What think ya'll of this trend?
A quick glance at the punishments (or lack of them)
compared with male offenders
highlight the difference that the court system at
least views female vs. male offenders.








A California woman is the latest teacher suspected of raping a
student, as 41-year old Sherry Brians is in custody for allegedly
having a sexual relationship with a 12-year old boy.
[...]
She is joins a long list of women who have been accused or convicted
of having illegal sexual activity with children.

Among the most well-known is the case of Debra Lafave, a 26-year-old
reading teacher in Florida accused of having sex with a 14-year-old
boy in her classroom, car and at home. Her plea deal sparing her jail
time and giving her just house arrest was thrown out last week and
her trial is now slated for April 10.

Other cases collected by WND from news reports include:

Adrianne Hockett: Accused of having sex with a 16-year-old special-
needs student in a Houston apartment she rented for the get-
togethers. The boy has testified the pair would "have sex, drink beer
and smoke weed."

Amber Jennings, 31: Initially charged with having sex with a 16-year-
old, the counts against the Sturbridge, Mass., woman were reduced to
a single charge of disseminating harmful materials to a minor. She
reportedly admitted e-mailing naked photos of herself to a former
student.

Amber Marshall, 23: Northwest Indiana woman allegedly had sexual
contact, including intercourse, with several students, and turned
herself into authorities, telling police she knew what she did was
illegal.

Amira Sa'Si, 30: Clayton County, Ga., woman remarked she didn't think
her relationship was inappropriate based on her Internet research,
learning the Peach State's age of consent is 16.

Amy Gail Lilley, 36: Inverness, Fla., woman charged with an alleged
relationship with a 15-year-old girl.

Angela Stellwag, 24: Delran, N.J., woman accused of having sex in her
apartment with a 14-year-old boy she met in school.

Beth Raymond, 31: Private-school employee from Pownal, Maine, charged
with risk of injury to a minor and second-degree sexual assault of a
juvenile male.

Bethany Sherrill, 24: Daughter-in-law of school-board president is
charged with molesting a middle school student when he was 14.

Carol Flannigan, 50: Boca Raton, Fla., music teacher reportedly slept
with 11-year-old former student, and also had a simultaneous sexual
relationship with the boy's father.

Celeste Emerick, 32: Police in Huber Heights, Ohio, say she hosted a
party where students were shown porn.

Christina Gallagher, 26: Jersey City, N.J., woman ordered to pay more
than $1,000 in fines, sentenced to a lifetime registration as a
convicted sex offender and ordered to attend therapy for having sex
with a 17-year-old student.

Deanna Bobo, 37: Arkansas teacher allegedly had sex twice with a 14-
year-old boy in his own bed while his parents were not home.

Donna Carr Galloway, 33: Married mother of two found naked in a car
with a 17-year-old student.

Elisa Kawasaki, 25: Officials say ex-biology teacher had sexual
relations with a 16-year-old student on up to 20 different occasions.

Elizabeth Miklosovic, 36: Grand Rapids, Mich., woman pleaded no
contest to sexually assaulting a 14-year-old female student
she "married" in a pagan ritual.

Elizabeth Stow, 26: Woman from Fresno, Calif., area convicted of
having sex with three of her students was sentenced to nine years,
but the judge suspended that sentence and gave her one year, possibly
on house arrest, as well as faces five years probation.

Ellen Garfield, 43: Former student says teacher took him into an
empty classroom where she worked, partially disrobed, and coaxed him
into having sex with her in 1998. Garfield was acquitted of all
charges in September of this year.

Emily Morris, 28: Alabama woman faced a possible 20-year sentence,
but received one year in jail for having consensual sex with a 15-
year-old student.

Erica Rutters, 29: York, Pa., woman allegedly wrote erotic messages
to a 17-year-old student and had sexual intercourse with him four
times in her apartment.

Georgianne Harrell, 24: Sylvester, Ga., woman charged with performing
oral sex on a 9-year-old boy, allowing students to gaze down her
blouse and slashing her wrists with glass in front of her students.
She pleaded not guilty.

Gwen Ann Cardozo, 33: Colorado woman charged with having sex with a
17-year-old male student.

Heather Ingram, 30: Mathematics, science and business teacher in
British Columbia had sex with a 17-year-old student.

Janelle Marie Bird, 24: Accused of having a two-year affair with a 15-
year-old student from East Hill Christian School, in Pensacola, Fla.

Jaymee Wallace, 28: Basketball coach in Tampa, Fla., charged with
having an 18-month lesbian relationship with a student.

Joan Marie Sladky, 28: Redwood City, Calif., woman sentenced to six
months in county jail for having sex with a 16-year-old student after
pleading no contest to four counts of unlawful sexual intercourse,
oral copulation and penetration with a foreign object.

Katherine Tew, 30: Married English teacher from Greenville, N.C.,
arrested for having sex with a 17-year-old student.

Kathy White, 39: Charged with having sex with a 17-year-old student
in Lumberton, Texas. Victim alleges: "She just started grabbing me
and hormones were on and it just happened."

Kelly Lynn Dalecki, 28: Woman from St. Augustine, Fla., pleaded no
contest to charges she had sex with a 13-year-old boy.

Kristen Margrif, 27: Michigan woman accused of having sex with a 16-
year-old male student in her car or at his summer workplace.

Kristi Dance Oakes, 32: Former Tennessee high-school teacher
allegedly had sex with a 16-year-old boy who was in her biology class
the previous year.

Lakina Stutts, 40: School-bus driver admitted to cops she had sex
with a 14-year-old student in her home and in a car outside the boy's
home.

Laura-Anne Brownlee, 26: Former music mistress at a top private
school in Belfast, N. Ireland, was sentenced on six charges of
indecently assaulting a 15-year-old boy.

