• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey pro

Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

The sexual revolution was fought years ago and sex won. We are just seeing the last desperate gasps of the old sex fearing culture. Sex won because contraceptives and condoms for disease protection made new ethics viable.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

The sexual revolution was fought years ago and sex won. We are just seeing the last desperate gasps of the old sex fearing culture. Sex won because contraceptives and condoms for disease protection made new ethics viable.

More like the last gasps of sanity, as the lunatics who've presently overrun the asylum gleefully douse everything in sight with gasoline and rumage for matches. :roll:
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification su...

We have a steady march to chemical dependency, suicide, and an ever increasing number of special category gender confused individuals. No...I dont think there is anything that could demonstrate and convince you what reality has failed to achieve.

But again...carry on.

Why are you connecting drugs and suicide with the sexual revolution referred to in the OP? Altho it is true that social intolerance and judgement has driven some people trying to feel comfortable with their own sexuality to suicide, that is true.

Do you think that that intolerance and judgement is justified?
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

As you people are so fond of pointing out, behavior, and orientation, are not the same thing. If bisexuality is increasingly being pushed as being "trendy" or otherwise socially desirable, it's not at all out of the question to suggest that its prevalence might sky-rocket regardless of the general population's actual sexual leanings.

what evidence do you have of this? Blue eyes can be trendy yet the rate of blue eyes never change. No one is going to start sucking dick on a long-term basis unless they actually enjoy it, which is not something they have any control over.


The idea of a "sexual spectrum" is frankly a lot of largely irrelevant pap anyway for that exact reason. As I pointed out in another thread, primitive (hunter-gatherer) human societies, with only a small number of isolated, largely ritualized, exceptions limited to a few specific tribes, tend to have basically no homosexuality or bisexuality. It's so rare that most of the people living in them don't even know what Western researchers are talking about when they raise the subject.

i debunked this badly in that thread, i do recall, and you had no response. Not going to dig it up again


By the same token, even if someone is "1%-10% homosexual" in their orientation in today's society, there's really no particularly pressing reason why they should ever indulge it. The odds are that it's so deeply buried that they would have to go deliberately out of their way to even try.

Would you object so loudly if a "1-10% heterosexual" indulged in the opposite sex? No, then i have no reason to tolerate your objections to the other scenario. Because god knows there's been immense pressure on homosexuals to go to great lengths to hide and deny their urges, but to you the real tragedy would be if a small % of "mostly heterosexual" teenagers experimented once or twice with the same sex

i just can't bring myself to care


Somehow, the human race managed to make it work for the centuries and millennia proceeding the 20th Century. Through the stability and productive center it provided, we built the modern world. If that's "unnatural," by all means, sign me up for more of it.

Monogamy is, simply speaking, a sign of civilization triumphing over barbarism. It should be embraced as such.

Which is kind of exactly why this modern trend towards unfettered nihilistic libertinism is, and always has been, doomed from the very start.

Human beings are freaking morons. :lol:

They're cavemen, still working off of caveman instincts. Those instincts are largely obsolete, if not outright counterproductive, in the modern world. As such, telling that caveman to basically "go wild" tends to result in absolutely nothing productive.

Certain "shackles" exist for very good reason, I'm afraid.

All of this is debatable going forward, even if i were so preoccupied over "the good of the species." What exactly do you think will happen if the aging process is reversed, people continue breeding at levels that quickly become catastrophic?

Do you really think relationships would form to begin with if not for sex? So it should be no surprise that if sex is possible without relationships, and without having kids, people will prefer that
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

The sexual revolution was fought years ago and sex won. We are just seeing the last desperate gasps of the old sex fearing culture. Sex won because contraceptives and condoms for disease protection made new ethics viable.

Yeah. It 'won'.
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1443922225.646165.jpgImageUploadedByTapatalk1443922243.898231.jpgImageUploadedByTapatalk1443922260.082282.jpg
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

what evidence do you have of this? Blue eyes can be trendy yet the rate of blue eyes never change. No one is going to start sucking dick on a long-term basis unless they actually enjoy it, which is not something they have any control over.

Have homosexuals wishing to avoid detection by mainstream society not been doing the same for centuries?

