• 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!

Bisexual men sue gay group, claim bias

"sexually illiterate " ??? WTF is that ? Now if you are talking about knowledge of all of the various types of sexual orientaions that seem to be evolving I did admitt that the fringe sexual orientations such as transgenderous bipolor flip flopers are groups that I barely heard about until recently just as I did not know that Tea Baggers did all work for Lipton.

No. It means you wouldn't know what sexuality was if it passed you by on one of your beloved F-107s. The fact that you consider bisexuality to be 'fringe' is proof enough. Add to that the fact that you consider to be 'trangenderous bipolor' to be some sort of coherent term for anything and we have ourselves a complete sexual ignoramus.

and what exactly am I guilty of with this statement ? "the fruit of their discrimination.".

Also what is "hamsters driving " who is it that you claim "finds it amusing" ?

I think tha you are a bt cranky this evening !!!!

Learn to spell. Then learn to read. Simple.
 
Last edited:
No. It means you wouldn't know what sexuality was if it passed you by on one of your beloved F-107s. The fact that you consider bisexuality to be 'fringe' is proof enough. Add to that the fact that you consider to be 'trangenderous bipolor' to be some sort of coherent term for anything and we have ourselves a complete sexual ignoramus.



Learn to spell. Then learn to read. Simple.

ha ha I never could get the the spell check button to work here ..

I do not beleive that I was calling bisexuality a fringe but let's be honest it is not one of the most popular sexual orientatiions.

You obviously have not read too many of my posts or you would know by now that I will make up a term if I see fit to either identify it or as an act of derision. It is my nature to also be irreverent and you may have noticed that I anoint political figures with knicknames much to the great dislike by certain mods and their pet posters. Recall Igloo Girl PALIN ?

Yes I know damn well that 'trangenderous bipolo flip floppers" do not exist because after all how could they I invented them a little while ago.

Sometimes we have to not only laugh at ourselves but also some of the categories and types of terms we create for things, social and political groups, and yes sexual orientations.

You know why ? Becasue some of those social, political, and psycho babble is just that, babble and it deserves to be laughed at !!


And by the way don't make fun of us immigrants and ourt spelling because we might get offended !! and maybe I am not an immigrant after all I am a trans-national humanoid who had undergone a citizen identity change without surgery lol:rofl
 
Last edited:
It takes a person who knows literally nothing of sexuality to suggest there is something unnatural with homosexuality. It takes a person who knows nothing of sexuality to claim there is no evidence to suggest that homosexuality is not controlled by the same biological and social factors which dictate heterosexuality. My comment stands and your bull**** detector needs fixing.

illiterate - definition of illiterate by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.



sexually - definition of sexually by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Uh so where have I bashed homosexuality as being unnatural? methinks you protest too much.
 
Don't ask me to explain it, but as a very general rule, gays and in particular lesbians are dog fanatics. Seriously, this softball tournament had people camping there, and every single campsite had at least 2 dogs, all very well trained and behaved.

Best in Show (2000)
 
This is what happens when one group gets to oppress another. When one group gets to dictate what another is and isn't, the oppressed group will then turn on itself. The black community for example tends to look down upon biracial individuals like myself and Obama(it is why some blacks were saying he wasn't 'black' enough). This is due to the fact that whites who owned slaves in this country gave those of biracial lineage slightly better treatment. The best part about it is that the sexually illiterate like texmaster and F107HyperSab do not get to see that cases like this are the fruit of their discrimination. They get to laugh it off. Oh well. I guess somebody who finds hamsters driving amusing would laugh at this.

Lets not bring the hamsters into this. Besides, EVERYONE thinks driving hamsters are amusing!

Nobody likes personal attacks on driving hamsters.

You aren't going back to the tired race comparing to homosexuality again are you? Really?

I know you can't argue the biological argument I've successfully made against your fantasy genetic claims on homosexuality but sexually illiterate?

If you define that by claiming I don't know the intricacies of homosexual sex then consider me guilty as charged!
 
It takes a person who knows literally nothing of sexuality to suggest there is something unnatural with homosexuality. It takes a person who knows nothing of sexuality to claim there is no evidence to suggest that homosexuality is not controlled by the same biological and social factors which dictate heterosexuality. My comment stands and your bull**** detector needs fixing.

Already blown out of the water. But since you are just a glutton for embarrassment, please explain how the biological sexual reaction differs between heterosexuals and homosexuals. Surely homosexual males don't need sperm so that function doesn't exist in them right? How about females? Surely their menstrual cycle stops since their sex would never produce a child right? How about their sexual reaction to sexual stimuli? How does that change between heterosexual women and homosexual women? Can't wait to see how you are going to spin this. :rofl
 
Uh so where have I bashed homosexuality as being unnatural? methinks you protest too much.

