Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Science, Math, and Philosophy Discussions regarding science, math, and/or philosophy.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-05-2017, 03:32 PM   #126
TomCowley
Pooh-Bah
 
TomCowley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,513
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
I'm not sure about Tom. I can't get my head around the inner workings of cat "people." He got the "habit" and the difficulty of modeling human behavior thing correct, but I assume that he gathered this through years of studying the behaviors of real people.
Cats are great. They'll come when you call them and don't give a **** (or take a ****) if you forget.
TomCowley is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 04:23 PM   #127
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
Wait, they found that males are pretty slutty and that it is the relative lack of willing females that limits the number of partners that heterosexual men have?!? Groundbreaking!
Well, perhaps that's partly why the gay lifestyle is so harmful mentally and should be discouraged in the borderline cases. Gay men, who have 7x the sex of straight men and women, commit 5x the rate of suicide. 1 in 5 kill themselves. Sex is supposed to be good for your mental state. Perhaps lustful same-sex sex with huge numbers of partners, isn't?
ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-05-2017, 04:37 PM   #128
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
Easy game. Find people who have intact brains except for damage to their feely parts, or disconnect people's thinky parts from their feely parts either medically or through surgery.
This is an impossible thing to do. Psychologists hugely simplify the brain, and label one part as doing one thing, one part another. But it's still largely quack science/cultish beliefs and "truths". We simply haven't mapped the brain well enough to make the kind of statement you're making above.

Quote:
The thinky parts are between the feely parts and the voluntary action parts, which simplifies things.
Not really. Brains are complex.

Quote:
This has been both discovered and done, and these people just don't do much of anything that would be expected (if they had the normal emotions). It seems that there is no reason to do any cold-hard calculations on the proper course of action if you don't feel like doing cold-hard calculations. It just doesn't occur to them to do the calculations.
Yeah, see this is what I mean. When statement like the above are made:

a) you have no ****ing clue what you're talking about (you as in psychologists/neurologists)
b) you (as in the quacks in this field) wildly extrapolate the tiny (useless) data you have into unsupported conclusions.

The amygdala/limbic system is not just a seat of emotion. It's a seat of drive, motivation, instinct. It's no doubt involved in physically or electrically activating other parts of the brain (outside emotion).

So your claim that we can remove the emotion bit and people don't do much of anything is just false; we cannot separate out the emotion system from all the other functions the same component produces. We don't know enough of the brain to be able to separate emotion from drive. The limbic system likely does lots of low level, non emotion routing, energizing and organizing of the brain. There's no "emotion" section that we can cut out without removing a bunch of other stuff too.

I do agree that emotions are primal and central and lay on a stack below thought. Does that mean they underlie everything we do. Not really. The driveshaft underlies the car, and at various speeds there are states you can't reach, but the higher control unit - the driver - can still decide what to do with it.

Similarly, decisions can be made from a flow of competing emotions that don't involve those emotions. If you feel love and hate for something, for example, what makes you decide between?

People with lobotomies are very different to people without. They make different decisions, have very different behavior. Indeed, lobotomies were sold by your illustrious profession as a way to "cure" healthy but spirited women; thousands of women had their personality destroyed by your quack profession and became more compliant and less emotional. According to your model of the brain, only their higher "thinking" functions were removed. Yet their behavior changed greatly despite no damage to their emotional centers.

Last edited by ToothSayer; 05-05-2017 at 04:49 PM.
ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-05-2017, 04:52 PM   #129
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13,847
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer View Post
Well, perhaps that's partly why the gay lifestyle is so harmful mentally and should be discouraged in the borderline cases. Gay men, who have 7x the sex of straight men and women, commit 5x the rate of suicide. 1 in 5 kill themselves. Sex is supposed to be good for your mental state. Perhaps lustful same-sex sex with huge numbers of partners, isn't?
I'll grant a non-zero chance that this is remotely possible, except that it turns out that the 1/5 is inaccurate. It is almost accurate for attempts at suicide that include such things as "thought about it" or "took a number of aspirin slightly more than is recommended on the bottle."
BrianTheMick2 is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 05:00 PM   #130
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13,847
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCowley View Post
Cats are great. They'll come when you call them and don't give a **** (or take a ****) if you forget.
There is no need to justify your preferences.
BrianTheMick2 is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 05:11 PM   #131
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13,847
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer View Post
This is an impossible thing to do. Psychologists hugely simplify the brain, and label one part as doing one thing, one part another. But it's still largely quack science/cultish beliefs and "truths". We simply haven't mapped the brain well enough to make the kind of statement you're making above.