Laura Lynn Findlay, 30: Middle-school band teacher in Buena Vista
Township, Mich., charged with having sex with at least 5 students,
one as young as 14.

Margaret De Barraicua, 30: Sacramento, Calif., area woman arrested
after police found her having sex with a 16-year-old male student in
her car while the woman's toddler was strapped into a seat in the
back.

Maria Saco, 28: Passaic, N.J., woman sentenced to a year in jail for
an intimate relationship with a teen student who was 14 when they
first met.

Mary Kay Letourneau, 34: Des Moines, Wash., woman did prison time
after having an affair with a sixth-grade student, and had two
children by him. The couple recently married.

Melissa Michelle Deel, 32: Bristol, Tenn., woman pleaded guilty to
crossing the state line into Virginia to have oral sex with a 13-year-
old male student.

Michelle Kush, 29: Ohio woman allegedly had sex with a 15-year-old
boy several times during summer break.

Nicola Prentice, 22: British woman from Sheffield, England, given a
12-month suspended jail sentence after she seduced a 16-year-old
student and began a 19-month affair.

Nicole Andrea Barnhart, 35: Colorado woman reportedly told police she
loves the 16-year-old boy with whom she was having sex. She pled
guilty to felony sexual assault on a child, resulting in a two-year
prison sentence and a minimum of 10 years in a sex-offender probation
program.

Nicole Pomerleau, 31: High-school English teacher in Charlotte, N.C.,
accused of having a sexual relationship with her 16-year-old student.

Pamela Smart, 22: Media-services director at Winnacunnet High School
in Hampton, N.Y., had convinced her 15-year-old lover to murder her
husband. The Nicole Kidman film "To Die For" is based on her story.

Pamela Turner, 27: Former model and beauty-pageant contestant accused
of having a three-month sexual relationship with a 13-year-old boy.

Rachelle Vantucci, 32: Ex-substitute teacher in western New York
admitted having sex with a 16-year-old boy.

Rebecca Boicelli, 33: Redwood City, Calif., woman gave birth to a
baby last year and DNA test results gave prosecutors enough evidence
to prove the father is Boicelli's former student, who was 16 at the
time of conception.

Rhianna Ellis, 24: New York City teacher who allegedly had a 10-month
affair with an 18-year-old, and allgedly gave birth to his baby.

Robin Gialanella, 26: Elementary teacher in Toms River, N.J., engaged
in kissing, and inappropriate conduct and conversations with two
sixth-grade boys, ages 11 and 12. She was sentenced to 364 days in
jail.

Robin Winkis, 29: York, Pa., woman allegedly had sex with a 17-year-
old boy after giving him alcohol.

Samantha Solomon, 29: Fired after school bosses learned she was
having sex with a teenage boy. She denies the charges.

Sandra "Beth" Geisel, 42: Albany, N.Y., woman was fired from her job
at an private all-boys school after police in found her in a parked
car with a 17-year-old. She pleaded guilty to a single count of rape
and was sentenced to six months in jail.

Shelley Allen, 35: East Texas teacher's aide accused of sexual
assault and faces a possible 20 years behind bars.

Shelley White, 24: Geography teacher in Britain had been engaged to
be married before she kissed a 15-year-old student on at least three
occasions. She avoided jail, but received 12 months community
service.

Stephanie Burleson: Volleyball coach and teacher at Floresville High
School in Texas six years ago, pleaded guilty to all charges for
molesting a 16-year-old female student. She was sentenced to 10 years
probation, and required to register as a sex offender.

Susan Eble, 35: Former teacher's aide is accused of having a sexual
relationship with a 14-year-old boy.

Tara Lynn Crisp, 29: Police allege she had sex with a student at
least three times beginning when he was 14.

Toni Lynn Woods, 37: The Braxton County, W.Va., woman confessed to
having sexual intercourse with three juveniles a total of four times
and oral sex with one of those juveniles and another juvenile a total
of four times. She resigned.

Well, I don't think it's a "trend". And your long list of suspect/convicts does nothing to prove otherwise.

Baron Max

that stuff probably happens all the time, it has simply become popular to bust people on it and plaster their names and faces on all sorts of media.

Lucky kids. :D

Well, I don't think it's a "trend". And your long list of suspect/convicts does nothing to prove otherwise.

Baron Max

Sure it is a trend. They are being encouraged to do this as part of the plan to destroy American society. You know that popular show "american housewives"? It is all about teaching your wife and girlfriend how to have affairs with the neighbors while you are away at work.

You know that sheltered science world you live in? That one that blinders you? You need to come out from their and go watch the Lifetime channel. The lifetime channel is devoted to showing women having sex with men and boys, married and unmarried, any situation you can think of.

These shows tell these women how great it is to get the big one wherever you can find it. And if you get caught, their might be fights and crying, but after that, you can go get more big one.

Really. Some of these TV shows are scandalous. Not from a moral view but from the view of "how does this TV show affect the health of our society"?

Lucky kids.

I concur, heh.

I will gladly let any woman victimize me in a sexual manner. And the same held true when I was under age. :)

- N

Men are such wimps these days. At least boys are excited about sex. Maybe it is in part because men and women alike are drama queens?

Thats only a tiny fraction of the student-teacher sexual reactions. It is actually quite common.

What I want to know is what motivates a teenage boy to turn in a hot teacher proving sexual gratification? This stuff is like a penthouse forem letter come true.

What think ya'll of this trend?
A quick glance at the punishments (or lack of them)
compared with male offenders
highlight the difference that the court system at
least views female vs. male offenders.

(long list of recent offenders attached)
[...]
Nothing surprises me about this issue. Neither the long list of offenders, nor the reaction of people to it.