He's just in a lather. Trust me, I'm the target. You guys are just the cannon fodder :rofl
 
Don't ask me to explain it, but as a very general rule, gays and in particular lesbians are dog fanatics. Seriously, this softball tournament had people camping there, and every single campsite had at least 2 dogs, all very well trained and behaved.
How do you know that?
 
Already blown out of the water. But since you are just a glutton for embarrassment, please explain how the biological sexual reaction differs between heterosexuals and homosexuals.

I see you capable of using red herrings. But I'll explain to you how debate works. I make a claim :

My claim: Heterosexuality and homosexuality are both guided by the same biological and social factors. The evidence is already there.

I support my claim with evidence:

Twin Studies of Homosexuality

Bailey and Pillard's 1991 study is clearly superior to any of its predecessors in terms of experimental design and analysis of results. Although it, too, has its weak points, it is notable that the estimates of heritability derived from the data were significant under a wide range of assumptions concerning the base rate of homosexuality and the degree of ascertainment bias. In contrast, estimates of the proportion of phenotypic variance explained by shared environmental differences were not significant under the same range of assumptions.

These results give reason to believe that there is some constitutional component to male homosexuality. However, the twin data are consistent not only with a purely genetic explanation, but also with one involving possible differences in the degree of shared prenatal environment between monozygotic and dizygotic twins (as explained earlier, monozygotic twins experience higher similarity in foetal hormone production, both in timing and in amount, than do dizygotic twins). Some recent theories of the genesis of homosexuality, to be mentioned in the next section, place critical importance on hormone levels in the prenatal environment of an individual. If such theories are true, then the difference in concordance rates between monozygotic and dizygotic twins could be explained largely in these terms (see next section). It should be noted that such an explanation still relies on genetically controlled prenatal hormone production to account for observed differences in concordance between monozygotic and dizygotic twins.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/HTML/facts_mental_health.HTML

Other social science researchers also argued against the prevailing negative view of homosexuality. In a review of published scientific studies and archival data, Ford and Beach (1951) found that homosexual behavior was widespread among various nonhuman species and in a large number of human societies. They reported that homosexual behavior of some sort was considered normal and socially acceptable for at least some individuals in 64% of the 76 societies in their sample; in the remaining societies, adult homosexual activity was reported to be totally absent, rare, or carried on only in secrecy.

In a review of published studies comparing homosexual and heterosexual samples on psychological tests, Gonsiorek (1982) found that, although some differences have been observed in test results between homosexuals and heterosexuals, both groups consistently score within the normal range. Gonsiorek concluded that "Homosexuality in and of itself is unrelated to psychological disturbance or maladjustment. Homosexuals as a group are not more psychologically disturbed on account of their homosexuality" (Gonsiorek, 1982, p. 74; see also reviews by Gonsiorek, 1991; Hart, Roback, Tittler, Weitz, Walston & McKee, 1978; Riess, 1980).

Confronted with overwhelming empirical evidence and changing cultural views of homosexuality, psychiatrists and psychologists radically altered their views, beginning in the 1970s.

http://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/97jun/burr2.htm

Psychiatry not only consistently failed to show that homosexuality was a preference, a malleable thing, susceptible to reversal; it also consistently failed to show that homosexuality was a pathology. In 1956, in Chicago, a young psychologist named Evelyn Hooker presented a study to a meeting of the American Psychological Association. Hooker had during her training been routinely instructed in the theory of homosexuality as a pathology. A group of young gay men with whom she had become friendly seemed, however, to be quite healthy and well adjusted. One of them, a former student of hers, sat her down one day and, as she recalls in Changing Our Minds, said, "Now, Evelyn, it is your scientific duty to study men like me." She demurred.

Then I answer your ridiculous red herring questions:

Surely homosexual males don't need sperm so that function doesn't exist in them right? How about females? Surely their menstrual cycle stops since their sex would never produce a child right?

BBC NEWS | Health | How homosexuality is 'inherited'

Andrea Camperio-Ciani and colleagues argue genetic factors favouring homosexual male offspring could make women more fertile.

"Our data resolve this paradox by showing that there might be, hitherto unsuspected, reproductive advantages associated with male homosexuality," they said.

They looked at 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men and their relatives, which included more than 4,600 people overall.

Your ridiculous suggestion that sperm are essential to determining sexuality is proof enough that you have no clue what it is you're talking about. Reproductive capability does not dictate human sexuality anymore than being disabled means you have to be on a wheelchair. As a matter of fact your questions would suggest that if anything there is something clearly biological about homosexuality as it has existed regardless of the society in question.

How about their sexual reaction to sexual stimuli? How does that change between heterosexual women and homosexual women?

Then I ponder just what some of them refer to? What sexual stimuli? Do you know what sexual stimuli are? Here I'll explain, I'm a heterosexual male, my sexual stimuli are the female body parts of a woman. Jallman is a homosexual male. His sexual stimuli are the body parts of his male partner. Your sexual stimuli seem to be hamsters.

And now I wait for you to present evidence to the contrary.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom