“LGB drop the T” trending on Twitter
(notthebee.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (73)
sorted by:
The point is that "bisexuality" is not compelled by some sort of genetically determined "irresistible impulse" (Thanx, **Anatomy of a Murder). It is a choice, conscious or not.
And homosexuality isn't "genetic" either, but the result of something going wrong in a child's sexual development.
Homosexuality is not "normal," but it is in the interest of community and social cohesion that their sexual habits be tolerated, as long as these habits don't include pedophilia, just as we don't tolerate hetero pedophilia.
That said, their public exhibitions of "pride" only serve to antagonize those of us willing to leave them alone. They ought to tone it down a bit, to speak with restraint.
This is very important: do your thing in private, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else, but do not taunt us or berate us heteros for having an aversion to homosex. Such public goading and preening only antagonizes people with genuinely malign hatred of homosexuals.
Heteros would do well to resist name-calling and bullying of homos who just want to have a private sex life and limit their public orgies to well-established gay bars and other exclusively homosex public spaces.
Depends what you mean by "real."
I'd put the alphabet salad on a continuum of delusion, with homosexuality being the most deeply conditioned behavior owing to some sort of early trauma during sexual maturation and trans-sexuality being a purely social disease or "choice," many times coerced in vulnerable adolescents by the tranny political lobby and their accomplices in medicine and psychology.
I don't know. I'd say a "bisexual" is a hetero who likes the occasional homo encounter, or a homo who makes an exception once in a while out of politeness or compassion or curiosity.
Which is to say that I think homosexuality is a more deeply held drive than bisexuality,
Overall, what determines one's sexual preference is a mystery to me, but I am obviously not beyond guessing for the sake of argument.
Most credible hypothesis on male homosexuality is that it originates and multiplies through molestation. If true, you can't tolerate homosexual behaviors without the children suffering for it.
What are ya gonna do, put homos in re-conditioning camps? They must be tolerated simply because there's so damn many of them. And if every homosexual is the result of being sexually abused as a child, there must be an awful lot of molestation going on.
I'm skeptical of the hypothesis.
It's fair to be skeptical of the hypothesis, it's just a hypothesis. As for molestation rates, it's bad.
And no, gay camps wouldn't be productive. I meant cultural tolerance.
The best-established correlate of male homosexuality is how many boys occupied your mother's womb before you, whether you were raised together or not.
Which leads to the alternative hypothesis that it is an malign adaptation to insufficient maternal/paternal attention, or trauma as a result of negligence. The quickest way to check the validity of this hypothesis would be to examine children known to come from negligent homes, regardless of sibling count, and compare homosexuality rates with a control population of non-negligent homes.
I've also read something related to motherhood.