Page all of 3 123>
Topic Options
#72280 - 10/30/12 07:50 AM Are Gays Beneficial to Society?
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: prodigalsun
My Channel to GODDESS LILITH With Hardcore Women, Lesbians, Trannies. The female persuasian few limits.


You're a dude, right? WTF's up with the trannies?

Me personally (and I really only speak for myself), I find it impossible to dignify a surgically altered dude a Goddess by any stretch. Osiris might have had a John Bobbitt moment at the hands of Set, but the last thing he did was transform into a woman. He became what is politely called a Capon.

Anatomy is destiny - Sigmund Freud

JK


Moved from Porn Site thread... please continue


Edited by Fnord (10/30/12 11:28 AM)
_________________________



Top
#72281 - 10/30/12 08:05 AM Re: More Woman Than Woman Trans-Ann Coulter [Re: Jason King]
prodigalsun Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 78
Loc: CA, USA
Good insights Jason King, I am a dude and to be more specific, about 95 percent homosexual and 5 percent heterosexual opportunist. If it's human, has orifices, and walks on two legs, in heat, it's fair game.

I've never fully understood the Transgender mystique and I've always had crossdresser Gay male friends and dates. In exploring all kinds of hardcore porn, Trannies, or chicks with dicks on hormones and breasts, banging men and women, just kind of got to me, and got me off.

In pre Christian and other ancient civilizations, there were crossdressing males that were part of worship to Goddesses or acted as surrgate females for male devotees. A certain amount of transgendered male pagans and LHPers will also take a position of emulating the Goddess paradigm and energies, even if with a hermaphroditic body.

I worship the Demon Goddess Lilith in recreational perversion so all kinds of female archetypes I add in my venerations. Love them all.

TRANSVESTISM IN GODDESS WORSHIP THROUGH HISTORY

http://www.geocities.ws/karenspecial/tvism.html


Edited by prodigalsun (10/30/12 08:14 AM)

Top
#72287 - 10/30/12 09:43 AM Re: More Woman Than Woman Trans-Ann Coulter [Re: prodigalsun]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: prodigalsun
Good insights Jason King, I am a dude and to be more specific, about 95 percent homosexual and 5 percent heterosexual opportunist. If it's human, has orifices, and walks on two legs, in heat, it's fair game.

I've never fully understood the Transgender mystique and I've always had crossdresser Gay male friends and dates. In exploring all kinds of hardcore porn, Trannies, or chicks with dicks on hormones and breasts, banging men and women, just kind of got to me, and got me off.

In pre Christian and other ancient civilizations, there were crossdressing males that were part of worship to Goddesses or acted as surrgate females for male devotees. A certain amount of transgendered male pagans and LHPers will also take a position of emulating the Goddess paradigm and energies, even if with a hermaphroditic body.

I worship the Demon Goddess Lilith in recreational perversion so all kinds of female archetypes I add in my venerations. Love them all.

TRANSVESTISM IN GODDESS WORSHIP THROUGH HISTORY

http://www.geocities.ws/karenspecial/tvism.html


The mind is a fickle thing.

Consider the difference: transexual vs. transvestite. And the difference, considering your link, is ultimately a pseudo-Freudian need by the male to be Progenitrix.

Men have dressed up as women for various reasons, and none of these are chief (or vergences) to understanding a slight phenomenon. Consider the Sambia tribe here .

Is this behavior productive outside of a small population? And is the population, within which it is common, on the top of the heap, or the bottom?

Now, let me give you the naturalistic argument.

Bodies are made a certain way. And this way requires one XX and one XY in order to propagate. In the Aves and a few others, it is a mirror. It always takes two.

A homosexual man will end his life 9/10 times with no offspring. Yet, the incidence of homosexuality vis a vis species population has remained constant at about 10%. Almost like a tithe.

The sad fact that hardly anyone wants to address is just this: homosexuality is an intended check on population growth. OR, rather, you are gay because you are in opposition to "god". Is it no wonder that LGBT folks are the most vocal amongst us.

JK
_________________________



Top
#72289 - 10/30/12 10:29 AM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Jason King]
prodigalsun Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 78
Loc: CA, USA
This thread was on Porn site suggestions, now steering into another area on LGBT and social, plus population issues.

In a World with near 7 billion humans, any alternative to creating more births is a welcome change, particularly in nations with heavy heterosexual inclined populatons.

Transvestism and same sex sexuality exists where heterosexuality is the norm, more often as an alternative or available form of sex if no opposite genders are readily available for sex, as in certain same gender enviroments, prisons, military, male schools. It only becomes a problem when alarmists or those with interests in certain sized populations make it an issue. Consumer capitalism for one which needs masses.

STDs and physical dangers, this is problem for both genders and a large population of sexually active young adults and youths, where their behavior becomes dangerous to the larger society, this is where many institutions and groups become the most antagonistic in reaction or retaliation.

There is a growing phenom of LGBT extended families and same sex couples that are having children with surrogate partners, with or without same sex marriage legalized. As same sex marriage is more accepted, the idea of mainly Gay males parenting children created through a surrogate would be a way of propagating their lineage and it's happening in more states and some countries over last 5 years.

Those persons that are having same sex because they are opposed to "GOD" usually outgrow the phase or the novelty wears out and a number become political/religious conservatives to carry on their battles. Thousands of LGBT and some bisexuals are naturally mentally wired to their particular sex preferences.

With the explosion of multifaced porn online for both genders to explore, I've seen a very experimenting, multi sex preference population in the USA and World over last 15 years.

In covert science fact black lab projects, that many conspiracy theorists allege, experimentation with artificial womb technology has been explored and/or already exists, so that would change the dominance of the female gender as procreation organisms.