In fact the reaction of the following reader sums it up all:

Lucky kids. :D

I think we can compare it with the reaction that was sought to be raked up when by this BBC reporter (some Mohammed guy) who was enraged at Michael Jacksons sexual relationships with adolescent boys.

I'm not surprised and my entire research about the oppression of men points to what this thread amply highlights. A heterosexual society is keen to train its boys to be 'heterosexual', and it does not look at such incidents as serious. On the contrary it actually subtly encourages such incidents. The serial "The opposite sex" had an episode which actually glorified this schoold kid being attracted to an adult woman.

A man having sex with a boy is seen as one of the worst crimes, because it threatens the fragile but elaborate mechanisms that the society has built to kill a boys power to have sexual bonds with another male. It's been the same even in pre-heterosexual societies, especially in the west.

But there is a difference between how men and women are treated. A heterosexual society seeks to protect and indulge its women. Therefore, if an adult man has sex with a minor girl, that becomes an issue. Men are anyways treated as secondary citizens in a heterosexual society, and they have few rights in any case.

The heterosexual society brushes off the sexual exploitation of men/ boys at the hands of women.

When a woman has sex with a boy, the western heterosexual society rather sees it as if the woman is doing a favour to the boy by encouraging/ teaching him to be heterosexual.

And if you combine this with the intense pressure that boys live in the west to be heterosexual you get an exact picture of their exploitation. Like one boy narrated to me in a counseling session:

This teenage boy used to go to an adult female tutor to study. He said, the tutor started behaving funny and would sit close to him and one day started to rub his pants.

The boy did not fancy that girl and in fact was not looking for sex with anyone (boys in my society don't usualluy have sex before marriage!). But, he could not say no or resist her unwanted advances, because otherwise the woman would have seen him as 'impotent' or worse a 'homo'. He was under intense pressure to have sex, and he did.

This happened a couple of times, and then he stopped going for his tuitions. But could not tell his parents what happened. Nevertheless, the guy brags the incident amongst his peers to gain 'social masculinity'.

What do you people think of this incident?

What I want to know is what motivates a teenage boy to turn in a hot teacher proving sexual gratification? This stuff is like a penthouse forem letter come true.
So when a boy is exploited by a woman, he is expected to enjoy it! Good! Talk about social pressures.

I can relate other incidents of sexual exploitation of men at the hands of women in a heterosexual society --- and this exploitation has the sanction of authorities:

a.) Freshmen boys are made to strip naked in front of a gathering of people --- that includes girls that know them. In some cases women force strip the boys. Boys are made to masturbate in front of girls.

b.) Highschool students are asked to strip in front of their head mistress and other female staff, in the U.S. for medicals.

Do men have a choice to say no! Men are supposed to enjoy this humiliation, if they are supposed to be 'really men'. Men can't complain without loosing their manhood. But this happens only in a heterosexual society. They feel just as violated and humiliated as do women. But a wimpy, heterosexual society is sensitive only to women's needs, feelings and rights.

In a traditional society, a man is well within his right to feel violated. In fact he will fight this in order to save his honour and manhood.

Men are really in a pathetic condition in a heterosexual society. And the queer heterosexuals that don't deserve to be called 'men' in the first place gladly submit the entire male race to this inferior, helpless state.

Men are such wimps these days. At least boys are excited about sex. Maybe it is in part because men and women alike are drama queens?
You bet, Western heterosexual men are really wimps! --- the lowliest kind I know of! They allow the subjugation of men! That's the pits. They don't have a sense of honour! All they want is to be ruled by sexually aggressive women! It sucks!

Why do you care to call yourself a man in the first place!

12 years old.... is to young...

but it depends on the male..


i dont see it as rape...... since the boy wasnt harmed.... in fact he was lucky.


i remember several teachers saying things to me... alone, which might of lead to some sexual fanatsies... except i was to shy...

such is my loss.... i could have had her if i wanted to... but i was too shy..



it all comes down to whether the boy wanted to... or was he pressured.

if he had the hormones to want to.. then i dont see a crime.


there is a difference between an adult woman having sex with a boy..

and an adult male having sex with a young girl.....

boys dont get pregnant...

and nobody cares if he gets lucky..... they just get jealous...

other boys i mean.

-MT

its a double standard... but its reality...


]

Ahh! Too many spaces inbetween lines!
Learn to type correctly, and use proper grammar, or fuck off, MT.

Hapsburg.... go fuck yourself.

spaces between lines makes it easier to read... dah... moron.

-MT

No, it just makes you look like a retard who hasn't a good enough grasp at the English language.
However, I do agree that female teachers fucking male students is okay, and male teachers fucking female students is not.

No, it just makes you look like a retard who hasn't a good enough grasp at the English language.
However, I do agree that female teachers fucking male students is okay, and male teachers fucking female students is not.
Thank you both Mt and hapsburg. I'll use your posts as evidence in the thread, heterosexuality is queer.

I think there are two very different issues here. If a female teacher has sex with a fourteen year old male student there is a problem [1] because it breaches the professional relationship that ought to exist between teacher and student, and [2] because the student is considered too young to have sex.

I am in favour of dismissing from their posts people who engage in sexual relations inappropriate to those posts. This is not only teachers, but college professors who have sex with students who may be well into their twenties; also doctors who have sex with their patients, etc. And although you can do nothing about it, I don't favour bosses screwing their secretaries. (Screw someone else's.)

However, I take a dim view of laws which decree that having sex with a girl or boy a few days before their sixteenth (or whatever) birthday is the most heinous of crimes, but if you wait those few days it is perfectly okay. In particular, a society that approves equally of heterosexual and homosexual activity, but attempts to compel healthy heterosexual fourteen-year-old boys to celibacy seems to be an odd place. It seems to be a society in conflict with what nature says is healthy and normal.