We already know the impact "lipstick lesbian" bisexual pressure imposed by heterosexual males (largely influenced by pornography, themselves) has had on the latest generation of young women. That's really not even debatable at this point.

i debunked this badly in that thread, i do recall, and you had no response. Not going to dig it up again

You actually did nothing of the kind. I can understand your confusion, however.

All of this is debatable going forward, even if i were so preoccupied over "the good of the species." What exactly do you think will happen if the aging process is reversed, people continue breeding at levels that quickly become catastrophic?

Do you really think relationships would form to begin with if not for sex? So it should be no surprise that if sex is possible without relationships, and without having kids, people will prefer that

The aging process is no where remotely near being "reversed," so I'm not sure why we're even talking about such a thing. Hell! Under our current model, the elderly are more of a drain on society than a benefit anyway.

In any eventuality, the simple fact of the matter is that without children, there can be no human race. The entire "anti" line of reasoning on this particular issue is, and always has been, a dead end as such. At best, it is inherently self-defeating, as those who fail to do as nature beckons will inevitably see their genetic lines and cultural influence go extinct, while the descendants of those more sensible inherit the Earth in their place. At worst, it is flagrantly misanthropic and anti-humanist, expressing nothing less than self-destructive and self-loathing nihilistic malice towards the very idea of a human race, or its continued existence, in its entirety.

The fact that we presently live in a society where such blatantly unproductive thinking is not only commonly accepted, but is, in many regards, the norm, simply goes to show how sick, twisted, and even outright evil our culture has become.

Put simply, what our monkey brains might happen to "prefer" is largely irrelevant, as those impulses are overwhelmingly destructive. Moral, civil, and social codes have traditionally sought to keep such impulses in check for that exact reason. It is only really modern Western culture - which happens to have its head so far up its own ass with often contradictory and self-defeating notions of "individualism," "freedom," and "relativism" uber alles that it doesn't seem to know whether its even coming or going anymore - that has tried to buck this trend. Unfortunately, what we're finding out the hard way is that this "laissez-faire" approach is effectively apathetic poison, both for the individual, and to the greater society which they belong.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

Have homosexuals wishing to avoid detection by mainstream society not been doing the same for centuries?

i see what you're getting at, but i highly doubt that level of pressure - fear of loss of job, total ostracism, and worse - will ever be present for heterosexuals to the extent it drives them to exclusively same sex relationships, for one thing because they are *vast majority*

a bisexual can have satisfying relationships with both sexes, whatever pressure exists, that's what you're ignoring


We already know the impact "lipstick lesbian" bisexual pressure imposed by heterosexual males (largely influenced by pornography, themselves) has had on the latest generation of young women. That's really not even debatable at this point.

actually i have no idea, it doesn't interest me in the slightest


You actually did nothing of the kind. I can understand your confusion, however.

it wasn't just me who did so but i can copy paste my response there if you insist


The aging process is no where remotely near being "reversed," so I'm not sure why we're even talking about such a thing. Hell! Under our current model, the elderly are more of a drain on society than a benefit anyway.

In any eventuality, the simple fact of the matter is that without children, there can be no human race. The entire "anti" line of reasoning on this particular issue is, and always has been, a dead end as such. At best, it is inherently self-defeating, as those who fail to do as nature beckons will inevitably see their genetic lines and cultural influence go extinct, while the descendants of those more sensible inherit the Earth in their place. At worst, it is flagrantly misanthropic and anti-humanist, expressing nothing less than self-destructive and self-loathing nihilistic malice towards the very idea of a human race, or its continued existence, in its entirety.

it's not anti humanist to acknowledge the inevitable. All species go extinct and ours and our "culture" - i.e. the white culture you desperately want to preserve - does not hang in the balance because of single parents or fewer marriages or contraception. If it *declines in numbers slightly* it's because people make *choices* with the *options* they have, and those options change, including the possibility to reproduce without sex at all!

This isn't the middle ages where you need to squirt out 4 kids each just to maintain population level, because half of them die before adulthood. There's 7 billion people, we are not so desperate and it's perfectly natural to not raise kids simply out of concern of population levels 5 generations from now - by which time, age reversal and super computers may very well be reality.

The fact that we presently live in a society where such blatantly unproductive thinking is not only commonly accepted, but is, in many regards, the norm, simply goes to show how sick, twisted, and even outright evil our culture has become.

you're really going off the deep end now. Not having kids has nothing to do with "evil" and i don't think you have kids either? Let me ask, if you have only 5 kids are you more evil than the duggars? What is the acceptable contribution in your view?
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey


:lamo :lamo :lamo :lamo

Sexual revolution ? ?!