LGBT people have been very vocal because violence and homophobia are institutionalized in many facets of life and culture even by some people that claim to be heterosexual outwardly or are closeted status.

GAY SURROGATE PREGNANCY BUSINESS PHENOM

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=les...iw=1095&bih=664


Edited by prodigalsun (10/30/12 10:57 AM)

Top
#72292 - 10/30/12 10:52 AM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: prodigalsun]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2086
Loc: Texas
This has probably gone wide of topic (but is interesting). You guys want to move this to another thread? I can pick up the relevant posts and do so if you wish to continue.
_________________________
From the ashes arisen

Top
#72293 - 10/30/12 10:59 AM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Fnord]
prodigalsun Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 78
Loc: CA, USA
Sounds like a good idea, if you or a moderator can move these posts between Jason King and Me, Prodigalsun elsewhere on the forum. This topic appears to be more apply titled:

ARE GAYS BENEFICIAL TO SOCIETY?

Definately has social anthropology novelty to it.

Top
#72299 - 10/30/12 04:13 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: prodigalsun]
Naama Offline
member


Registered: 07/23/12
Posts: 318
Loc: NewYork
I would skip this topic, but the name ... made me stop...
As an LHP person why would I care for what is beneficial for a society.
This very society is constantly trying to extinguish the Black Flame
with its morals that are rooted in sense of unity with community and universe and herd mentality.

Looking at everything through the lenses "what is beneficial for a society" REALLY? Is thats how we are supposed to look at things?

About population control.
Why care and preach about "one-family one-child" propaganda issue?
Or why preach about "every teenager being provided with condom" issue.
These^^^^ are the only practical things that you, as individual can do (or am I missing something?)
Individuals (whether they RHP or LHP) obviously aren't able to induce a real impact on a "population control".
...Let the human roaches multiply and flood the Earth, let em bring it to a Final Solution. Don't stop the madness...
You will not see these metamorphoses during your lifetime anyway. Or perhaps a big meteorite can fall down one day and kill 95% of a humanity thereby solving the "population problem". Things can go unexpectedly and humans aren't really able to predict what is going to happen with a DESTINY of a humanity.
_________________________
http://i57.tinypic.com/2j498ih.jpg

Top
#72306 - 10/30/12 04:59 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Naama]
ÜbermenschMunchi Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/17/12
Posts: 45
Loc: California
 Originally Posted By: JK

The sad fact that hardly anyone wants to address is just this: homosexuality is an intended check on population growth.


That is a fact? Intended by whom, and how do you figure? Cannot homosexuality be one of many random anomalies? What persuades you to attach a purpose to it?

Also, assuming your statement is a fact, what qualifies it as "sad"? In my opinion, if there is some higher order attempting to curb population it is sadly failing.


Edited by ÜbermenschMunchi (10/30/12 05:10 PM)
Edit Reason: Added a question.
_________________________
"Resolve to serve no more and you are at once freed." -Étienne de La Boétie

Top
#72313 - 10/30/12 08:27 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: ÜbermenschMunchi]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: ÜbermenschMunchi
 Originally Posted By: JK
The sad fact that hardly anyone wants to address is just this: homosexuality is an intended check on population growth.

That is a fact? ...

"Intentions" notwithstanding, it has always seemed to me that if homosexuality were a genetic attribute [as opposed to a lifestyle choice], which is what I gather to be the current PC explanation, it would die out within a generation - at least absent a very energetic and targeted artificial insemination effort. But what do I know?
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#72316 - 10/30/12 08:35 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
blackblooded Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/14/12
Posts: 24
Loc: Louisiana
Maybe the gene lay dormant for a few generations? Or it could be a combination of genetic and environmental factors? Just putting ideas out there.
_________________________
I'm a pacifist. They can't fight if they're dead.

Top
#72318 - 10/30/12 08:49 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: blackblooded]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
Loaded question. In terms of population control? Maybe. By nature or nurture, they certainly contributed to the antinomian streak out here in NorCal. Radical subculture with influence. Society? I don't know. I'm for same-sex marriage, adoption rights, etc. Yet, it has all become very PC. I know some gay folk fight "assimilation". Overall, I just wouldn't say "This group is beneficial (or not) to society." It would be more about individual rights sans PC bullshit. I just don't care about sexual preference.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#73246 - 11/27/12 03:29 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
There is a hypothesis, I have heard, out there that we are all born homosexual and it is indeed the way we are raised and the societal influences that create the "straight" aspect of ourselves.

This might explain why there is no "dying off" of the gene. Or perhaps why we have such gender pandering toys for the youngsters.
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#73250 - 11/27/12 05:52 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
ceruleansteel Offline
active member


Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 784
Loc: Behind you
I disagree, and I think that's just about the dumbest "hypothesis" I've ever heard. I'd like to see a respectable link to that information. That whole thing smacks of "gays are good, embrace the concept" propaganda, to me.

Anyone who has studied child development knows that all small children go through phases where they emulate and admire each parent in turns. It doesn't have shit to do with sexuality, farther than the child is figuring out gender roles.

And if you would have researched farther along that course instead of stopping at "we're all born homos; society forces us to go straight", then you would have stumbled across at least one of many examples of science throwing the bullshit flag. I.e., children being raised in a strictly genderless environment and after a certain age, boys choosing guns and trucks while girls gravitated towards dolls and dress up and whatnot.

It has been proven with sociopaths that almost every single time there is a trauma during some developmental stage that sets things in motion. I think that the same can be said for homosexuals and many others who deviate from the "norm" in a sexual arena. Especially men, because the sex drive is more id-engulfing for them than it is for women.

