Thread: Are you Homophobic?

...actually, that float is very 80s...

Originally Posted by JPPR2

ALL "Heavy" PDA should be kept in private locations.

...agree: I'm just as uncomfortable with gays or straights outraging public decorum...however, the current double standard is that when gays kiss, fondle, assgrab, etc it's terrible; when straights do it, well, you know, they're just horsing around...unacceptable...

Originally Posted by Maanaam

no, you are moving the goalposts. That is not the original point at all. It is you who introduced the element of lifelong partnerships.

I think most guys who consider themselves to be gay would say that they do not and have never found women to be sexually attractive in comparison to men and that they have only ever been sexually attracted to men.

Most would say that they have been that way ever since they were aware of their sexuality and expect to remain that way so the 'lifelong' exclusive aspect is common to most gay men's experience of homosexuality.

If that is the commonly understood definition of being gay then being gay is almost certainly not 'natural' in the sense of being an evolved behaviour.

Even if you relax the exclusive idea and say 90% I think even that would still struggle to find an evolutionary rationale.

I am happy to support gays in their quest for social acceptance on humanist grounds but I don't want that acceptance to be founded on scientific falsehood such as 'being gay is natural' because 1. it is intellectually dishonest and 2. it makes the acceptance contingent upon something which is almost certainly not true which is counterproductive for the foundations of that social acceptance.

...FOL...

Originally Posted by GracelessFawn

I'm mostly at peace with everybody/most things, except abusive cunts

I always feel proud leaving a [at][at][at][at] in a thoroughly abused state.

Originally Posted by Looper

I think most guys who consider themselves to be gay would say that they do not and have never found women to be sexually attractive in comparison to men and that they have only ever been sexually attracted to men.

Most would say that they have been that way ever since they were aware of their sexuality and expect to remain that way so the 'lifelong' exclusive aspect is common to most gay men's experience of homosexuality.

I take it you have never heard of the "Kinsey Scale", which tries to identify a person's heterosexual -> homosexual preference on a scale of 1-7.



Homosexuality has been observed, to some extent, in all species of Hominidae (Great Apes). A link for those who may be interested in the subject or possibly some new positions...

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272483706_Homosexual_Behavior_in_Primates.

Originally Posted by Troy

I take it you have never heard of the "Kinsey Scale", which tries to identify a person's heterosexual -> homosexual preference on a scale of 1-7.

The Kinsey Scale is a bit vague.

0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual

Any gay bloke who has ever in his life had any heterosexual experience has to rate himself as less than 6.

But social expectation puts pressure on young gay folk to try heterosexuality. Only if they really cannot stomach even the idea of even giving it a go by kissing a girl and have literally never touched a girl can they rate themselves as 6.

I imagine there are many full on gay bloke who at least gave it crack with at least kissing a girl when they were young.

Also many full on gay fellas will self-report as being on the spectrum just because because it leaves the back door open in terms of their own self perception if they are perhaps still not 'out'.

I doubt that there are many fellas who truly swing both ways in the sense that is suggested by options 1-5. I have met a few gay fellas but I have never met anyone who said they swung both ways.

I don't think gay sex in prison should count. The evolutionary question is about genuine preference not necessity.

so, you recognized my blue striped shirt...

On that scale im a 0
Chitty however would be at least a 3 on weekends

"Incidentally homosexual" wtf does that even mean?

Originally Posted by SKkin

"Incidentally homosexual" wtf does that even mean?

That means that you are only gay on Sundays

Originally Posted by Looper

Sundays

So Sundays are when you don the Heels and stockings then.

Originally Posted by JPPR2

That float is standard fare.

Sans Tom in the blue striped shirt.

Originally Posted by Looper

Most would say that they have been that way ever since they were aware of their sexuality and expect to remain that way so the 'lifelong' exclusive aspect is common to most gay men's experience of homosexuality.

I don't follow your reasoning.

Originally Posted by Looper

Even if you relax the exclusive idea and say 90%

Ah, yes, it seems you have an inkling of the irrationality of your premise. Just an inkling, mind.

Originally Posted by Looper

I think even that would still struggle to find an evolutionary rationale.

I keep on asking you and you keep avoiding answering: Does every sexual act have to have an evolutionary reason?

And you didn't address my point that you had moved the goalposts.

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

Your "gaydar" has gone Pete Tong tuk tuckin

BTW some of my friends are Homo erectus

Where's my fookin pizza I'm starving!

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

Where's my fookin pizza I'm starving!

Someone is on the sauce. Make sure you take pics when it arrives.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Someone is on the sauce. Make sure you take pics when it arrives.

I'm doubtful it will ever arrive, it's been two days since I placed my order.

Not much chance of a tuckin.

PM sent to the haggis bothering fvcker.

Originally Posted by tomcat

...nearly every male (SD excepted) with whom I've enjoyed some form of carnal relations has been straight

How many of them were the "bottom" in those relations?

Originally Posted by tomcat

...nearly every male (SD excepted) with whom I've enjoyed some form of carnal relations has been straight...the right setting, alcohol, control of the dimmer switch and voila! Bob's yer date...that scale probably describes a larger number of horny males than many here would realize...

Are you a 20 stone dyke with a strapon dressed in leather wanting to pound bsnubs prostrate and label him a twat?

Originally Posted by Looper

scientific falsehood such as 'being gay is natural' because 1. it is intellectually dishonest

OK, be intellectually honest then. The "scientific falsehood" that 'being gay is natural' has been posited. Since you claim it's a falsehood, it is incumbent upon you to prove it's a falsehood. Don't say there's no evolutionary rationale because there must be thousands of examples of things in nature for which there is no evolutionary rationale (that we can think of) but they are all natural, by definition of their existance. And keep in mind "rationales that we can think of". Only in recent years have scientists realised an evolutionary rationale for humans having an appendix. Ten years ago, nobody could explain why we have one.
So 1. Lack of "evolutionary rationale" does not mean something is unnatural, and 2. "rationale" is something we can think of. That we can't thin of it doesn't mean a rationale does not exist.
Two very separate facts that you need to address.

Originally Posted by SKkin

How many of them were the "bottom" in those relations?

...none...that I remember anyway...

Originally Posted by Chittychangchang

Are you a 20 stone dyke with a strapon dressed in leather wanting to pound bsnubs prostrate and label him a twat?

...bingo!...although I'm on Dill's diet program and hope to be down to a svelte 18 stone by summer for my beach body...

Tart