No, it just makes you look like a retard who hasn't a good enough grasp at the English language.
However, I do agree that female teachers fucking male students is okay, and male teachers fucking female students is not.

He is not a retard. He is smarter than you. If you were a scientist, you would figure it out, instead of accepting it as "just the way it is".

Read and look at what he wrote. The spacing and the words. What does it remind you of?

Music. Chanting. Religion. Poetry.

It is a way of speech meant to subtly hypnotize, control and brainwash you. Human beings are animals that react to certain stimuli. If you talk like a preacher or a poest or whatever, it works on the brain of the person. They cannot help their reactions unless they know how the manipulation works and they can put a label to it when it occurs.

This type of speech makes the person writing it appear to be on a higher level. Over time, simple people that never bother to figure things out will gradually accept this low level subtle brainwashing that he is superior. You will never realize. He will own you or anyone else after awhile.

Precisely what the flying fuck on a stick does that have to do with MT's abhorrent grammar?

What I want to know is what motivates a teenage boy to turn in a hot teacher proving sexual gratification? This stuff is like a penthouse forem letter come true.

They don't. It's their parents that make a big fuss about it and take em to court. They could have heard rumors about their child and teacher, or their kid could have accidentally mentioned something that made em suspicious, etc.



I can relate other incidents of sexual exploitation of men at the hands of women in a heterosexual society --- and this exploitation has the sanction of authorities:

a.) Freshmen boys are made to strip naked in front of a gathering of people --- that includes girls that know them. In some cases women force strip the boys. Boys are made to masturbate in front of girls.

Huh? Never heard of that happening. Lucky kids. :p

And hey, it ain't rape if both sides consent. :)

- N

bla, bla, bla ...

Do men have a choice to say no!....

The right question is, Do they want to say no ?

Now look, If the kid enjoyed it but the society curses it the poor child has no choice but to deny how incredible the experience was. Here I would be against thoes female teachers who forced thoes boys and would like to kill thoes male teachers who destroyed our societies reproductive traditions by being GAY.

...and would like to kill thoes male teachers who destroyed our societies reproductive traditions by being GAY.

This is a homophobic AND threatening comment.

You're walking a fine line, Anomalous...

that's hot

12 years old.... is to young...

but it depends on the male..

i dont see it as rape...... since the boy wasnt harmed.... in fact he was lucky.

i remember several teachers saying things to me... alone, which might of lead to some sexual fanatsies... except i was to shy...

such is my loss.... i could have had her if i wanted to... but i was too shy..

it all comes down to whether the boy wanted to... or was he pressured.

if he had the hormones to want to.. then i dont see a crime.

there is a difference between an adult woman having sex with a boy..

and an adult male having sex with a young girl.....

boys dont get pregnant...

and nobody cares if he gets lucky..... they just get jealous...

other boys i mean.

-MT

its a double standard... but its reality...


]

They don't. It's their parents that make a big fuss about it and take em to court. They could have heard rumors about their child and teacher, or their kid could have accidentally mentioned something that made em suspicious, etc.

Huh? Never heard of that happening. Lucky kids. :p

And hey, it ain't rape if both sides consent. :)

- N

that's hot
You obviously don't know much about men.

In my vast work with men, I have come accross some instances of such a sexual orientation, where men actually enjoyed sexual humiliation at the hands of women. This 'perversion' comes with several other typical characteristics. The person usually has a desire to be dominated by women. One such person reported that he liked to be beaten by masculine women by a whip while she made love to him. I also have observed that there is a secret (often suppressed) desire to don women's clothes that these men have.

Unfortunately, for the majority of men, the western heterosexual society has institutionalised and glorified this perversion as a 'straight'/'manly' stereotype, which almost closes all venues for men to even protest when he is so humiliated by women.

A few years ago I had read a site on the net where the originator had solicited experiences from other men of being naked in front of female doctors/ nurses (this guy apparently had a fetish for it), and he specifically asked what gender will they prefer to be seen by. Interestingly, the majority of 'heterosexual' people (heterosexual is a misleading label) reported that they hate to be examined by female doctors and would prefer someone of their own sex. That clearly shows that what you're saying is only 'heterosexual' mispropaganda.

Women also reported that they wanted to be examined only by female practitioners. In fact when some men complained about the malpractise of forcing cadets naked in front of female officers in the navy/ army etc. a female nurse commented that women themselves hate to see men humiliated in such a manner. The site still ought to be there somewhere, and one can find it with some efforts.

This experience of men is in keeping with how men feel about it in my society.

That men do not raise their voice against it inspite of how negatively they feel about it clearly shows that men operate under heavy pressures where they are expected to conform to heterosexual stereotypes.

In one of my workshops with boys, one boy bitterly complained about this practice of stripping boys in front of females (a recent practise in my country after its heterosexualisation), while narrating an army recruitment drive, where the boys were stripped but not even a single one could complain.

Clearly a minority of people with with queer inclinations --- and others who just like to further this pressure for the sake of power --- are keeping this pressure alive on men, so that men keep being the wimps that the heterosexual western society wants them to be --- and not be able to raise their voice.

This is a homophobic AND threatening comment.

You're walking a fine line, Anomalous...

I said would like to, it doesnt mean I will, go for a english class.

“ ...and would like to kill thoes male teachers who destroyed our societies reproductive traditions by being GAY. ”


"This is a homophobic AND threatening comment.

You're walking a fine line, Anomalous... "

Its amazing how JamesR cant see the threat from GAY people.

Buddha, you realize barely anyone takes you seriously, and those that do have mental problems, like Happeh.