There's six kids in my family and 4 of them are at least a decade younger than me. I have no shortage of younger brothers who played with my high heels and no shortage of sisters who (like me) enjoyed swinging a hammer. But none of us have homosexual tendencies/desires. In short: toys don't have shit to do with sexuality. Even as an adult I enjoy "manwork" more than domestic chores, and I NEVER played with dolls growing up, yet I've never had a moment where I thought of another female in a sexual manner.

That may have been different if my family would have tried to push gender roles on us and tried to make us feel weird or guilty or even dirty because we investigated the other side of the gender fence in what toys we chose or hobbies we enjoyed.

I have an acquaintance who dated a guy with a psycho mom who referred to his penis as a "green tomato" and never allowed him to even touch himself while he peed or bathed. This acquaintance was the only person surprised to find out he was a sexual deviant.

I also know a young girl who grew up with a severely dominating mother and a spineless father. She grew up attracted to females and freely admitted it was because her examples in life taught her that the females were where the power was and she was attracted to power. She also confided that her dad was always a disappointment to her; I think that was equally influential.

I don't believe that anyone is "born" any certain way. I think that we're born with a clean slate mentally (and the sex drive and our attractions are 100% mental, just as much as what our favorite foods are), and that we are molded by experience from the minute we exit the womb. The sum total of those experiences, to coin a psychological phrase, and how we interpret them and deal with them, mold who and what we become.

I don't believe it's all society. I don't even believe it is "mostly" society. I think it hinges on how we choose to interpret and deal with the world around us and the things that happen to us during the whole of our lives. Example: I was raised by my grandparents until I was 8, who also raised my mom long before I came along. We were raised the same way, by the same people, and we turned out completely different. Half the time, I can't even believe I'm related to the woman, and that young girl who grew up lesbian had two other siblings who were straight.

In short, I think it does come down to choice, but I think those choices are based on things that are so deeply rooted in the subconscious that they cannot even be identified, much less considered.

I'm one of those people who constantly find strangers divulging their entire life story, and one thing I've noticed is that each and every one of them who were dysfunctional in some way were "flash-frozen" at a certain age/development in which something they never got over occurred. An abusive, jealous guy - it turns out - had his entire world upended when he was 15 and his dad moved out. Come to find out, his dad had been cheating for the duration of the marriage (to the point where the mom, who had never been with anyone else in her life, had contracted several diseases over the years) and everything the guy ever thought he knew about his parents, his family unit, and relationships in general, was pulled out from under him. It fucked him up psychologically and his disappointment and betrayal and blah blah blah fucked up the way he handled his own relationships from that point on.

With all that in mind, I suggest that factors influencing small children while they are going through that stage of emulating/admiring their parents in alternate turns are what determines a child's sexuality. People say, "Oh, I've felt this way my entire life" and offer pictures of them with mommy's lipstick or daddy's boots as proof, yet ALL kids get into mommy's lipstick and wear daddy's boots. Few people have a solid picture of everything that influenced their lives when they were 6 months old or 1 or two.

Hell, even 5 and 6 are sketchy to me.


Edited by ceruleansteel (11/27/12 06:13 PM)
Edit Reason: clarification

Top
#73251 - 11/27/12 07:36 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: ceruleansteel]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
With all due respect, I think you may have read into my comment a bit further than I initially intended anyone to do. However..

 Quote:

I disagree, and I think that's just about the dumbest "hypothesis"


The suggestion in question was small response to what Aquino had to say about the fading of the gene due to generational evolution. I agree that it seems a bit far fetched but an interesting thought. Even if it is only to myself.

 Quote:
I'd like to see a respectable link to that information.


Study

Stanford


SD

The earliest study I found was from Sweden, who tested twins. The most commonly listed finding here is the region of "XQ28" located near the tip of the "X" chromosome. (As stated in "Stanford".) They do admit that genes do not completely take hold of what determines sexuality as environmental (as you said) influences have an effect as well.

 Quote:
Even as an adult I enjoy "manwork" more than domestic chores, and I NEVER played with dolls growing up, yet I've never had a moment where I thought of another female in a sexual manner.


I am also a bigger fan of manual labor. I didn't play with dolls; I played with trucks. I'm the eldest and only girl and grew up with 2 boys. Never once did I desire to get into my mother's make up or even have anything to do with dress up. Neither did either of my brothers. I, however, DO have a tendency to be attracted to both men and women.

 Quote:
The sum total of those experiences, to coin a psychological phrase, and how we interpret them and deal with them, mold who and what we become.


I can agree to that but what says that there isn't a genetic cause? Although the research says that it's not completely genetics due to seeing results that differed in the twins about homosexuality.. if it were indeed something that was fading off with the generations, it would become recessive and testing would show that.

They say that bipolar disorder is also genetic but this also skips generations and is influenced by daily life and experiences. Does the fact that it skips generations make it any less fact that it is genetic?

 Quote:
I'm one of those people who constantly find strangers divulging their entire life story, and one thing I've noticed is that each and every one of them who were dysfunctional in some way were "flash-frozen" at a certain age/development in which something they never got over occurred.


That's an interesting way of looking at it.. and I have to say I have heard that before. The freezing into the age of whenever a traumatic incident happens.

Quick question though: Am I to assume, based entirely off what I have read in that statement, that perhaps homosexuality is merely a mommy/daddy/traumatic event issue just waiting to be gotten over? Or maybe something learned and made into routine so the individual just thought it to be normal and now feels ostracized to the point where they have to pull the genetics card?

 Quote:
People say, "Oh, I've felt this way my entire life"


I can't say that I have gravitated towards a specific gender since I was born but I can say that I had that "talk" with my parents around 5-6 years old after being caught too many times playing doctor with my female friend from downstairs and I can also say, that feeling never left me but never developed into anything more than a mutual attraction between myself and members of both genders.

PS - I apologize if this a bit off the wall or all over the place. I'm quite tired.


