding the male homosexual act than most women do about male or female gay sex.
I am not bi-sexual or even particularly bi-curious, but I do not find the idea of two women having sex even remotely disgusting or deeply revolting. I can find a woman's mind beguiling and infinitely interesting and have also found myself appreciating the perfection of a beautiful female figure, however this has never translated into any serious attraction to another woman. But I am not going to say that it could never happen, because I feel that there is so much I don't know about myself yet. I refuse to put myself into a box in any aspect of my life and that includes my sexuality.
I am of the unlearned and un-scientific opinion that one's sexuality (at least in the case of women, but maybe in men too) is in actuality quite a fluid thing, and I'm not sure that any of us are exclusively hetero- or homosexual. Could it be that if there was absolutely no shame or repulsion attached to homosexuality, people might actually move back and forth between male and female lovers at different periods of their lifetime according to what they feel at that point in their life, and considering the fact that it is possible to have very deep, loving and long-lasting bonds with same-sex friends? I don't know, but I think it's an interesting prospect.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From Ne Oublie
Monday, April 19, 2004, 06:22
(Agree/Disagree?)
I would tend to agree with Vicky, that without the social stigma there may be a lot more fluidity between sexual preferences. It is this need by society to classify people that often forces people to choose extremes. Is a sexual preference really a fundamental difference in a person? If so, then isn't someone who prefers blondes also fundamentally different from someone who prefers brunettes, or Asians?
As for straight males' aversion to male homosexuality, I think this may have something to do with the fundamental differences in the act of sex between gay men and lesbians - therefore it's just a bit more disturbing for a straight guy to think of 'that' going 'in there'. When just the thought is enough to cause repulsion, defining a whole group by that specific act does not serve to endear them in the least.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Shania
Monday, April 19, 2004, 12:06
(Agree/Disagree?)
I was watching this documentary called "the History of Sex" and it amazed me that back before mandated Christianity ruined everything, the Greeks, who pretty much ruled what was the known world back then, considered sex to be sex, there was no stigma attached to which gender you went with. It was common for married men to have sex with other men or the wife to have sex with other women, etc. I believe religion has played a major part in the segregation of the sexes. If there was never any "thou shalt not have sex with thine own gender" condemnation aspect of it that most people grow up with, then men would never feel like they could not come out about their sexuality, because it wouldn't be an issue at all. More like, I prefer red wine to beer--more of a casual preference, rather than a "lifestyle choice".(reply to this comment) |
| | From Jasper
Monday, March 14, 2005, 00:45
(Agree/Disagree?)
The history channel?! Pfftt. You can see where all the sexual promiscuity of the last few decades has led, and that trail leads to outbreaks of clamydia, herpes, aids, gonorrhea, a reemergence of syphllis, etc. PROMISCUOUS SEX IS DANGEROUS TO SOUL AND TO LIFE. Christianity did not 'ruin' anything! Rome, Greece, Egypt, and other ancient societies were steeped in sexual perversions and barbaric and they all perished at the point of a sword. There is a strong undercurrent of sadism and immaturity in the homosexual psyche. The man who was just diagnosed with a new strain of AIDS admitted to recently having had sex with over 100 men! And they wonder why they are dropping like flies. These people are addicted to sex. Sure sex 'feels' good, but how fulfilling are empty sex acts alone? Human beings are not beasts. And even the beasts are restrained by nature from indulging in sex at whim.(reply to this comment) |
| | From ack
Monday, March 14, 2005, 10:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
The senate, Democracy, just about any language based on greek or Latin beg to differ with your presumptuous ignorant opinion.
Have you ever observed dogs? Do. Watch a pack of dogs and tell me there's no homosexuality or whimsical sex in nature!
History tells us it was christian proselytites who are responsible for spreading siphilis, smallpox, polio, measles and chickenpox to indigenous populations worldwide. There is plenty of evidence that homosexuality existed in precolombian America, and that it was not necesarily ostricised in all cultures. Where were those diseases then? I'll tell you, they were safely alive in european christians.
Your incapacity to see the continuance of all those previously mentioned cultures shows how observant you really are.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From roughneck
Monday, March 14, 2005, 09:14
(Agree/Disagree?)