Not really. Brains are complex.


Yeah, see this is what I mean. When statement like the above are made:

a) you have no ****ing clue what you're talking about (you as in psychologists/neurologists)
b) you (as in the quacks in this field) wildly extrapolate the tiny (useless) data you have into unsupported conclusions.

The amygdala/limbic system is not just a seat of emotion. It's a seat of drive, motivation, instinct. It's no doubt involved in physically or electrically activating other parts of the brain (outside emotion).

So your claim that we can remove the emotion bit and people don't do much of anything is just false; we cannot separate out the emotion system from all the other functions the same component produces. We don't know enough of the brain to be able to separate emotion from drive. The limbic system likely does lots of low level, non emotion routing, energizing and organizing of the brain. There's no "emotion" section that we can cut out without removing a bunch of other stuff too.

I do agree that emotions are primal and central and lay on a stack below thought. Does that mean they underlie everything we do. Not really. The driveshaft underlies the car, and at various speeds there are states you can't reach, but the higher control unit - the driver - can still decide what to do with it.

Similarly, decisions can be made from a flow of competing emotions that don't involve those emotions. If you feel love and hate for something, for example, what makes you decide between?

People with lobotomies are very different to people without. They make different decisions, have very different behavior. Indeed, lobotomies were sold by your illustrious profession as a way to "cure" healthy but spirited women; thousands of women had their personality destroyed by your quack profession and became more compliant and less emotional. According to your model of the brain, only their higher "thinking" functions were removed. Yet their behavior changed greatly despite no damage to their emotional centers.
Taking all of that into account, and pretending that it is all true, the evidence still all points in one direction: Emotions drive behavior and cognition does a bit of steering of that behavior.
BrianTheMick2 is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 05:18 PM   #132
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
Taking all of that into account, and pretending that it is all true, the evidence still all points in one direction: Emotions drive behavior and cognition does a bit of steering of that behavior.
No argument here, except to say it's a lot more than emotion that drives behavior. As Tom points out, learned habits drive a great deal of behavior. Whether you can call them emotion, is hard to say.

Take addiction (of various kinds). It's not really emotion. It's brain chemicals like dopamine and (non-emotional, as far as I can tell) habitual reward pathways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
I'll grant a non-zero chance that this is remotely possible, except that it turns out that the 1/5 is inaccurate. It is almost accurate for attempts at suicide that include such things as "thought about it" or "took a number of aspirin slightly more than is recommended on the bottle."
Sure, agreed.

But the 4% to 20% attempts story is really pretty incredible. Because some percentage of people will be losers. Have horrible life events. Have severe mental illnesses (4% is the rate of major mental illnesses - schizophrenia, bipolar, severe depression), then you have physical illnesses, addicts, druggies, bankrupts. So you've got to wipe out the bottom 2% or so, and look at the non-mentally ill/non total losers. You're talking 2% normal people vs maybe 18% of gay people. 40% of transsexuals.

Last edited by ToothSayer; 05-05-2017 at 05:24 PM.
ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-05-2017, 06:12 PM   #133
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13,847
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer View Post
No argument here, except to say it's a lot more than emotion that drives behavior. As Tom points out, learned habits drive a great deal of behavior. Whether you can call them emotion, is hard to say.

Take addiction (of various kinds). It's not really emotion. It's brain chemicals like dopamine and (non-emotional, as far as I can tell) habitual reward pathways.
Talking about neurochemicals is just a different level of abstraction. You wouldn't call dopamine emotional or some other chemical rational.

Take addiction (to opioids). It is a strong and (relatively) unopposable desire (desire is an emotion). Quite similar to an itch that must be scratched.

Take habits (brushing your teeth). It is comfortable (an emotion) to stick to a routine. I doubt many adults do any sort of rational analysis over whether to brush their teeth.

Quote:
Sure, agreed.

But the 4% to 20% attempts story is really pretty incredible.
It is less incredible once you dig a bit deeper. The differences in the likelihood of "attempts" is largely due to reporting differences. The "true suicide attempts" (actual attempts that have at least some chance of "success") are approximately equal. It is kind of like the "troubled youth" narrative that states that adolescence is a time of sturm und drang. It isn't true at all, but the narrative causes adolescents to over-report emotional troubles.