Edited by OrgasmicKarmatic (11/27/12 07:38 PM)
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#73253 - 11/27/12 09:19 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
ceruleansteel Offline
active member


Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 784
Loc: Behind you
I clicked the one called "study" first, and I can already see the socio-psychological flaw in it. It helps that they point it out themselves.

Kids are usually more influenced by the mother's side of the family than the father's because mothers are the caregivers and usually the one the kids look to for nurturing, illustrating family values, etc. It only makes sense that they would have more exposure to the mother's side of the family and therefore be more influenced by what they see and hear. To suggest that it is sex-linked is still ridiculous, unless they do a study on homoesexual men who are never exposed to the maternal side of the family. So I'm throwing that one out the door. It seems to me to have been a half-assed attempt at justifying what they thought already instead of a real attempt to find a genetic link.

Your second link cites much of the same as the first and is riddled with speculation and even conflicting studies. I will put this in the "I don't know the answer, but they told me I had to make a presentation in 6 months" category.

Your last study contradicts both previous studies by saying there is no "gay gene". I also find fault in how they arrived at their 35% and 18% number.


Not one of these studies suggested that we are all "born homosexual".


 Quote:
if it were indeed something that was fading off with the generations, it would become recessive and testing would show that.


If anything, homosexuality would be an anomaly, an example of something going awry during the copy-paste process (such as the physically obvious anomaly that resulted from Thalidomide, and the suggestion that homosexuality is caused by a pregnant mother having an excess of a certain chemical hormone in her blood during a vital step in fetal development). It doesn't make sense for it to be genetic and there be a rise in cases when the very nature of homosexuality prevents the genetic propagation of the copies of the genetics.

 Quote:
They say that bipolar disorder is also genetic but this also skips generations and is influenced by daily life and experiences. Does the fact that it skips generations make it any less fact that it is genetic?


They say a lot of shit...and that's what it is: shit. The problem is that when it comes to the human brain, they are like fingerprints and you cannot use one or even a thousand examples of a human activity as a measuring stick for other humans when it comes to something rooted in psychology.

IF IF IF there truly is a genetic predisposition to mental illness, then either that gene is on or it is off, like eye color and hair color.

Read what you wrote "bipolar is genetic, but it skips generations and is influenced by environment"....it's psychobabble bullshit for "we don't know the answer but we know it's not easily categorized". And studies in different cultures and different countries (and levels of industrialization) will all have different answers to any question like that.

In ancient Rome, it wasn't homosexuality at all. It was just fucking a young man because the women were far away.

 Quote:
Am I to assume, based entirely off what I have read in that statement, that perhaps homosexuality is merely a mommy/daddy/traumatic event issue just waiting to be gotten over? Or maybe something learned and made into routine so the individual just thought it to be normal and now feels ostracized to the point where they have to pull the genetics card?


It can definitely be said that acceptance of deviance of any kind is something that is trained into humans. It's not within human nature to be accepting of foreign, different...anything. That's why you can drive through the neighborhoods of a major city and find that people have grouped up according to race (or sometimes religion). "Hey, there's little China...little Italy...little Mexico...little Rainbowland"... That's why a kid raised by a vegan mother will often look stricken at the sight of his peers devouring a cheeseburger.

I think it's entirely possible that the root cause of homosexuality has to do with some fuck up during the development of the child. I draw the line at blaming it wholly on the parents, though, because the child's psychological makeup and how he INTERPRETS and INCORPORATES the experiences of his life into his mind are more important than what those experiences are. It could be something that he saw in passing, some snippet of conversation that he heard...there's no telling what will and will not be a major influence on a developing mind.

Although I have observed enough to suggest that a child brought up in a very uptight and controlling environment will have more psychological problems all across the board than a child that is brought up in a laid back family, regardless of the level of nurturing. And again, this seems to affect men more than women. (hey, what a coincidence: that's what they say about homosexuality in your last link..that there are more gay men than women!)

Top
#73254 - 11/27/12 09:29 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: ceruleansteel]
XiaoGui17 Offline
veteran member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1219
Loc: Austin, TX
 Originally Posted By: ceruleansteel
I don't believe that anyone is "born" any certain way. I think that we're born with a clean slate mentally ...

Naturally, influence plays a role. If humans were born a certain way regardless of environment, genes would determine personality 100%, and clearly they don't.

But genes and factors that impact in-utero development do affect the mind to some degree. Separated twins show remarkable similarities in behavior, even if raised in totally different environments. Fetal alcohol syndrome is a condition that remains regardless of nurture. Mental retardation is present at birth and permanent. Even in utero, babies develop tastes for certain foods based on what their mothers eat while pregnant.

 Originally Posted By: ceruleansteel
It has been proven with sociopaths that almost every single time there is a trauma during some developmental stage that sets things in motion.

Neuropsychologist James Fallon identified three components necessary for psychopathology: (1) A genetic factor, (2) a neural abnormality formed in utero, and (3) trauma, usually severe abuse in childhood. This is why many children who suffer trauma or abuse do not become psychopaths: they lack the genetic and neurological aberrations. Trauma doesn't create a psychological condition in a vacuum; it simply activates something already present.

This indicates that abnormality is a combination of nature and nurture. Nature provides a trigger; nurture can pull that trigger. A person born without a trigger can't have it pulled. A person born with a trigger may still remain normal if the trigger isn't pulled.

I think many people attempt to rationalize away their tendencies by pointing to a certain influence. It's easier to pin the blame on someone else than to admit that a character flaw is an inherent part of one's makeup. Often, the flaw was present in a trigger, and the influence that they identify pulled that trigger.

 Originally Posted By: ceruleansteel
An abusive, jealous guy - it turns out - had his entire world upended when he was 15 and his dad moved out...It fucked him up psychologically and his disappointment and betrayal and blah blah blah fucked up the way he handled his own relationships from that point on.