Red state USA is still stuck in the sexual stone age, and the so-called "progressives" are still stuck in binary orientation mode, where someone's sexuality is classified as either "gay" or "straight" (or possibly "bi").

At this rate, there won't be a sex revolution for another 800 years.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

I'm pretty much bored with everybody's sexuality. So long as whatever goes on is between consenting adults and doesn't "frighten the horses," I wish everybody would just go to work and mow their lawns and keep their private lives private and mind their own business.




That would work for me.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

Oh no, odd people! Quick, let's get rid of our hard won freedom so we don't have to look at them!
Look at them. But look quick. So many of them have been ****ed up by your version of winning that they will end up killing themselves in celebration of how 'normal' they are.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

Look at them. But look quick. So many of them have been ****ed up by your version of winning that they will end up killing themselves in celebration of how 'normal' they are.

Isn't that what you want, for deviants to feel ashamed of themselves for being different?
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

Isn't that what you want, for deviants to feel ashamed of themselves for being different?
No. I want people to act like grownups and stop teaching children they can be penguins if its what they truly truly believe they are. I want people like you to stop convincing people that it is somehow right and normal to have a doctor cut away body parts and THEN...THEN you will feel normal.

But thats just what I personally want. You may feel free to join society in your celebratory touchdown spike of 'winning'. The fact that your version of winning has people more ****ed up than ever before...well...you shouldnt let that slow your roll any.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

i see what you're getting at, but i highly doubt that level of pressure - fear of loss of job, total ostracism, and worse - will ever be present for heterosexuals to the extent it drives them to exclusively same sex relationships, for one thing because they are *vast majority*

a bisexual can have satisfying relationships with both sexes, whatever pressure exists, that's what you're ignoring

Have you not noticed how "trendy" it has become for modern television to sneak in bisexual characters, and bisexual love affairs? Hell! Sometimes the orientation isn't even explicitly stated or discussed, and what we'll see is effectively a homosexual, bisexual, or pansexual character "seducing" a heterosexual character for no other reason than that they can.

Why do you think that is, exactly? Why is it necessary? Do you really think that writers are without an agenda of their own when they seek to normalize such behavior in front of their audiences?

How do you think this affects young and impressionable viewers?

Make no mistake. What you're seeing here is a certain person's - or, more accurately, group of persons' - vision of how they think human sexuality and society should be. They are attempting to persuade everyone else to see things the same way by indoctrinating them with their ideas through mass media. If a military or other government organization was involved, people would describe it as being nothing less than "psychological operations," or blatant propaganda.

In any eventuality, the end result is ultimately the same - "Monkey see, monkey do."

Women are already displaying an affinity for bisexual behaviour which would have been unthinkable a few decades ago due to the effects of things like "Girls Gone Wild," and readily available lesbian pornography catered towards heterosexual men. Now certain interests are attempting to do the same with men.

it's not anti humanist to acknowledge the inevitable. All species go extinct and ours and our "culture"

Holding that the human race neither needs to exist, nor, in some cases, even should exist, is the very definition of "anti-humanism." It is, quite literally, an "anti-human" way of thinking. If, as a human being, you cannot see why that is inherently problematic, I don't know what to tell you.

In any sane world, it should really be self-evident.

If it *declines in numbers slightly* it's because people make *choices* with the *options* they have, and those options change, including the possibility to reproduce without sex at all!

"Declines in numbers slightly?"

We are literally "dying out" right now. Ethnic Western deaths significantly outnumber births to almost as severe a degree as is presently being seen in Japan. If that trend continues, a century from now, there will only be roughly half as many of us around as there are today.

It's really tantamount to nothing less than ethnic and cultural suicide, when viewed on a grander scale. Again, if you can't see why that's a problem, I don't really know what to tell you.

An individual who was so preoccupied with pleasure seeking, the accumulation of wealth, or some other form of superficial frivolity that they destroyed their own health in the pursuit of it would rightly be classified as being mentally ill. The only difference here is that it is our society as a whole which is ill, due to the effects of aggregate counterproductive behaviour inspired by an insipid and counterproductive culture

- by which time, age reversal and super computers may very well be reality.