Its amazing how JamesR cant see the threat from GAY people.
What threat? What the hell are you talking about, you drunken buffoon?

Its amazing how JamesR cant see the threat from GAY people.

Perhaps you can explain it for me.

Why do you fear gay people?

look, 12 is to young...

and he probubly needed coaching by the teacher... thats wrong...

but if the boy knew what he was doing and wanted it... as most do.. then he cannot be seen as a real victum...

it maybe illegal.. and the parents have a right to be upset and press charges.. but lets face it... the boy inst going home and crying at night...

in the eyes of most of his peers... hes lucky...

thats reality.

oh... and i space my lines... as i have learned from many 1000's of posts... that it is simply easier too read.

i am not trying to brainwash anyone with spaced lines...
but thats an interesting thought.

-MT

...

but if the boy knew what he was doing and wanted it... as most do.. then he cannot be seen as a real victum...

...
in the eyes of most of his peers... hes lucky...

thats reality

He got what he was supposed to get at 21. Now he will instead of making his career chase prostitutes. And hopefully rape some women, as that will be what he grew up for.

He had sex at 12 doesnt mean he should be told what he did was wrong but should be told its wrong at 12 or else he will suffer all his life with regret whenever he will be involved with ....

Perhaps you can explain it for me.

Why do you fear gay people?

First off, Gay people fear me in my real life. I am a member of an elite Anti Gay Activists Organization in my country.
- - - -

If Homosexuality is not genetic U r creating a big problem for future generations by not looking at the problem of child molestation by men on boys. Thoes children become childmolestors themselves as they know how they enjoyed it and would like other children to enjoy that too and get pleasure from that act. This is a memetic virus.

But eventhough its wrong. the boys molested by women wont get pleasure from molesting other boys and certainly not small girls becuase thats not what they learnt as kids about sex ....

Some people may get pleasure from reading this thread but that doesnot justify its rightfulness.

Perhaps you can explain it for me.

Why do you fear gay people?
Can't you see he is a Muslim fundamentalist? What bigger reason do you need than that! Now don't tell me that you don't understand this phenomenon!

If you think you can talk sense with him or reason with him, you're living in a world of illusion!

If Homosexuality is not genetic U r creating a big problem for future generations by not looking at the problem of child molestation by men on boys. Thoes children become childmolestors themselves as they know how they enjoyed it and would like other children to enjoy that too and get pleasure from that act. This is a memetic virus.
The only virus I know that we should all protect us from is Islamic terrorism!

If you conduct a world-widesurvey you'll know what people actually consider to be a virus.

Buddha, you realize barely anyone takes you seriously, and those that do have mental problems, like Happeh.
I'm aware of a lot of things!

I know that most people agree with me, even though they may not come out openly to support me, but that is because of the intense social pressures.

I know that for some of the members of the 'vested interest group' here --- a group which is extremely powerful and vocal, they would want to ignore me, for they don't see what I say as threat as long as the social structures that support their power is strong. Afterall, however true I maybe, this small discussion forum is not going to change things or give voice to men.

But, on the other hand, at least I would have spoken a truth which the society never wanted to be told. And in that it is definitely a begninning. Now at least you can't just spread your mispropaganda that oppress men and get away with it.

When the victim gets a voice, it should be threatening for the abuser.

Perhaps that is why my threads are taken so seriously. The size of the thread titled "heterosexuality is unnatural" speaks for itself. And that no true heterosexual has been able to challenge me, also speaks for itself. The majority of men, like I said give their support through their silence --- like in real life.

but if the boy knew what he was doing and wanted it... as most do.. then he cannot be seen as a real victum...
Most women, if we agree with heterosexual ideology also want sex with men, then why doesn't the society allow men to have sex with young girls? If both are willing?

Of course most men have some attraction for women. But that doesn't mean that they want to do it when they are young. And with anyone. They only want to do it when they want it, at their own terms. Pressurising boys to have sex with men as a proof of their 'manhood' is oppression.

In my vast work with men, I have come accross some instances of such a sexual orientation, where men actually enjoyed sexual humiliation at the hands of women. This 'perversion' comes with several other typical characteristics. The person usually has a desire to be dominated by women. One such person reported that he liked to be beaten by masculine women by a whip while she made love to him. I also have observed that there is a secret (often suppressed) desire to don women's clothes that these men have.
Of course, being sexually humiliated in front of others, especially women, makes men feel extremely vulnerable and "like a woman" (See the post on this phenomenon in this post in the thread: Gender orientation is biological (http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=949448#post949448). Now, the true heterosexuals (for the definition of a true heterosexual see the thread "heterosexuality is unnatural") --- who are an extreme minority --- seem to enjoy this 'feminine' feeling. Nothing wrong with it, even though it is kind of 'negative femininity', but when it is imposed on masculine, straight men it results in oppression.

This is one of the evidences that supports my observation that 'heterosexuality is queer', just like 'homosexuality'. Although true homosexuals are much more positive about their femininity that 'true heterosexuals' are not.

Huh? Never heard of that happening. Lucky kids. :p

And hey, it ain't rape if both sides consent. :)

- N
I recently read about a recent incident in an traditional orient country, being forced into heterosexuality, where in a university, about 25 senior students barged into the class of freshman (who were about 10 in numbers) with hockey sticks in their hands, bolted the room from inside and ordered the boys to strip naked while forcing the girls to sit in a corner.

The boys refused to do that and a terrible fight ensued. Actuall, boys would rather die than do that. And although the seniors managed to forcibly strip some boys and parade them naked, the boys did fight back like hell. The freshman were seriously wounded and were hospitalised.

Apparently, what you are saying about men and boys enjoying such things is wrong and a heterosexual propaganda. Straight (masculine gendered) men for sure don't like that. Those who do are not really straight!