This tendency could have been inherited from his father. The DRD4 (thrill-seeking) gene is related to cheating--men with longer versions of gene are more likely to cheat. Perhaps the father's behavior pulled that genetic trigger.

 Originally Posted By: ceruleansteel
I also know a young girl who grew up with a severely dominating mother and a spineless father. She grew up attracted to females and freely admitted it was because her examples in life taught her that the females were where the power was and she was attracted to power. She also confided that her dad was always a disappointment to her; I think that was equally influential.

Her dominating mother may have had a hormonal abnormality like high testosterone which altered the friend's hormones in utero. The influence of her mother might have pulled the hormonal trigger she inherited.

 Originally Posted By: ceruleansteel
With all that in mind, I suggest that factors influencing small children while they are going through that stage of emulating/admiring their parents in alternate turns are what determines a child's sexuality.

Having many older brothers increases each subsequent male child's likelihood of being homosexual, and one theory posits that this is because the mother builds up an immunity to certain factors that impact fetal brain development in males. This could explain why the brains of gay men resemble those of straight women more than those of straight men.

Older brothers could be either an influence (nature), a factor impacting the mother's hormones while pregnant (nurture), or both. I'd be interested to see a study in which males with many older biological brothers were raised in an environment where they were the only or oldest male child, to see if they show the same tendency. Either way, this may serve population control, or just be a biological accident.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#73255 - 11/27/12 11:19 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: XiaoGui17]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 901
Loc: Nashville
Nature or nurture? Hmm…not sure. I’ve always said that although I could choose to have sex with a man, I could not choose to be sexually attracted to a man. But could something in my past have conditioned me to be straight? My knee-jerk reaction is no, but who knows? I’m not exactly in a good position to understand my five-year-old brain.

I will say that every so often when I’m whacking off to porn, I’ll check out “shemale” pics. They can’t look like dudes with tits, though. They have to look like chicks with a little something extra. Asian ladyboys are nice as long as they’re not completely flat-chested. Wait a minute…whoa, that’s pretty fuckin’ gay.

Top
#73256 - 11/28/12 01:19 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: William Wright]
OrgasmicKarmatic Offline
member


Registered: 08/01/10
Posts: 256
Loc: Michigan, USA
 Quote:
Read what you wrote "bipolar is genetic, but it skips generations and is influenced by environment"....it's psychobabble bullshit for "we don't know the answer but we know it's not easily categorized". And studies in different cultures and different countries (and levels of industrialization) will all have different answers to any question like that.


I don't know about all that. My grandfather "had" everything that I have been "diagnosed" with. We grew up in different places and in different ways. My grandfather was an abusive little shit that liked playing with little girls for amusement and I am an angry little shit but I would NEVER lay a hand on a child. The genetic make up of a mental illness doesn't change with cultural difference but manifests physically in a separate way.

Although, I guess that statement is at a major disadvantage considering I have only lived in the United States and my first hand experience with mental illness cannot create bridges to other countries.

 Quote:
I think it's entirely possible that the root cause of homosexuality has to do with some fuck up during the development of the child.


I am sure that there are those out there that have had some kind of trauma that turned something on. As XG says, like a trigger. Bringing it back to a more understood subject to myself.. they claim that anything I may have been "diagnosed" with may have been turned on at the age that it started manifesting itself. (Around 11-12) Although, it is noted that things such as bipolar, if indeed genetic, has a typical showing at the beginning of puberty.

My call to disagreement with the whole trauma thing is that I personally do not think I went through any trauma that would cause the on/off method that everyone wants to hold onto so closely. Also, those of my friends that are homosexual/transsexual, would agree nothing in their childhood "prompted" their feelings, it just was what it was. I had a rough growing up period but I wouldn't attribute it as a cause anything that I may or may not have.

 Quote:
And again, this seems to affect men more than women. (hey, what a coincidence: that's what they say about homosexuality in your last link..that there are more gay men than women!)


Actually, they say that it seems to affect more men than women but it is a toss up because women tend to show favorable reactions to ANYTHING that has to do with any kind of sex. Pin pointing that women tend to be sexually attracted to anything and not necessarily anything in specific. (When I discussed this with Wicked last night he had a laugh and said,"And this is why when women get drunk they make out with each other.." just a random joke.)

While I agree this section of the X chromosome would be considered an anomaly or perhaps a malfunction in the genetic make up, I have an issue with ignoring it on a whole and reverting back to the "it's simply a choice that is made". Along with I think that it'd be a disservice to anyone that IS homosexual to "choose" to be with someone of the opposite sex because "that is how they were raised".

 Quote:
But could something in my past have conditioned me to be straight?


I have a hard time believing that EVERY person in the world that is homosexual or otherwise was "trained" to be homosexual or otherwise. I am not going to go survey the world and ask everyone about the little traumas in their lives but I still wonder, if it is a choice, why would someone want to purposely put themselves out there in this state of the world to be ridiculed? No one is a stranger to the possibilities of what happens to people that are openly gay or transsexual. It's not a comfortable stance to hold and there are many places where it's not even safe to be as such.

If it's a choice, why place yourself into a situation where you risk your reputation and, at some times, life?


Edited by OrgasmicKarmatic (11/28/12 01:22 PM)
Edit Reason: misspelling
_________________________
I am a ghost.x
http://othermindx.blogspot.com

Top
#73257 - 11/28/12 02:15 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: OrgasmicKarmatic]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2711
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
These days [at least in San Francisco], anyone can pretty much dress and behave however they wish, as long as only other consenting adults are involved and you don't scare the cats. If you're in the Castro, it's not uncommon to see people walking around outside in the buff. My only objection is that some of these look pretty scraggly. Perhaps we should pass a city ordinance that if you cast aside the veils of illusion in public, you have to spend a certain amount of time at the gym.