This seems like an awfully fanciful and uncertain thing to pin one's hopes upon. There is simply no guarantee that it will ever happen.

Personally, I kind of hope that NASA manages to work out this whole "warp drive" problem they're presently pondering, so people like me can follow our ancestors' example, leave all of this mess behind, and start over somewhere new. I wouldn't exactly "bank" upon it, however.

you're really going off the deep end now. Not having kids has nothing to do with "evil" and i don't think you have kids either? Let me ask, if you have only 5 kids are you more evil than the duggars? What is the acceptable contribution in your view?

I'm sorry, but there's really no better way to describe it. Modern culture, at least of the kind the sociocultural Left likes to promote, is largely "evil," if not outright "satanic."

This isn't just about the kids either. It's about the entire worldview.

We're presently giving the old pagan societies of yore a run for their money in terms of bankrupt self-serving amorality. Frankly, in many regards, we're worse than even that! At least they acknowledged some sense of civic and personal duty beyond the individual, in comparison with our own focus on increasingly nihilistic and apathetic hedonistic individualism alone.
 
Last edited:
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

Have you not noticed how "trendy"...

i don't really watch tv. You mean they hit on a hetero character? Well then that's just like females who aren't interested getting hit on, which has happened on tv since forever. How do you that affects young viewers?

Men are horny and aggressive and there's no reason for gay characters to act differently in that regard

Or you mean similar to how filmmakers since forever have shown only heterosexual flings, and that certainly hasn't changed in movies. Again, i've no reason to take this complaint seriously from those who remain silent on the complete lack of gay characters/relationships in other mediums and in the past on tv. Where's you concern that exclusively hetero romance in movies will influence gay people into things they've no inclination towards?

Holding that the human race neither needs to exist, nor, in some cases, even should exist, is the very definition of "anti-humanism."...

i am fond of other creatures too, and i notice they go extinct directly as a result of human expansion. I see no reason we need to reach 8 billion or we can't survive as 5 billion or whatever. In that sense i too would like to reverse the clock


"Declines in numbers slightly?"

If that trend continues, a century from now, there will only be roughly half as many of us around as there are today.

which is nowhere near dying out. I don't think you realize how close humans have come in the past. During an ice age, it was down to maybe thousands left. It will be again someday, whether we breed like rabbits or not. What can save us? Technology...

We now have artificial insemination and cloning, and scientists have even grown a very small brain. The mass manufacturing of humans will be possible before population levels are ever in jeopardy

look, if i wanted to have a kid it'd be for positive reasons, just different ones from "survival of species." Bisexual experimentation though is not synonymous with indifference to the species' survival. That is the most outrageous link you're drawing, if i'm understanding

An individual who was so preoccupied with pleasure ...would rightly be classified as being mentally ill.

Um, i can be indifferent to population trends without being a hedonistic, greedy piece of **** who contributes nothing of value. What about a neurosurgeon who saves lives but never reproduces himself? Oh! Maybe i can be the doctor in "idiocracy" who helps save the dumb white jocks' reproductive functioning so that he can go on to punch out a dozen more kids

What are you saying anyway, that homosexuals have a duty to reproduce and it's mentally ill not to? I have no idea why else you're lecturing me.

Personally, I kind of hope that NASA manages to work out this whole "warp drive" problem they're presently pondering, so people like me can follow our ancestors' example...

Our ancestors had no upward mobility and died by 40 and so did half their offspring, and women couldn't make a living period, that's why they stayed married and had so many kids. More kids = help on the farm, yeah what inspiring and selfless sacrifice and what pure romance

You can't have it both ways man. This thing we're using now called the internet can't exist without ALSO porn and hookup apps, you can't uninvent the condom, and your time period of choice (likely the 1950s, since they had indoor plumbing and electricity at least) couldn't help but lead to porn and hookup apps and condoms.

Cultural norms like the divorce stigma take time to dissipate, but they are definitely beholden to natural desires, like ****ing as much as possible with as many people as possible. Remove the barriers like unintended pregnancy and having to go on several dates just to get laid, and it all comes crashing down and you know what? If that were possible in the 50s, they would've done all of that too!


Modern culture, at least of the kind the sociocultural Left likes to promote, is largely "evil," if not outright "satanic."