However, I take a dim view of laws which decree that having sex with a girl or boy a few days before their sixteenth (or whatever) birthday is the most heinous of crimes, but if you wait those few days it is perfectly okay. In particular, a society that approves equally of heterosexual and homosexual activity, but attempts to compel healthy heterosexual fourteen-year-old boys to celibacy seems to be an odd place. It seems to be a society in conflict with what nature says is healthy and normal.
I agree with you, but the only problem is that the term 'heteroseuxal' is very misleading. Most boys/ men are not heterosexual, they only take that identity because of social pressures. It does not mean that they don't like women, but heterosexuality is not only about liking women sexually. Especially adolescence is a stage when most masculine gendered boys do not have a particularly strong sexual need for women. It develops gradually during the latter part of the youth.

Of course I'm not backing the above statements that I'm making here. But I have provided enough evidences of them in the thread "heteroseuxality is unnatural". And this is what I've learnt after more 10 years of work with straight men in my country.

Buddha, you realize barely anyone takes you seriously, and those that do have mental problems, like Happeh.
And as for you, after all the evidences that I've provided you can only ignore me at your disadvantage.

I recently read about a recent incident in an traditional orient country, being forced into heterosexuality, where in a university, about 25 senior students barged into the class of freshman (who were about 10 in numbers) with hockey sticks in their hands, bolted the room from inside and ordered the boys to strip naked while forcing the girls to sit in a corner.

The boys refused to do that and a terrible fight ensued. Actuall, boys would rather die than do that. And although the seniors managed to forcibly strip some boys and parade them naked, the boys did fight back like hell. The freshman were seriously wounded and were hospitalised.

Apparently, what you are saying about men and boys enjoying such things is wrong and a heterosexual propaganda. Straight (masculine gendered) men for sure don't like that. Those who do are not really straight!


Look at him, Jame R, Look at the psyco Buddha1; the poor man has a disability called homosexuality. He has a twisted mind; to a crooked man crooked path looks straight, arent U afraid of such people, I am not. But the question is do U like what he says ?

Heres what I have to say on his crap.

Thoes who barged in were boys, GAY boys and used the girls excuse to strip the poor hetrosexual, How twisted can things be ?

Hey, BW, I can go on whole night with women; Ya if there is no disgusting homo in the room to enjoy watching me. Me and my women no males please when I am making love.

Look at him, Jame R, Look at the psyco Buddha1; the poor man has a disability called homosexuality. He has a twisted mind; to a crooked man crooked path looks straight, arent U afraid of such people, I am not. But the question is do U like what he says ?

Heres what I have to say on his crap.

Thoes who barged in were boys, GAY boys and used the girls excuse to strip the poor hetrosexual, How twisted can things be ?

Hey, BW, I can go on whole night with women; Ya if there is no disgusting homo in the room to enjoy watching me. Me and my women no males please when I am making love.
so ou've never had a Gay friend then?

I agree with you, but the only problem is that the term 'heteroseuxal' is very misleading. Most boys/ men are not heterosexual, they only take that identity because of social pressures. It does not mean that they don't like women, but heterosexuality is not only about liking women sexually. Especially adolescence is a stage when most masculine gendered boys do not have a particularly strong sexual need for women. It develops gradually during the latter part of the youth... This Buddha1 is an amazing specimen to study the psycology of a GAY man.

When I was 12, and I saw a naked man, nothing happend, sure the man being homo may have been happy but I puked blue and green.

When I was 10 and I saw these women being horny on TV, I still remember, that was the day when I felt what it was like to be a true man.
No one taught me to act or no one had told me anything about sex, I guess I was born with the right set of genes.

so ou've never had a Gay friend then? yes I had, since they touched me on my crotch, some psyco serial killer killed them all.

yes I had, since they touched me on my crotch, some psyco serial killer killed them all.
what yo said dont make any sense. your a troll init.........? no need to confirm. it's obvious

BEST ADVICE. IGNORE TROLLS. waste of space nd time

Apparently, what you are saying about men and boys enjoying such things is wrong and a heterosexual propaganda. Straight (masculine gendered) men for sure don't like that. Those who do are not really straight!

Huh, where'd I say that?

I only said "lucky kids", not in regards to being forced to strip by older guys, but by being able to whip your thing out and play with it in front of a bunch of girls without anything bad happening in return. Hell, if I was able to do that and get away with it, I'd be doing it all the time like a horny lil monkey. :p

- N

Huh, where'd I say that?

I only said "lucky kids", not in regards to being forced to strip by older guys, but by being able to whip your thing out and play with it in front of a bunch of girls without anything bad happening in return. Hell, if I was able to do that and get away with it, I'd be doing it all the time like a horny lil monkey. :p- N
You may enjoy it and laught at it, but it doesn't do any good for the 'men' as a race. In fact you're adding to their pressures. Men need to be freed from this strange pressure where his own sexual space, his sexual exploitation and abuse just do not matter. While, the heterosexualised society becomes oversensitive to the needs of women's dignity, modesty and rights.

That is bad news for men, especially masculine gendered men.

You may enjoy it and laught at it, but it doesn't do any good for the 'men' as a race. In fact you're adding to their pressures. Men need to be freed from this strange pressure where bla bla bla ...

Need I have to say anything more about this Psyco.

Need I have to say anything more about this Psyco.
A psychopath troll!

Need I have to say anything more about this Psyco.
YOu are accusing someone of being psycho?? ypou who talk fukin gibberish, and have no fuki argument but deranged homophobia

Hey, BW, I can go on whole night with women; Ya if there is no disgusting homo in the room to enjoy watching me. Me and my women no males please when I am making love.

Is this really natural sex you're having? Or do these women take a pill that gives them a disability, making them unable to have children?
Apparently that is one of the major disabilities homos suffer from, the inability to have NATURAL sex. I take it you also enjoy unnatural sex?
Please, lie to me and tell me how many children you have proudly fathered with all these women. Are these children who you may behead someday if they "dishonor" you?

Of course, in order to be dishonored, I guess you'd have to be honorable in the first place, and judging from your violent rhetoric and poor English, nope, you never had any to begin with!

When I was 10 and I saw these women being horny on TV, I still remember, that was the day when I felt what it was like to be a true man.
No one taught me to act or no one had told me anything about sex, I guess I was born with the right set of genes.

At an age (ten years old) when most kids (at least in my country) still wait for Santa Claus to deliver the goods on Christmas Eve, I wouldn't expect any sexual response from them to be mature, developed, and to have much in common with the sexuality of grown adults.
Then again, I don't really expect anything you say to have much in common with the reasoning of a grown adult.
Does this PROVE you have the "right" set of genes?

yes I had, since they touched me on my crotch, some psyco serial killer killed them all.

Please explain this, Anomalous. Did this serial killer just miraculously and coincidentally kill all these dirty homos that were supposedly your friends?
Or was there a larger conspiracy at work?
What role did YOU play in this lucky accident?

Please explain this, Anomalous. Did this serial killer just miraculously and coincidentally kill all these dirty homos that were supposedly your friends?
Or was there a larger conspiracy at work?
What role did YOU play in this lucky accident? Its very easy today.

Just create a blog with all the details of abuse and home address of the gay, the rest is done by the missionaries based on the previous record of that homo.

Its very easy today.

Just create a blog with all the details of abuse and home address of the gay, the rest is done by the missionaries based on the previous record of that homo.
ahhhhh, i see i see. complete utter bullshite

Anomalous:


First off, Gay people fear me in my real life. I am a member of an elite Anti Gay Activists Organization in my country.

I didn't ask you why gay people fear you. I asked you why you fear gay people. Your deflection of the question is telling. I think you're probably very young. I'm guessing a teenager - perhaps 15 or 16 years old. Either that or you're a neo-Nazi type with below-average intelligence, but most likely the former.


If Homosexuality is not genetic U r creating a big problem for future generations by not looking at the problem of child molestation by men on boys.

Did you know that most child molestation is committed by men who identify themselves as heterosexual, rather than gay?


Thoes children become childmolestors themselves as they know how they enjoyed it and would like other children to enjoy that too and get pleasure from that act. This is a memetic virus.

Do you think that children enjoy being molested? Would you enjoy it? Do you think you would "turn gay" if you were molested?


Look at him, Jame R, Look at the psyco Buddha1; the poor man has a disability called homosexuality.

You can tell that his homosexuality causes his behaviour, can you? Are you an expert on homosexuals, Anomalous?


...arent U afraid of such people, I am not. But the question is do U like what he says ?

I neither like nor dislike what he says. I disagree with him, partly because I think he has strange conceptions of what words like "heterosexual" and "homosexual" mean, and therefore uses those terms in an idiosyncratic way.

Why do you react to intellectual arguments with emotion, instead of logic or analysis? Can't you think?


Hey, BW, I can go on whole night with women; Ya if there is no disgusting homo in the room to enjoy watching me. Me and my women no males please when I am making love.

Why do you feel the need to brag about your sexual exploits? To convince people you have been with a woman? Do you think they may doubt it?

Or is it that you think people might think you're gay?

Or something else?

I think anamalous is ruining this important threads with his anti-gay hysteria. Sexual exploitation of boys/men at the hands of women is a real issue!

I think anamalous is ruining this important threads with his anti-gay hysteria. Sexual exploitation of boys/men at the hands of women is a real issue!

Sorry to burst the magical bubble of two entities causing cold and frost on the windshield and electromechanical failures to boot, but last time I checked, men predominated the sexual molestation field!

Or do you mean this FIGURATIVELY?

I recently read about a recent incident in an traditional orient country, being forced into heterosexuality, where in a university, about 25 senior students barged into the class of freshman (who were about 10 in numbers) with hockey sticks in their hands, bolted the room from inside and ordered the boys to strip naked while forcing the girls to sit in a corner.

The boys refused to do that and a terrible fight ensued. Actuall, boys would rather die than do that. And although the seniors managed to forcibly strip some boys and parade them naked, the boys did fight back like hell. The freshman were seriously wounded and were hospitalised.

Apparently, what you are saying about men and boys enjoying such things is wrong and a heterosexual propaganda. Straight (masculine gendered) men for sure don't like that. Those who do are not really straight!

Sounds like men, alright. I don't know how, but I'm sure this violent act was committed to ensure their sexual "viability" and to demonstrate their potency and virility to the women. In the biological world, might often equates to right!
I mean, what woman in her right mind would pass up the offer to have THAT MAN'S child?!?!? If I was a woman, I'd be getting that man's sperm every chance I got!

:p

Its very easy today.

Just create a blog with all the details of abuse and home address of the gay, the rest is done by the missionaries based on the previous record of that homo.


Well, I guess missionary doesn't always mean "Light Worker"! (that was for you fans of New Age jargon!)

And what was the "abuse"? Is this something that would be perfectly acceptable if it were done to a woman (making a pass, as they say)?

What makes it abuse when it is done by one male to another male? Abuse is a pretty hefty accusation, which usually implies a certain degree of unprovoked hostility and harm towards the victim. Do women (some of the brightest among them, that is) not consider being treated as a sex object abuse? Apparently not the women that YOU hang around. The size of the breasts is generally converse to the amount of intellegence. Generally, that is...

Just wondering what the big difference is, other than biological gender.