Anyway, pulling this funny thread into some Satanic historical context, I would like to point out that one of the original & significant things about the Church of Satan was twofold: (1) Do anything you want to, but (2) take personal responsibility for your decision and its consequences. The first part of this was the Church's famous "Indulgence Instead of Abstinence" slogan. The second part reflected Anton's contempt for hypocrisy, in this sense people who indulged in something but were only comfortable if they could blame it on something else than their own desires: "I was born this way", "Society made me do this", "It's my parents' fault" ... all variations on the classic "the Devil made me do it".

So if you liked painting your ears purple, the Church didn't mind as long as you didn't try to "excuse" it. And if it resulted in consequences, whether fair or not, that was just something you stood on your own feet and accepted when you made your original decision.

This applies to homosexuality of course, but to everything in general. For instance I was a professional Army 2nd Lieutenant when I decided to join the Church. The Army is a very conservative institution with strongly-established J/C bias (Corps of Chaplains, post chapels, etc.). I knew I was certainly giving up my chance for a star, and would have various uphill fights even below that, but I decided that the philosophical, moral, and metaphysical significance was worth it; and I am not one to vampirize something from the periphery.

Interestingly it was the homosexuals who had the most trouble with this Church policy, because along with the homosexual lifestyle in the 60s was a guilt trip and a projection of the responsibility for that guilt trip. They were happy to let go of the former, but absolutely not the latter. Which meant that privately they weren't really letting go of the former.

Food for thought for any of you contemplating painting your ears purple.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#73258 - 11/28/12 03:48 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
These days [at least in San Francisco], anyone can pretty much dress and behave however they wish, as long as only other consenting adults are involved and you don't scare the cats. If you're in the Castro, it's not uncommon to see people walking around outside in the buff. My only objection is that some of these look pretty scraggly. Perhaps we should pass a city ordinance that if you cast aside the veils of illusion in public, you have to spend a certain amount of time at the gym.


Uncanny timing. Unfortunately, the law tends to be a blunt instrument. I wish there had been some compromise on this issue. The new city ordinance was actually introduced by the Supervisor representing The Castro. Residents were the impetus. They simply tired of it.

SF Bans Most Public Nudity

Note the exceptions: Fairs and parades. Also, the actual penalties are fairly "modest"



 Quote:
Anyway, pulling this funny thread into some Satanic historical context, I would like to point out that one of the original & significant things about the Church of Satan was twofold: (1) Do anything you want to, but (2) take personal responsibility for your decision and its consequences. The first part of this was the Church's famous "Indulgence Instead of Abstinence" slogan. The second part reflected Anton's contempt for hypocrisy, in this sense people who indulged in something but were only comfortable if they could blame it on something else than their own desires: "I was born this way", "Society made me do this", "It's my parents' fault" ... all variations on the classic "the Devil made me do it".


I would mostly agree with LaVey on these points. It does strike a reasonable balance. We do have to consider changes in society (and even law) when examining this particular phenomena. SF remains unique just in the sense the above ordinance would even be relevant. It is difficult for me to weigh in heavily on causation. Grew up in NorCal a generation after you guys. As you note, it became very political. I saw a lot of good and bad emanating within subcultures. To this day, many gay folks decry "assimilation". Conversely, you may wake up next week to a bombshell regarding The Proposition 8 Case.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#73277 - 11/29/12 04:21 AM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Wait a minute; why didn't I see any naked people when I was there? I feel like I have been deprived. Are there any good looking chicks that like to walk around without any clothes on there?

On other matter, I would like to propose a new definition of hell, one not based on hell as a place, but rather as a state of affairs or something of that sort.

Hell is when that beautiful and funny girl from a middle eastern background tells you casually that she is a Jehovahs Witness and then mentions that she is involved in regular bible studies and seems to himting that you should join in the bible studies as well. Unfortunately I can't fake it.

This is hell.

Top
#73639 - 12/11/12 05:22 AM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
JWG Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 68
Mr. Aquino,

Being someone who has no problem indulging in the male physique myself, I love your points made here. To me, I could care less the justification for my attraction, I choose to indulge in it. The topic of 'nature or nurture' or any subsequent reasoning I had to give anyone seemed pointless to me. Mind your business!

On the same token, if I go around publicly with signs, whistles, rainbows, and swinging dildos; I cannot blame anyone but myself for people who have indiscretions with gay people to look down upon me or react. :P

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
These days [at least in San Francisco], anyone can pretty much dress and behave however they wish, as long as only other consenting adults are involved and you don't scare the cats. If you're in the Castro, it's not uncommon to see people walking around outside in the buff. My only objection is that some of these look pretty scraggly. Perhaps we should pass a city ordinance that if you cast aside the veils of illusion in public, you have to spend a certain amount of time at the gym.

Anyway, pulling this funny thread into some Satanic historical context, I would like to point out that one of the original & significant things about the Church of Satan was twofold: (1) Do anything you want to, but (2) take personal responsibility for your decision and its consequences. The first part of this was the Church's famous "Indulgence Instead of Abstinence" slogan. The second part reflected Anton's contempt for hypocrisy, in this sense people who indulged in something but were only comfortable if they could blame it on something else than their own desires: "I was born this way", "Society made me do this", "It's my parents' fault" ... all variations on the classic "the Devil made me do it".

So if you liked painting your ears purple, the Church didn't mind as long as you didn't try to "excuse" it. And if it resulted in consequences, whether fair or not, that was just something you stood on your own feet and accepted when you made your original decision.

This applies to homosexuality of course, but to everything in general. For instance I was a professional Army 2nd Lieutenant when I decided to join the Church. The Army is a very conservative institution with strongly-established J/C bias (Corps of Chaplains, post chapels, etc.). I knew I was certainly giving up my chance for a star, and would have various uphill fights even below that, but I decided that the philosophical, moral, and metaphysical significance was worth it; and I am not one to vampirize something from the periphery.

Interestingly it was the homosexuals who had the most trouble with this Church policy, because along with the homosexual lifestyle in the 60s was a guilt trip and a projection of the responsibility for that guilt trip. They were happy to let go of the former, but absolutely not the latter. Which meant that privately they weren't really letting go of the former.

Food for thought for any of you contemplating painting your ears purple.
_________________________
In every real man a child is hidden that wants to play.
-Friedrich Nietzsche


Top
#76479 - 05/19/13 09:23 PM Re: LGBT and Population Control? Steered off porn [Re: ceruleansteel]
prodigalsun Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 78
Loc: CA, USA
Back to question one, ARE GAYS BENEFICIAL TO SOCIETY?

Returning to this issue in 2013 with President Barack Obama reelected to office (a turbulent tenure with Obamagate and complex charges to his administration), the LGBT must be beneficial in some media and political context.

Same sex marriage keeps being legislated in more U.S. states, even after a spring sesssion at the Supreme Court to debate the constitutionality of DOMA and Prop 8. The rulings will come out for summer 2013 if they will stand or fall. About 12 states now have same sex marriage as law. More people coming in contact or dealing with LGBT people daily and topics on the internet or in social networking sites.

Top
#76522 - 05/21/13 01:53 AM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: Jason King]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7187
Loc: Virginia
 Originally Posted By: Jason King
 Originally Posted By: prodigalsun
My Channel to GODDESS LILITH With Hardcore Women, Lesbians, Trannies. The female persuasian few limits.


You're a dude, right? WTF's up with the trannies?

Me personally (and I really only speak for myself), I find it impossible to dignify a surgically altered dude a Goddess by any stretch. Osiris might have had a John Bobbitt moment at the hands of Set, but the last thing he did was transform into a woman. He became what is politely called a Capon.

Anatomy is destiny - Sigmund Freud

JK


Moved from Porn Site thread... please continue


I'll bite, (I don't expect a reply from JK who seems to be banned)

Interesting topic.

I suppose its a matter of personal preference. As a bi-sexual woman, a Chick with a dick just makes for an interesting 'best of both worlds' scenario. *snark*

The LGBT sub-culture oddity isn't really my thing but I'll go to events with friends for the shiggles. Post-op male-to-female usually get mad play from the men. And many of them have great bodies, so I can see why. They work really hard to look as feminine as possible, you'd really never know it, so for all you know Mr. King, you've worshiped at the altar of that goddess with your eyes (at the very least), heh.

The female-to-male post-op is a bit harder to play off but not impossible with a lot of body work. They usually have the most beautiful women hanging all over them. I can say, that this type has never appealed to me, I don't care how 'attractive' they seem, I know he was born a woman. Instinctively. So, in all fairness I can relate to the type of inner feeling you get when you consider it (knowing) 'she' used to be a 'he'. Although, I don't feel that way with men that turn their outie into an innie. I suppose it's my personal preference for a woman to look and feel like a woman.

I maintain that 'Sexuality' is Social and not to be confused with our innate instincts to procreate. I no more believe that there is a 'Gay Gene' than I do an Alcoholic Gene, or Genes that make me a dare-devil.

Homosexuality has always been beneficial to society, it's always existed and well... So does society. So the idea that it would cause some kind of decline if it wasn't morally policed is absurd. People often forget that it was widely a norm in specific eras and cultures in history and look, there's still humans around and the population is still ebbing/flowing with mortality rates. As any society progresses with invention and innovation, life is just extended which accounts for population growth. Plus, the Proletariat breed like rabbits.

In the 80's at the peak of AIDS hysteria, that sure didn't exterminate homosexuality and I doubt any future disease will either.

I wonder, if it was declared that homosexuality was 100% acceptable in American society, do people really think millions of people are going to wake up Gay?
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#76946 - 06/07/13 01:04 PM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: Jason King]
American Diavolo Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/04/13
Posts: 44
Loc: New Jersey, U.S.A.
The question is a bit contrived. Are they beneficial? I would say no more or less than how much harm they do. They are a minority, and where they can care for unwanted children, they wish not to procreate. Gay at birth, outspoken by choice. Point is that the question has no answer other than opinion.
Top
#76972 - 06/08/13 01:53 PM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: American Diavolo]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3300
[Quick reply]
I haven't really responded to this topic by reason the answer is just too obvious to have it mentioned. Are they beneficial? On the very same account M.A.A. already mentioned:

 Originally Posted By: M.A.A.
the first part of this was the Church's famous "Indulgence Instead of Abstinence" slogan. The second part reflected Anton's contempt for hypocrisy, in this sense people who indulged in something but were only comfortable if they could blame it on something else than their own desires: "I was born this way", "Society made me do this", "It's my parents' fault" ... all variations on the classic "the Devil made me do it".

So if you liked painting your ears purple, the Church didn't mind as long as you didn't try to "excuse" it. And if it resulted in consequences, whether fair or not, that was just something you stood on your own feet and accepted when you made your original decision.


Within that context, being gay is just as being heterosexual, it doesn't matter. Apologetics based on the notion of sexual preference, in one way or another, is something I despise.

The current crux of raising kids by a LGBT-couple is a slightly more complicated one by reason I haven't seen fully grown adolescents who were raised in such a household. I agree with CS when it concerns children figuring out gender roles and the emulation of the parents behavior. I'm of the idea, or better yet, convinced, the most healthy situation is still mixed companionship...