Jasper? Pfftt. Perhaps you ought to be watching the History Channel if you're so naive as to suggest that the decline of all the empires you mention was merely due to 'perversions and barbaric[sic]'. This is just the kind of simplistic Family 'logic' that all thinking people really ought to despise for the utterly fallacious propaganda that it is.
You of course *are* aware that primates (among other species) in fact *do* have sex for pleasure, even homosexual sex at that, 'on a whim' even! - right? Perhaps in the future you should stick to real research about sexuality rather than lurking at alt.sex.zoophilia . By your recent postings on this site I already know you aren't the kind of bloke who lets reason and logic, (much less proper science) interfere with your already-made-up mind, so I won't carry on (much) with the significance of members of the animal kingdom engaging in not-for-procreation sex as it pertains to why humans do so.
When (if) replying, do please spare me your Christian Apologist rationalisation for the fact that we share 99% of our DNA with apes.. oh, and that surprise! we experience the same sexual urges as apes do too! (though not everyone finds chimps sexually attractive. Oh OK, maybe _you_ do [and that's okay with me!], but I don't.) - also spare me the 'But... but... but... the Bible says...()!' arguments too. - I could give a fuck what the Bible says. The Bible is flat out _wrong_ where it contradicts peer-reviewed science, full stop. -Just like any other lousy full-of-holes hypothesis. It's beyond rational argument as far as I'm concerned that you're a big (nearly) hairless ape, so am I, and (sorry folks) so is everyone else here! Get over it already. Some apes prefer sex with their own gender, and some don't. - Some prefer neither, or both. What's the big kerfuffle about that?
In closing, I think that you're a deeply stupid, bigoted and prejudiced human being who should put down the MO Letters long enough to refrain from posting your brainwashed, Family-sympathetic drivel on OUR site! Please FOAD already.
L. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From Shania
Monday, March 14, 2005, 10:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
Whatever. Husbands and wives engage in anal sex all the time, and nobody is coming down with hiddeous infections. It is simply another form of sex. Yes, you have to be a little more careful and you should always wear a condom, but trust me, half the hetrosexual couples you know probably do that from time to time and would never tell your hyper ass about it. He.
In all seriousness, if you read anything from any sort of modern sex therapist, they are going to tell you that it if both parties are into it, the act of anal sex is perfectly healthy for men and women to enjoy. Sure not everyone likes it, but as in all sex acts, not everything is for everyone, every individual has different preferences, likes & dislikes.
And remember, Berg thought that oral sex with a woman was unhealthy too and could give a guy a sore throat. Maybe he should've stopped going down on dirty skanks who had just had sex with some other dude a few hours earlier. And in a lot of the southern states in the US, it is still technically "against the law" to give a guy a blow job. So anything can be regarded as perverse if you choose to look at it like that.
And Jasper, seriously, homosexuality is something that is a personal preference. Why should someone go through their whole life denying themself the sex that they want just because someone who thinks it is perverted told them that. I bet you are actually the kind of person who would love to get chained and spanked very hard. Find a hot babe and try it, you will probably like it. :)(reply to this comment) |
| | From Shania
Monday, March 14, 2005, 10:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
Whatever. Husbands and wives engage in anal sex all the time, and nobody is coming down with hiddeous infections. It is simply another form of sex. Yes, you have to be a little more careful and you should always wear a condom, but trust me, half the hetrosexual couples you know probably do that from time to time and would never tell your hyper ass about it. He.
In all seriousness, if you read anything from any sort of modern sex therapist, they are going to tell you that it if both parties are into it, the act of anal sex is perfectly healthy for men and women to enjoy. Sure not everyone likes it, but as in all sex acts, not everything is for everyone, every individual has different preferences, likes & dislikes.
And remember, Berg thought that oral sex with a woman was unhealthy too and could give a guy a sore throat. Maybe he should've stopped going down on dirty skanks who had just had sex with some other dude a few hours earlier. And in a lot of the southern states in the US, it is still technically "against the law" to give a guy a blow job. So anything can be regarded as perverse if you choose to look at it like that.