The number of lifetime partners suffers from a somewhat different issue. There are between-group differences in what is considered "a sexual partner" plus some super-sluts who drive up the mean (thereby hiding the median, which is the number that matters) plus some amount of non-ingroup effects. I've done my best to counteract the middle issue, but I'm only one man.
BrianTheMick2 is offline  
Old 05-05-2017, 06:45 PM   #134
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

I'll think about the top one some more. In terms of suicidal, disagree strongly that it's reporting differences. If you argued that family ostracization differences are a big causative factor, I might agree with you more, although decent data is hard to find due to politicization of academia.
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
The number of lifetime partners suffers from a somewhat different issue. There are between-group differences in what is considered "a sexual partner" plus some super-sluts who drive up the mean (thereby hiding the median, which is the number that matters) plus some amount of non-ingroup effects. I've done my best to counteract the middle issue, but I'm only one man.
The data I posted earlier was the median. Gays have about 8x the median number of sexual partners.

ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-05-2017, 06:51 PM   #135
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13,847
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer View Post
The data I posted earlier was the median. Gays have about 8x the median number of sexual partners.

Clearly untrue because it was a study done by people with an agenda. (touché)
BrianTheMick2 is offline  
Old 05-06-2017, 10:54 AM   #136
Pokerlogist
veteran
 
Pokerlogist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: "turn on ,tune in, drop out"
Posts: 2,376
Re: Sex GTO

Family rejection makes more sense as a cause of gay suicide and evidence backs it up:

In a study done with 224 GLBT adults it was found that:

Teenagers that were rejected by their family were
8 times as likely to attempt suicide
6 times as likely to report serious depression
3 times as likely to have unprotected sex
3 times as likely to use drugs

Gay Latinos were more likely to get less or poor support from their parents and they had the highest rates of risk factors for HIV and mental health problems.

https://www.healthyplace.com/gender/...eir-glbt-teen/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19117902
Pokerlogist is offline  
Old 05-06-2017, 02:12 PM   #137
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

I disagree that it makes more sense, but it's a part of the puzzle.

There's a huge selection bias problem with these studies. People rejected by their families tend to be from less functional and loving families to begin with.

And they tend to be less functional people themselves as well. Mental illnesses, personality disorders, poor self control, lead to promiscuity, drug use, and family rejection due to far more friction and less healthy coping behaviors (both in themselves and their family who share their genes - mental illnesses, stress tolerance, addiction and maladaptive coping skills are highly genetic).

So I'm not sure these studies are worth the paper they're printed on. Confounding variables could easily be the entire explanation.

We can do a little BS test as well. If social and familial rejection is the only answer, we'd see an enormous difference between gay-accepting areas and non-gay-accepting areas. We don't, however. If social rejection and attitudes were a bit factor, we'd see an enormous drop in attempted suicide rates as society, and especially young people, have become more pro-gay over the last couple of decades. We're not seeing that either - rates appear to be as high as ever.
ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-06-2017, 03:04 PM   #138
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 13,847
Re: Sex GTO

If those studies aren't to be trusted, then obviously idle speculation by a random person on the internet must be the way to go.

Also, your BS test has some huge flaws in it. You are assuming high homogeneity of individuals and families within gay-accepting areas. Pennsylvania voted for Trump which indicates that only middle-aged and older white men live in Pennsylvania, right?
BrianTheMick2 is offline  
Old 05-07-2017, 02:59 AM   #139
HardPoker
stranger
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 11
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokerlogist View Post
Family rejection makes more sense as a cause of gay suicide and evidence backs it up:

In a study done with 224 GLBT adults it was found that:

Teenagers that were rejected by their family were
8 times as likely to attempt suicide
6 times as likely to report serious depression
3 times as likely to have unprotected sex
3 times as likely to use drugs

Gay Latinos were more likely to get less or poor support from their parents and they had the highest rates of risk factors for HIV and mental health problems.

https://www.healthyplace.com/gender/...eir-glbt-teen/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19117902
Gays reject half the entire population, sons of lesbians and daughters of gays are rejected by their parent before they even start puberty along with rejected by the rest of society, ive seen enough of the spite towards the opposite gender from lesbians in particular to know homosexuality is a large part psychological but calling it entirely a mental illness is misguided, homosexuality is first a sexual disability which then causes a pathological mindstate towards the opposite gender, if penetration were required for female orgasm obviously lesbians wouldnt exist and if penetrating a vagina felt better than penetrating an anus for all men then gays wouldnt exist either, physical defect or incompatibility is the primary factor and gays tend to have poorly developed sex organs or weak tissue genes