I don't believe in satan or evil either so whatever. This is just blindly throwing out insults


This isn't just about the kids either. It's about the entire worldview.

We're presently giving the old pagan societies of yore a run for their money...

apathetic, finally you found the right word, at least re: slight population variances. And yes, 3.5 billion instead of 7 billion in an age of global travel is still slight. It's still a metric ****ton of people

and yeah, the pagans were so self and collectively destructive that they build a city of marble with a million people that lasted for a thousand years, and ended only as christianity brought them into a dark age
 
Last edited:
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

That would work for me.

You mean so long as lgbt keep their private lives private, or rather lie when their coworkers pry, while heteros get to post pics of their kids graduating and tell us how their son is going into an apprenticeship

Like matt damon's recent facepalming rant on how gay actors should stay in the closet, right after he had gone into detail about his own family life

And "DADT" while the hetero soldiers are bragging about their latest conquest

And michael sam while tom brady is making out with his supermodel girlfriend in front of cameras and aaron rodgers and manti te'o get to remind us repeatedly of their invented love lives

I could go on and on with this double standard
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

You mean so long as lgbt keep their private lives private, or rather lie when their coworkers pry, while heteros get to post pics of their kids graduating and tell us how their son is going into an apprenticeship

Like matt damon's recent facepalming rant on how gay actors should stay in the closet, right after he had gone into detail about his own family life

And "DADT" while the hetero soldiers are bragging about their latest conquest

And michael sam while tom brady is making out with his supermodel girlfriend in front of cameras and aaron rodgers and manti te'o get to remind us repeatedly of their invented love lives

I could go on and on with this double standard




You're mistakenly assuming I approve of things I've not expressed approval for, and that I agree with things I have not expressed agreement with.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

You mean they hit on a hetero character?

I'm taking about crap like in the series PennyDreadful, where about halfway through the first Season, Josh Hartnett's - so far, completely heterosexual - cowboy character gets drunk and has a one night stand with a hedonistic pansexual character "just 'cuz," and then goes right back to lusting after Eva Green's character like nothing ever happened afterwards. I'm seeing this kind of nonsense more and more in mainstream media these days. Again, that's not a coincidence. It's a blatant promotion of a certain lifestyle and way of thinking about sexuality.

Don't get me wrong. In some cases, it's more workable than others. Frank Underwood's bisexual (or possibly just homosexual who occasionally has sex with women) character in House of Cards isn't terrible, because it actually adds a bit of pathos to him. It's just another way in which his real self differs from his public self. While I really can't say the same for the bisexual/pansexual character in Halt and Catch Fire, I can at least understand why adding a homosexual aspect to the role might have appealed to that particular actor, as he happens to be homosexual himself in real life.

What happened in PennyDreadful, on the other hand? I'm sorry, but no. That was only there to be "trendy." It served no purpose to the story whatsoever outside of that. You could almost visualize the writing team sitting back in their little office, jerking themselves off over how "ground breaking" they thought they're being while the scene was on screen.

That really speaks to the cultural paradigm shift we're seeing on this issue in general. The narrative isn't "gay people exist, try to be kind to them" any more. It's "homosexuality is trendy and desirable, you might even be a little gay yourself."

It would appear that the younger generation is responding to that message more and more. That's frankly more than a bit ridiculous, given what a small portion of the overall population legitimate bisexuals and homosexuals actually are.

which is nowhere near dying out

Losing half of one's population in less than a century isn't the kind of thing a society or people simply shrugs off. By any practical measure, it's a catastrophe, and a completely avoidable one at that.

This whole attitude of "who cares, I'm only out for me" is exactly the problem here.

The mass manufacturing of humans will be possible before population levels are ever in jeopardy

i.e. Brave New World, as I said before.

Again, this is also assuming that all of these things you're talking about ever come to be in the first place. That's hardly a given.

That is the most outrageous link you're drawing

You're not understanding my point in its entirety. The push for bisexuality is simply one small piece of a larger overall trend.

That trend is towards Cultural Marxism in all aspects of society. It is proving to be nothing less than blatantly poisonous.

What are you saying anyway

You apparently need to re-read my post. The point was that just as an individual person who neglects their health in favor of superficial trivialities would be considered to be "sick," so too is our present culture and society. It's not only lost sight of what's actually important, but done so to such an excessive degree that it actually jeopardizes its own existence.