And Jasper, seriously, homosexuality is something that is a personal preference. Why should someone go through their whole life denying themself the sex that they want just because someone who thinks it is perverted told them that. I bet you are actually the kind of person who would love to get chained and spanked very hard. Find a hot babe and try it, you will probably like it. :)(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From conan
Monday, March 14, 2005, 09:43
(Agree/Disagree?)
You mean that you are aware that the anus is where human beings (and other creatures) defecate our of?? Wow!! You are an enlightened one!
Of course, when it comes to sexual topics you're about as enlightened as a fly drowning in the shit he tried to feast on. Go figure! Anal sex is not immoral and nor should it be considered perverse. It's a matter of choice and just like 'normal' vaginal intercourse can have health risks and complications if not done under proper circumstance or with the right level of cleanliness. And no, cleanliness is not next to godliness and anal sex has nothing to do with god either, gay or hetrosexual for that matter. (reply to this comment) |
| | From Wake up!!
Monday, March 14, 2005, 04:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
This is the 21st century for christ sake! Anal sex is pretty "normal" in sexual relations these days. As with all types of sex, there are certain aspects of cleanliness that needs to be considered, but doesn't mean it's somehow "wrong". You can catch "nasty infections" from viginal sex as well if you're not careful.
Judging only from your comments on this subject, I'd say you have a pretty boring and unadventurous sex life (that is if you have a sex life at all). If (as you seem to believe) God made our bodies, what's wrong with enjoying things that naturally give us pleasure. And before you start saying that anal sex isn't enjoyable, beleive me you don't know what you are talking about!! As they say, don't knock it until you've tried it.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | from FTLBearDavid
Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 21:07
(Agree/Disagree?)
Shania:
Thank you for your letter about homophobes. I believe, as a gay male in the USA, that Americans are facing the reality that Gays are not THAT different from anyone else. Homophobia IS created at home by one of two types of people:
1. Parents who hate gays, due to their "white cracker"-thinking.
2. Men who ARE in the closet and are not "man enough" to face the fact that they, themselves are actually gay.
(reply to this comment)
| From Jasper
Monday, March 14, 2005, 00:57
(Agree/Disagree?)
In that gays are human beings, they are not at all different from the rest of humanity in material composition. Where they 'differ' from the norm is in the area of the choices they makes in regard to their sexuality. Men who are in the closet should be advised to remain there. New strains of AIDS are killing within three months. The pursuit of pleasure without responsibility is selfish. And this has nothing to do with being a 'white cracker' either. Get over it. Homosexuality is intrinsically disordered.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From vacuous
Friday, April 22, 2005, 04:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
Jasper they make no "choices" in regard to their sexuality...in order to be responsible for what you do, you must be responsible for the way you are, at least in crucial mental respects.
Are you responsible for the chemical constitution of your brain and are you responsible for your mental nature?
You cannot help but think the way you do and neither can gays.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From Shania
Monday, March 14, 2005, 11:49
(Agree/Disagree?)
One of the main signs a person is ignorant is when they are so freaking set in what they believe is right just because it is what they think or believe. The beauty of life is that we should be able to find what makes us happy and go for it--whether it be sexual preference, career, being single and partying like a rock star every night, or settling down with the love of your life--whatever it may be, it should be YOUR CHOICE. Clearly homosexuality is not your thing, but who are you to say it is wrong just because you don't personally like it? It would be one thing if you were saying that in your opinion it seems wrong or distasteful as far as your own preferenes go, but you are a crazy whacko anyway, so who really cares about you and your ignorance.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From Jasper
Monday, March 14, 2005, 01:09
(Agree/Disagree?)
A phobia is a 'fear of something.' I don't think most people 'fear' gays at all. Gays have the most to fear from themselves, especially if they persist in having unprotected sex with each other. The primary cause of death among gays is AIDS. Relatively few gays die as a result of attacks by heterosexual males. In fact, more gays die as a result of mistreatment by fellow gays than heterosexuals! The most prolific mass murderers of gays in the last century were all gays! -i.e., Dean Coryll in Texas, William Bonin, John Wayne Gacy, Jeffry Dahmer, etc.(reply to this comment) |
| | from frmrjoyish
Sunday, April 18, 2004 - 19:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
I am a gay man trapped in a woman's body! Somebody help me, please!
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]