Since there are men who look like women and women who look like men and we all have 24/7 access to our own genitals, opting for homosexuality over surgery to repair defective sex organs can only be the result of lacking empathy for the opposite gender which is why homosexual procreation/parenting needs to be heavily discouraged by society
HardPoker is offline  
Old 05-07-2017, 04:49 AM   #140
boganomics
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 51
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by HardPoker View Post
if penetrating a vagina felt better than penetrating an anus for all men then gays wouldnt exist either
A+ logic
boganomics is offline  
Old 05-07-2017, 10:38 AM   #141
HUstylez
RIP HUNL Champ
 
HUstylez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,912
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer View Post
.
The data I posted earlier was the median. Gays have about 8x the median number of sexual partners.

I mean the obvious logical conclusion from this data is more of a men vs women argument, of course homosexual men can get sex at a much higher frequency than a heterosexual man because females are much more limiting in that regard. to try and argue that is not true seems pretty myopic
HUstylez is offline  
Old 05-07-2017, 12:08 PM   #142
HardPoker
stranger
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 11
Re: Sex GTO

Sex has always been too risky and intimate for having many partners to be worthwhile
HardPoker is offline  
Old 05-07-2017, 12:14 PM   #143
HUstylez
RIP HUNL Champ
 
HUstylez's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,912
Re: Sex GTO

that's not the point i was trying to make. as a generalization, men TRY to have many sexual partners moreso than women. whether or not successful is not the point. it is simply much easier for homosexual men to get more partners, not some hardwired increased promiscuity like toothsayer is trying to say
HUstylez is offline  
Old 05-08-2017, 12:56 PM   #144
heehaww
Pooh-Bah
 
heehaww's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: It was an attractive goat in AR
Posts: 4,111
Re: Sex GTO

Tooth, I'm a bi man married to another man. I'm curious if you can tell me what's wrong with me.

Facts about me and/or my hubby:
- Neither of us are suicidal, nor have we ever been.
- Neither of us are pedos and neither of us are attracted to animals.
- Neither of us are drug users or criminals.
- Neither of us have STD's.
- We eat very healthy, exercise and are in good physical health.
- We are a very happy couple, in fact we believe the happiest couple we know (gay or straight).
- I play poker for a living. I never go on tilt and I don't stress during downswings.

On paper it sounds like I'm happy and my life is great, but according to you, I have a mental disorder. Is my happiness an illusion? Am I similar to a high-functioning alcoholic? Will I wake up one day and turn suicidal out of nowhere? Have I left any details out that you need in order to make your assessment?
heehaww is offline  
Old 05-08-2017, 01:31 PM   #145
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by heehaww View Post
Tooth, I'm a bi man married to another man. I'm curious if you can tell me what's wrong with me.

Facts about me and/or my hubby:
- Neither of us are suicidal, nor have we ever been.
- Neither of us are pedos and neither of us are attracted to animals.
- Neither of us are drug users or criminals.
- Neither of us have STD's.
- We eat very healthy, exercise and are in good physical health.
- We are a very happy couple, in fact we believe the happiest couple we know (gay or straight).
- I play poker for a living. I never go on tilt and I don't stress during downswings.
What's wrong with you? Apart from being very weak on logical analysis, and having broken or overridden mechanisms that would normally (in a healthy specimen) attract someone to the opposite sex, nothing I can see from your description.
Quote:
On paper it sounds like I'm happy and my life is great, but according to you, I have a mental disorder.
Having a mental disorder isn't incompatible with happiness or high functioning. Some of the greatest geniuses in the world were depressed, bipolar, had personality disorders, had autism spectrum disorders. And that's the just the extreme ones. Psychopaths, people with OCD, various addictive disorders, people with extreme doll and excrement fetishes, tourettes, etc, can and are frequently happy and highly functioning people. It doesn't stop what they have being classified as a disorder. On average though, they tend to be comordbid with other problems, just like homosexuals are. Such is the nature of disorders. In any but the most severe disorders (like schizophrenia), you would expect a large minority of people just like yourself - happy and functional. If comorbidities were 100%, they wouldn't be called comorbidities.
Quote:
Is my happiness an illusion? Am I similar to a high-functioning alcoholic? Will I wake up one day and turn suicidal out of nowhere?
No more than someone with OCD or or addiction will suddenly become suicidal out of nowhere.
Quote:
Have I left any details out that you need in order to make your assessment?
Yes, lots of details. But that's beside the point. Whether something is classified as a disorder has nothing to do with whether a subset of the individuals with the disorder have healthy and happy and high functioning lives. If it was, OCD or paraphilias are not disorders. Do you want to argue that that's the case?

