lets talk about it... - Page 5

[hollystyles]

..it shows that you cannot control your mind yourself..!

No you just don't fully understand it yet.

i understood...i was just kidding on that

[hollystyles]

>i understood...i was just kidding on that

Yeah I got that. Maybe I should have put a smiley on my post. :)

i forgot to put smiley because its quick reply

[joshSCH]

one more thing. i had been attracted to another man once. i walked into his store and for a minute i lost complete control over my own thoughts and emotions as i experienced what could only be described as a rush of hormones complete with dizzyness.

what is worse is that i was attracted to him in a way that i know a woman is attracted to a man.

i stood motionless for several seconds while i fought it. after i regained control over myself i looked at him and grinned. i do not know if he realized what had happened. but then i just asked him what i went in there for in the first place(i.e. bycicle inner tubes) and then i left.

to this day i believe that he must have used some sort of feromone but why on earth it worked on me and why exactly in that specific manner i really dont know.

hmm... thats uh, strange.. I don't think I've ever experienced that..

[christina>you]

That is very strange.

[quintoncoert]

@ josch and christina

i am not gay. trust me on that. all i am saying is that i have for a handfull of seconds experienced what it might be like for same sex people.

i mean. it is not as if i actually started some deep soul searching or anything after that. i just fought it on the spot and that was it. i merely recited it because of what hbk said.

considering that seeing two gay men kiss on tv is enough to make want to gag. but watching two women is cool though. but only if they are sexy.

[joshSCH]

but watching two women is cool though. but only if they are sexy.

Hell ya!

[ndeniche]

i know what you mean...

[christina>you]

but watching two women is cool though. but only if they are sexy.

Hell ya!

Seriously now, how is this hot? I've never grasped that concept.

[ndeniche]

that's because you're a chick... look at it this way:

girls dislike:
- watching two guys kissing and touching each other
- watching two girls kissing and touching each other

guys dislike:
- watching two guys kissing and touching each other

guys like:
- watching two chicks going at it...

so that makes the lesser of evils two girls kissing...

[christina>you]

Lol I still don't get how it's "hot."

[hollystyles]

Lol I still don't get how it's "hot."

Thats because dna wants to make more dna and have that dna well looked after.

So girls like a strong healthy man, and to be with other women for nurture support but not kissing (instinctively in general , there being exceptions as always).

Boys like as many girls as possible so they can generate dna at a cracking rate. (instinctively in general , there being exceptions as always) So one girl, two girls dna don't care, the chemicals are released and the buttons are pushed regardless.

God told Abraham he would have as many children as there are stars in the sky... through a monogomous marriage? go Abes!

I hope everyone realises I'm a happy go lucky guy that loves dry humour, and I'm basically having fun with this whole thing. But, I'm not being totally flippant either.

:)

[hollystyles]

Monogomy through marriage has grown as it's no longer a numbers game. Monogomy resists disease and allows better the transfer of the huge knowledge we have ammassed onto our offspring, but the remnants of earlier instinct are still there. :)

[christina>you]

Thats because dna wants to make more dna and have that dna well looked after.

So girls like a strong healthy man, and to be with other women for nurture support but not kissing (instinctively in general , there being exceptions as always).

Boys like as many girls as possible so they can generate dna at a cracking rate. (instinctively in general , there being exceptions as always) So one girl, two girls dna don't care, the chemicals are released and the buttons are pushed regardless.

God told Abraham he would have as many children as there are stars in the sky... through a monogomous marriage? go Abes!

I hope everyone realises I'm a happy go lucky guy that loves dry humour, and I'm basically having fun with this whole thing. But, I'm not being totally flippant either.

:)

Lol.. well that's a good way to put it. I understand now ha.
And you're a guy?

[ndeniche]

And you're a guy?

yeah... i thought you were a girl too... heh

[christina>you]

Yeah... the name threw me off.

[joshSCH]

haha.. same here

[jwenting]

the use of the word "gay" for homosexuals is an abomination. They're no more gay than anyone having a good time...

Anyway, I've little against them in principle.
What I dead set against is their constant demands to be given special privileges over other people.
The worst of those excesses are the so-called "Gay Pride" parades, filled with homosexuals performing lewd acts in public and walking around naked or in their underwear, all in the name of "showing that we're normal well adjusted people".
Hear this, faggots: if anyone BUT homosexuals did anything like that they'd be arrested for indecent exposure and lewd behaviour instantly and probably end up with a hefty fine, maybe jailtime, and almost certainly forced psychiatric treatment.
Your insistence that sex with young boys is perfectly alright as long as it's homosexuals doing it is another farce. You're perverted pedophiles.

Now not all homosexuals think and act like that, but enough do to make the entire group look bad and from their numbers it sure looks to be the majority.

And oh, if you insist you're not homosexual by choice that means it's a mental disorder. That (combined with your tendency towards pedophilia) disqualifies you from ever laying your hands on children, so don't come screaming that the ban on having homosexuals adopt kids is discriminatory.