Or in other terms: "someone ought to be the bitch".
Quite frankly, all gay couples I know has either one of the two living up to being "the bitch".
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#77006 - 06/09/13 07:48 AM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: Dimitri]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7187
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
Quite frankly, all gay couples I know has either one of the two living up to being "the bitch".


That's been my personal observation as well. Have you read Marlebranche's book Androphile? There was a chapter in which he describes his own follies being 'Gay', to include all the stereotypical faire of acting and dressing like the Fairy Bitch. He later adopts a more masculine persona but I have yet to see a couple that doesn't include the roles. I suppose that's what the point of his manifesto was, a disdain for the absence of an Androphilic presence. He does include his own thoughts about pursuing family, and his lack of interest in raising children.

There seems to be a strange gender-role recipe as if two men can't be nurturing to a child without a Bitch-type in the household.

I observe how men treat their children and grandchildren. I see men just as nurturing as women can be, some men seem to be more over zealous about it than women can be. The dynamic of how they treat their male children vs. female children is interesting too.

Recently, I've observed a single father with his young daughter. He was a bit over bearing and protective. I can't help but wonder if it has something to do with seeking the approval of his ex-wife or other women, or if he's really that way all the time with his child. To be a fly on the wall...
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#112324 - 04/13/17 11:31 AM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: Jason King]
Dibloc Offline
lurker


Registered: 05/26/12
Posts: 1
Loc: Gloucestershire, UK
In my view, homosexuals are the elite of human beings. Throughout history they have at times been treated as such yet at other times they have been condemned and ostracised. In my time homosexual acts were illegal so, although I craved for lust with other men, I took the cowards way out and followed the heterosexual lifestyle. Now through the work of many wonderful people it is no longer illegal here even if there is still much condemnation.
It is only that I have always been focused on the Satanic ethos that I have survived. The gay Satanic lifestyle is the focus of my existence even though I am not "out".
Answering the question I give it a resounding "YES".

Top
#112325 - 04/13/17 12:31 PM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: Dibloc]
Megatron Offline
active member


Registered: 08/22/14
Posts: 859
Loc: fuckit, some kid cracked my co...
 Originally Posted By: Dibloc
In my view, homosexuals are the elite of human beings.


OK, that's your position.

Now you might want to start arguing to it. Because, at least from what I've seen, you haven't bothered.

The only argument I've ever seen in defense of your thesis has to do with natural population control, which, if you ask me, isn't very flattering.

JK
_________________________
You can't beat me, I'm a fucking Transformer (TM), dude.

Oh, and I spell everything right.

Top
#112335 - 04/14/17 04:06 PM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: Dibloc]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7187
Loc: Virginia
 Originally Posted By: Dibloc
The gay Satanic lifestyle is the focus of my existence even though I am not "out".


I'm guessing because you feel as though it's not beneficial to that lifestyle that you remain closeted. If that be the case, how is that Elitism?

Isn't that the same thing as pretending to be straight, something you described as cowardliness?

For myself, They and Them have never been a consideration. Why should they be? I make willful choices and if they throw rocks because of them; they find themselves stratified.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#112344 - 04/14/17 07:14 PM Re: Are Gays Beneficial to Society? [Re: Dibloc]
Ubermensch23 Offline
member


Registered: 03/11/14
Posts: 142
Loc: Pretoria, South Africa
 Originally Posted By: Dibloc
In my view, homosexuals are the elite of human beings. Throughout history they have at times been treated as such yet at other times they have been condemned and ostracised. In my time homosexual acts were illegal so, although I craved for lust with other men, I took the cowards way out and followed the heterosexual lifestyle. Now through the work of many wonderful people it is no longer illegal here even if there is still much condemnation.
It is only that I have always been focused on the Satanic ethos that I have survived. The gay Satanic lifestyle is the focus of my existence even though I am not "out".
Answering the question I give it a resounding "YES".


The only thing you're elite in is in regards to pedophilia. You're so elite right? Name me great homosexual pioneers of science? Name me great homosexual conquerors? And don't be disingenuous by implying Alexander was homosexual, he was bisexual because he enjoyed fucking ladyboys.

If homosexuality is a benefit to your society, why does social justice, which includes rights for homosexuals, coincide with the erosion and deterioration of your society? I mean, America used to have pioneers in every area, now all your pioneers are foreigners. So what this seems to indicate is that social justice has led to regression in regards to intelligence, innovation, and creativity in the western world.

I might be a European pagan, however it would be a lie to suggest that predominantly Christian societies did not become impressive. I always argue that if Rome was never Christianized, that we would be 500 years more advanced than we are today, however, they did learn to discard Christian values. Specifically many pagan values were obviously stolen by Christians, as were holidays and so on, which counteracted the regression that permeated throughout the Christian world. There was also the injection of science and pagan culture with the influx of refugees fleeing Constantinople.

My point is that the Christians at least realized that their doctrine can't encompass every aspect of life, otherwise they would be sure to perish, so they adapted by allowing science and pagan morality to inject itself into their societies to some extent. The stance against homosexuality is not an originally Christian stance either. Germanic and Celtic pagans were notably against homosexuals, as were most, and even though Romans allowed it, it was still very much frowned upon.

I can live in a predominantly Christian society, because Christians unknowingly possess many pagan morals which they had adopted in the past. Hell, I can even pretend to be Christian in public if it comes to that, and if I need to do that in order to survive. But I can't even consider being a cowardly little social justice pansy. You guys are part of the least interesting era in human history. The Christians at least have Lucifer, which is an inspiration and a philosophical icon, much like Prometheus. I hate you people more than I do Christians.
_________________________
"0" is the past, "1" is the future. "Now" is nowhere.

Top
Page all of 3 123>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.064 seconds of which 0.008 seconds were spent on 44 queries. Zlib compression disabled.