Also, I think you misunderstand me. I'm all for leaving adults alone and having them be happy as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. The question of homosexuality is largely a question of social policy around what we teach children and take as true in society.

Also, having a disorder doesn't make you "bad" or "less" as a person. That's clownthink, and why that notion spread through the gay community like AIDS is beyond me. It's no doubt somewhat a holdover from religion and the social attitudes of the past. Perhaps it's something that's internal - their actions give many gays have that they're not "right". I contend that many of the mechanisms that make men like women and avoid the same sex, probably still function in gay people; other mechanisms or habits override them however. It's a bit like some people liking ****-porn; either the mechanisms of disgust are overriden by other mechanisms, or the disgust itself becomes perverted into an arousing emotion. I think quite a lot of the internalized negative feelings felt in homosexuality (and manifested in things like a far greater suicide attempt rate) could come from such a mechanism. Just a theory though.

The truth matters here in terms of social policy and the attitude we take in teaching kids about homosexuality and presenting it as a normal, healthy life. And no one knows what the truth is.

Last edited by ToothSayer; 05-08-2017 at 02:00 PM.
ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-08-2017, 02:04 PM   #146
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

Also I'll say that if gays were purely born gay - some are, some aren't - and there was no consideration that people would choose an unhealthy gay lifestyle or fall into it because it's socially acceptable, then there would be no issue; I'd be right behind the gay lobby all the way.

For me it's purely an issue of whether promoting homosexuality as normal has unwanted side effects that override the "comfort" factor of teaching everyone that homosexuality is completely normal. And that's a hard question. I don't think it's settled.
ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-08-2017, 02:30 PM   #147
heehaww
Pooh-Bah
 
heehaww's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: It was an attractive goat in AR
Posts: 4,111
Re: Sex GTO

Don't have much time but I'll respond to the first bits for now:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer View Post
Apart from being very weak on logical analysis
Are you deducing this purely based on my being bisexual? My degree is in Math, and things like logic & programming have always come easy to me. But because of my attraction to males, you know for a fact that I suck at those things? And are straight females also bad at logic?

Quote:
and having broken or overridden mechanisms that would normally (in a healthy specimen) attract someone to the opposite sex
I said I'm bisexual. But your statement does apply to my husband, who is fully gay.

Regarding "broken mechanisms", couldn't I just as easily say you have broken mechanisms preventing you from seeing male attractiveness?
heehaww is offline  
Old 05-08-2017, 02:40 PM   #148
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by heehaww View Post
Are you deducing this purely based on my being bisexual? My degree is in Math, and things like logic & programming have always come easy to me. But because of my attraction to males, you know for a fact that I suck at those things? And are straight females also bad at logic?
No, I'm deducing this purely based on the implied "I'm gay and healthy and normal/high functioning, therefore your arguments about gays are invalid" post content. And silly questions, like "am I suddenly going to become suicidcal". I explained why it doesn't work that way and that should have been obvious to you; so you're either trolling or bad at thinking.
Quote:
I said I'm bisexual. But your statement does apply to my husband, who is fully gay.

Regarding "broken mechanisms", couldn't I just as easily say you have broken mechanisms preventing you from seeing male attractiveness?
I see male attractiveness. Some lovely looking men out there, although they're a lot rarer than women. Zero sexual interest though, because my brain functions as it's designed. In the same way, I'm not humping the TV or the dog or getting turned on by my toaster; a functional brain doesn't find those things sexually arousing.
ToothSayer is online now  
Old 05-08-2017, 05:22 PM   #149
dynamite22
centurion
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 186
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSayer View Post
Also I'll say that if gays were purely born gay - some are, some aren't - and there was no consideration that people would choose an unhealthy gay lifestyle or fall into it because it's socially acceptable, then there would be no issue; I'd be right behind the gay lobby all the way.

For me it's purely an issue of whether promoting homosexuality as normal has unwanted side effects that override the "comfort" factor of teaching everyone that homosexuality is completely normal. And that's a hard question. I don't think it's settled.
It is normal in the sense that it occurs throughout the animal kingdom
and does not harm other people. For most it is not a matter of choice.

Can you substantiate your claims about an 'unhealthy gay lifestyle'? What % of gay people lead such a lifestyle? Can monogamous gay couples be said to lead a 'healthy gay lifestyle'?
dynamite22 is offline  
Old 05-08-2017, 05:52 PM   #150
ToothSayer
Pooh-Bah
 
ToothSayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4,490
Re: Sex GTO

Quote:
Originally Posted by dynamite22 View Post
It is normal in the sense that it occurs throughout the animal kingdom
So does depression, OCD and anxiety disorders. Whether animals have a condition doesn't mean that's it not a disorder.

Quote:
and does not harm other people. For most it is not a matter of choice.
This is an assertion by you which has no basis in fact. I'd argue that there's strong evidence against it, for example, rates of bisexuality are much higher than rates of homosexuality.

If you'd said "some", I'd agree.
Quote:
Can you substantiate your claims about an 'unhealthy gay lifestyle'? What % of gay people lead such a lifestyle? Can monogamous gay couples be said to lead a 'healthy gay lifestyle'?
Yes. Homosexuality is co-morbid with a huge number of mental and physical conditions. Most gay men lead this lifestyle; medium sexual partners for a 40 year old gay male is > 50. A life of lust and promiscuity are the norm of homosexual behavior.

Leaving aside the mental conditions which I've discussed, aggressive promiscuous buttsex is extremely unhealthy, it causes a number of medical conditions and spreads a lot of communicable disease. AIDS for example would have infected virtually no one without the gay community - it is a disease of butt sex and needle sharing, but mostly butt sex. MSM (men who have sex with men) are still the main reason why straight black women become HIV positive, despite the small percentage of the population they represent. Aggressive gay buttsex is enormous burden on society.

The 40 million people in the world who are suffering with HIV, all of them have HIV because US gay men like to **** each other aggressively in the ass, and do so with multiple partners. Indeed, the history of the HIV epidemic started and spread with gay men:

Quote:
AIDS was first clinically observed in 1981 in the United States.[110] The initial cases were a cluster of injection drug users and gay men with no known cause of impaired immunity who showed symptoms of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP), a rare opportunistic infection that was known to occur in people with very compromised immune systems.[111] Soon thereafter, additional gay men developed a previously rare skin cancer called Kaposi's sarcoma (KS).[112][113] Many more cases of PCP and KS emerged, alerting U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and a CDC task force was formed to monitor the outbreak
HIV is a disease of aggressive promiscuous gay anal sex; the infection rates tell you that; despite being a tiny percentage of the population, they make up most new HIV cases.



Many of the female cases, particularly in the black community, come from heterosexual (anal) sex with MSM (bisexuals) who've learned to enjoy buttsex.

And this is just one STD. I won't go into the gory details of what butt****ing does to your insides, but it's a substantial disease burden.

Beyond that, homosexual relationships damage the family unit. Homosexual politics, gay pride parades, etc, have liberalized sexual norms, including buttsex, which has nasty emotional consequences for many women. For example:
Quote:
25% of the women interviewed had been forced into having anal intercourse at least once. It goes on to say, “Coercion and violence notwithstanding, many participants reported pain and discomfort, including emotional distress, during anal intercourse.” 5 Furthermore, a qualitative study from the United Kingdom concludes, “Young people’s narratives normalized coercive, painful and unsafe anal heterosex. This study suggests an urgent need for harm reduction efforts targeting anal sex to help encourage discussion about mutuality and consent, reduce risky and painful techniques and challenge views that normalize coercion.” 1 It is the woman who is being coerced and feels the pain.
We're creater a cruder, rougher society thanks to gay normalization.

Most importantly though, homosexual politics - the idea of the "normalness" of being queer - are now extending beyond gay rights into the questioning and deconstruction of gender, which is becoming more and more mainstream. Kids are now taught gender fluidity at a young age (<10 in places), confusing their identity at a time they're not really ready for it. It has no benefit to the masses; the masses are being forced to bend so a the handful of people with mental disorders can feel normal (when they're not).

There are a lot of reasons we should call abnormal disorders, disorders, rather than celebrate them. Homosexuality is not a good thing for society. There are reasons to discourage development of the disorder in individuals who would otherwise be normal, rather than teach it as normal and desirable to children.

Last edited by ToothSayer; 05-08-2017 at 05:59 PM.
ToothSayer is online now  

Closed Thread
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.33 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online