[christina>you]

Wow.. good post. I didn't even think to mention all those things.

[Ancient Dragon]

yeah... i thought you were a girl too... heh

holystyles avator looks male to me.

[hollystyles]

And you're a guy?

yeah... i thought you were a girl too... heh

You see how easily we get programmed?

It certainly makes chat rooms fun for me! he he.

Living with three women has effected me too, in fact even our dog's a girl!

So I'm a little crazy.

[christina>you]

You see how easily we get programmed?

It certainly makes chat rooms fun for me! he he.

Living with three women has effected me too, in fact even our dog's a girl!

So I'm a little crazy.

Hehe... sounds like my dad.

Jwenting brought up a very valid point about faggots and the close link to pedophiles.

Surely what these people are doing is just plain wrong? If preventing or discouraging gays in society will cut the number of pedophiles surely this can only be a good thing?

[Ancient Dragon]

The worst of those excesses are the so-called "Gay Pride" parades, filled with homosexuals performing lewd acts in public and walking around naked or in their underwear, all in the name of "showing that we're normal well adjusted people".
Hear this, faggots: if anyone BUT homosexuals did anything like that they'd be arrested for indecent exposure and lewd behaviour instantly and probably end up with a hefty fine, maybe jailtime, and almost certainly forced psychiatric treatment.

I certainly agree about the gay parades, but they are not unique here in USA. We also have mardi graw parades where everyone gets plenty drunk, wears awful costumes, and dances in the streets. Then of course is Saint Patrick's Day Parade where grown men dress up as little elves in green costumes.

Your insistence that sex with young boys is perfectly alright as long as it's homosexuals doing it is another farce. You're perverted pedophiles. Now not all homosexuals think and act like that, but enough do to make the entire group look bad and from their numbers it sure looks to be the majority.

All lies. That is a false myth. Research has proven it to be false. You should read a little before spouting off your mouth about something you know nothing about.

And oh, if you insist you're not homosexual by choice that means it's a mental disorder. That (combined with your tendency towards pedophilia) disqualifies you from ever laying your hands on children, so don't come screaming that the ban on having homosexuals adopt kids is discriminatory.

I don't like the idea of gays adopting or even raising children either -- it just seems unatural for a kid to have two mothers or two fathers. But I think recent research has shown that children raised in such families are just as well off as kids raised on single parent or traditional two parent families. Again you are spreading lies

That argument concerns children, and rests on two related contentions: First, unlike heterosexual couples, gay couples generally do not raise children and therefore do not need the benefits of marriage. Second, to the extent that gays do raise children, they do the children harm.

As it happens, the best available evidence shows that both arguments rest on fantasies and false stereotypes.

The proclivity to raise children is neither automatic among mixed-gender couples nor off-limits to same-sex couples. The 2000 U.S. Census showed that in California, half of married couples and one-third of gay couples are raising children. (The latter figure is 28% if limited to one's "own" children — a census term that includes biological, step and adopted children — but climbs to 32% when unrelated children, such as foster kids, are included.) More than 70,000 children in California are being raised by gay couples.

What about the notion that children raised by gay parents suffer as a result? This too turns out to be unsubstantiated.

The American Academy of Pediatrics' Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health issued a report in 2002, the most recent comprehensive review of gay-parenting studies. It found no meaningful differences between children raised by gay parents and those raised by heterosexual parents.

[EnderX]

Who did the research? How can you be certain it isn't biased or contaminated?

[Ancient Dragon]

Who did the research?

follow the links I posted. They are only two of many many recent studies.

How can you be certain it isn't biased or contaminated?

I can't. You'd have to make up your own mind.

[EnderX]

follow the links I posted. They are only two of many many recent studies.

I can't. You'd have to make up your own mind.

"This site features work by Dr. Gregory Herek, an internationally recognized authority on sexual prejudice (also called homophobia), hate crimes, and AIDS stigma. It provides factual information to promote the use of scientific knowledge for education and enlightened public policy related to sexual orientation and HIV/AIDS."

Drawn from what looked to be the 'main site' page for the first link you gave, the one connected to the word 'Research'. Considering the site itself is the 'RAINBOW' directory, and that the description sounds like the traditional 'Pro-Homosexual Activist' (Note: Not necessarily homosexual, merely one of those who supports them), I'm afraid I'd consider the evidence provided therein to be biased.

[christina>you]

Ancient Dragon, I noticed you gave me bad rep for agreeing with jwenting. How is it all lies?? And I've done research myself on this.

[Ancient Dragon]

Ancient Dragon, I noticed you gave me bad rep for agreeing with jwenting. How is it all lies?? And I've done research myself on this.

read what I posted and you will find out. Fortunately bad rep doesn't really mean much here in Geeks Lounge. I would not have done that otherwise.