You can't have it both ways man

Crappy behaviour is hardly the inevitable consequence of technology. The people of the late 1900s through to the mid 20th Century were actually substantially better behaved, by and large, than people living centuries before them. That was due to both the influence of the prevailing culture of that era keeping many of the worst aspects of human nature in check, and higher standards of living making circumstances less desperate for most of the population.

It's only been fairly recently (within the last fifty or so years) that everyone seems to have simply thrown their hands up in the air and said "screw it, that's no fun." They have done so largely as a result of the same raised standards of living engendering complacency, and a false sense of security, in combination with the dedicated efforts of cultural and political Marxists to destroy the old social order responsible for keeping everyone in line.

Again, it's becoming more and more apparent with time that this change has not been for the better.

christianity brought them into a dark age

No, that was the repeated butt ****ings they received from the Germanic tribes on their borders, and the Islamic Caliphates due to allowing their civilization to basically crumble from the inside out while they squabbled amongst themselves over petty nonsense. There's a lesson to be learned there, methinks.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

I'm taking about crap like in the series PennyDreadful, where about halfway through the first Season, Josh Hartnett's - so far, completely heterosexual - cowboy character gets drunk and has a one night stand with a hedonistic pansexual character "just 'cuz," and then goes right back to lusting after Eva Green's character like nothing ever happened afterwards. I'm seeing this kind of nonsense more and more in mainstream media these days. Again, that's not a coincidence. It's a blatant promotion of a certain lifestyle and way of thinking about sexuality.

Don't get me wrong. In some cases, it's more workable than others. Frank Underwood's bisexual (or possibly just homosexual who occasionally has sex with women) character in House of Cards isn't terrible, because it actually adds a bit of pathos to him. It's just another way in which his real self differs from his public self. While I really can't say the same for the bisexual/pansexual character in Halt and Catch Fire, I can at least understand why adding a homosexual aspect to the role might have appealed to that particular actor, as he happens to be homosexual himself in real life.

What happened in PennyDreadful, on the other hand? I'm sorry, but no. That was only there to be "trendy." It served no purpose to the story whatsoever outside of that. You could almost visualize the writing team sitting back in their little office, jerking themselves off over how "ground breaking" they thought they're being while the scene was on screen.

That really speaks to the cultural paradigm shift we're seeing on this issue in general. The narrative isn't "gay people exist, try to be kind to them" any more. It's "homosexuality is trendy and desirable, you might even be a little gay yourself."

It would appear that the younger generation is responding to that message more and more. That's frankly more than a bit ridiculous, given what a small portion of the overall population legitimate bisexuals and homosexuals actually are.



Losing half of one's population in less than a century isn't the kind of thing a society or people simply shrugs off. By any practical measure, it's a catastrophe, and a completely avoidable one at that.

This whole attitude of "who cares, I'm only out for me" is exactly the problem here.



i.e. Brave New World, as I said before.

Again, this is also assuming that all of these things you're talking about ever come to be in the first place. That's hardly a given.



You're not understanding my point in its entirety. The push for bisexuality is simply one small piece of a larger overall trend.

That trend is towards Cultural Marxism in all aspects of society. It is proving to be nothing less than blatantly poisonous.



You apparently need to re-read my post. The point was that just as an individual person who neglects their health in favor of superficial trivialities would be considered to be "sick," so too is our present culture and society. It's not only lost sight of what's actually important, but done so to such an excessive degree that it actually jeopardizes its own existence.



Crappy behaviour is hardly the inevitable consequence of technology. The people of the late 1900s through to the mid 20th Century were actually substantially better behaved, by and large, than people living centuries before them. That was due to both the influence of the prevailing culture of that era keeping many of the worst aspects of human nature in check, and higher standards of living making circumstances less desperate for most of the population.

It's only been fairly recently (within the last fifty or so years) that everyone seems to have simply thrown their hands up in the air and said "screw it, that's no fun." They have done so largely as a result of the same raised standards of living engendering complacency, and a false sense of security, in combination with the dedicated efforts of cultural and political Marxists to destroy the old social order responsible for keeping everyone in line.

Again, it's becoming more and more apparent with time that this change has not been for the better.



No, that was the repeated butt ****ings they received from the Germanic tribes on their borders, and the Islamic Caliphates due to allowing their civilization to basically crumble from the inside out while they squabbled amongst themselves over petty nonsense. There's a lesson to be learned there, methinks.
Don't watch television if you don't like the content.

I'm not sorry that it's okay now. Nobody should be.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

Don't watch television if you don't like the content.

I'm not sorry that it's okay now. Nobody should be.

The relevant take away here is that mainstream media has gotten to the point where it's not just pushing "tolerance" for homosexuality, but actually promoting the behaviour itself as being desirable for its own sake. It is increasingly doing so for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike without regard for "orientation."

Simply put, it's pushing an agenda. That agenda seems to be having an impact on real life behaviour.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

The relevant take away here is that mainstream media has gotten to the point where it's not just pushing "tolerance" for homosexuality, but actually promoting the behaviour itself as being desirable for its own sake. It is increasingly doing so for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike without regard for "orientation."

Simply put, it's pushing an agenda. That agenda seems to be having an impact on real life behaviour.
So what?
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

The relevant take away here is that mainstream media has gotten to the point where it's not just pushing "tolerance" for homosexuality, but actually promoting the behaviour itself as being desirable for its own sake. It is increasingly doing so for heterosexuals and homosexuals alike without regard for "orientation."

Simply put, it's pushing an agenda. That agenda seems to be having an impact on real life behaviour.


Why should you care? If you are not gay, then it has nothing to do with you. Nothing is being pushed on you, no more than heterosexuality pushed on gay people. Live and let live. If two people in love that are the same sex bugs you, than its your problem, not theirs.
 
Re: America is going through a sexual revolution, and this self-identification survey

I'm taking about crap like in the series PennyDreadful, where about halfway through the first Season, Josh Hartnett's - so far, completely heterosexual - cowboy character gets drunk and has a one night stand with a hedonistic pansexual character "just 'cuz," and then goes right back to lusting after Eva Green's character like nothing ever happened afterwards. I'm seeing this kind of nonsense more and more in mainstream media these days. Again, that's not a coincidence. It's a blatant promotion of a certain lifestyle and way of thinking about sexuality.

Don't get me wrong. In some cases, it's more workable than others. Frank Underwood's bisexual (or possibly just homosexual who occasionally has sex with women) character in House of Cards isn't terrible, because it actually adds a bit of pathos to him. It's just another way in which his real self differs from his public self. While I really can't say the same for the bisexual/pansexual character in Halt and Catch Fire, I can at least understand why adding a homosexual aspect to the role might have appealed to that particular actor, as he happens to be homosexual himself in real life.

What happened in PennyDreadful, on the other hand? I'm sorry, but no. That was only there to be "trendy." It served no purpose to the story whatsoever outside of that. You could almost visualize the writing team sitting back in their little office, jerking themselves off over how "ground breaking" they thought they're being while the scene was on screen.

i see, well that is unrealistic then to not have the character at least remark "yeah i hook up with guys too now and then," or like brokeback's "this is a one time deal, i'm not no queer" (which obviously he was). Rather than immediately seeing an ulterior 'social conditioning' motive, though, i'm more inclined to chalk it up to lazy character development, part of the reason i don't watch tv.

Another possibility is that you're right that there is among young viewers a 'gay is trendy' movement, and tv is just responding to that in an unrealistic way. I reject however the idea that "life imitates art" as far as tv, especially when it comes to something like heterosexuals participating in gay sex cause they saw it on "penny dreadful."

It would appear that the younger generation is responding to that message more and more. That's frankly more than a bit ridiculous, given what a small portion of the overall population legitimate bisexuals and homosexuals actually are.

No...the younger generation has homophobic grandparents they ignore and they go and do things like allowing or flat out asking their gay friend give for a blowjob and THEN, maybe a few years later, tv responds to that. I'm sure you won't approve of that either, but I know from experience this is the correct timeline

Losing half of one's population in less than a century isn't the kind of thing a society or people simply shrugs off. By any practical measure, it's a catastrophe, and a completely avoidable one at that.

if those people were killed like in a plague sure, but from not breeding, it's just indifferent and that is why it would be shrugged off. There will be no flagellants going from town to town, no "the jews are the poisoning the wells" persecutions, no parents fleeing their desperately ill children. It will just be "i don't need kids to be happy and i might not be a great parent anyway, and i can't afford them besides, i'll just get a cat instead."
 
Back
Top Bottom