Sounds like men, alright. I don't know how, but I'm sure this violent act was committed to ensure their sexual "viability" and to demonstrate their potency and virility to the women. In the biological world, might often equates to right!
I mean, what woman in her right mind would pass up the offer to have THAT MAN'S child?!?!? If I was a woman, I'd be getting that man's sperm every chance I got!

:p
Interestingly, not to discourage you, but your analysis of men's behaviour is not quite correct.

Since straight men so suppress their sexual need for men, the need itself becomes a lot negative. Straight men like homoseuxal men cannot enjoy male-male love when its open and 'mushy'. Their social training makes it unpalatable for them. But it comes out in several negative ways. Most straight men can only give vent to their sexual need for other men when they are in positions of power over the men who are 'victims' and their is a social excuse (e.g. a custom). The above incidence was one of 'hazing'.

Sexual humiliation of men has an immense sexual value for straight men --- and turns them on. And the worst kind of sexual humilication for a man is to be humiliated in front of women --- they call it CFNM. So men subject other men to it because they derive immense sexual pleasure out of it. Sexual humiliation of a man, especially in front of women, also denudes him of his pretenses and of 'social masculinity' which also adds immensely to the sexual value of this.I have observed and analysed several such cases. Including the way Iraqi prisoners of wars were treated by the US soldiers. Of course no man worth his name would admit that it has any male erotic value attached to it. But then what's new!

Otherwise, if were to believe in the American hogwash that men get extremely put off by male eroticism, then the last thing the macho guys in power would want to do is to see the men naked. Hazing, whether in my society or in yours, often involves making the boy naked and asking him to masturbate. Now their social masculinity prevents men from doing masturbation on the other guy, so they make do with watching him. And the fact that he is being humiliated (more so if a girl is present) makes it all the more hot for these men. It's all becaue their sexuality for men has been so negativised.

...
And what was the "abuse"? Is this something that would be perfectly acceptable if it were done to a woman (making a pass, as they say)? Abuse than stands highest of all on the top of savagery, which threaten the reporductive fabric of my society.

Anomalous...
I neither like nor dislike what he says. I disagree with him, partly because I think he has strange conceptions of what words like "heterosexual" and "homosexual" mean, and therefore uses those terms in an idiosyncratic way... Thank god U have a little bit brain left at a corner of your skull.

However, I do agree that female teachers fucking male students is okay, and male teachers fucking female students is not.

Is there some biological reason for this? I thought males hit puberty later than females.


And hey, it ain't rape if both sides consent.

Statutory rape laws don't work that way.

"However, I do agree that female teachers fucking male students is okay, and male teachers fucking female students is not."

Is there some biological reason for this?

Yeah, there is! The young male's little dick gets hard and he's actually able to perform intercourse ...and that's 'cause he's excited and wants to fuck!! If the male did NOT want to fuck, i.e., consent, then his little dick wouldn't get hard, would it? See? That's biology.

A young girl can fuck like a mink, enjoy it tremendously, then pretend that she didn't really want it, and no one is the wiser!! So the male goes to prison for 4,000 years, and she just goes off happy as a lark looking around for some other stupid male whose dick is hard!

Baron Max

Yeah, there is! The young male's little dick gets hard and he's actually able to perform intercourse ...and that's 'cause he's excited and wants to fuck!! If the male did NOT want to fuck, i.e., consent, then his little dick wouldn't get hard, would it? See? That's biology.
You apparently don't know enough about sexual biology.

You could as well say that when someone humiliates a man by forcing him to masturbate, the fact that the man gets ejaculation --- and that ejaculation is a pleasant feeling, it means that the man liked it and so his consent is automatic.

To get it up is not really all that difficult, especially at that young age and even when you don't desire the woman. Even if you hate your woman, you can get it up with a little prodding and stuff!

You could as well say that when someone humiliates a man by forcing him to masturbate, the fact that the man gets ejaculation ....

How can a male masturbate AND ejaculate if his dick ain't hard? And if his dick is hard, then what, biologically, does that mean???


To get it up is not really all that difficult, especially at that young age and even when you don't desire the woman.

Oh, really? Please cite some evidence of that for us ...I'd be interested in reading such new scientific evidence on the subject.

Baron Max

Abuse than stands highest of all on the top of savagery, which threaten the reporductive fabric of my society.

What society is this?

How can a male masturbate AND ejaculate if his dick ain't hard? And if his dick is hard, then what, biologically, does that mean???Baron Max
It means that biologically a male's dick is so made that even someone he considers his sister, if she prods it enough can make him hard and cum (I know its disgusting, but I had to make you understand!). But it doesn't mean that he likes to have sex with his sister (or mother or whatever!), or that his consent is there.

By the way, you could get an erection just sitting in a bus!


Oh, really? Please cite some evidence of that for us ...I'd be interested in reading such new scientific evidence on the subject.Baron Max
Everything is not supported by studies. I think being a male should be enough to make you understand that. I am a counsellor and I have counselled any number of men who have sex with women even when they did not wanted to (I think more or less everyman goes through that!).

When I was 10 and I saw these women being horny on TV, I still remember, that was the day when I felt what it was like to be a true man.
No one taught me to act or no one had told me anything about sex, I guess I was born with the right set of genes.

At an age (ten years old) when most kids (at least in my country) still wait for Santa Claus to deliver the goods on Christmas Eve, I wouldn't expect any sexual response from them to be mature, developed, and to have much in common with the sexuality of grown adults.
Then again, I don't really expect anything you say to have much in common with the reasoning of a grown adult.
Does this PROVE you have the "right" set of genes?

Well for me, age 10 is what, 5th grade? Yep, that's about the right age for me. I was sexually active in 5th and 6th grade. Mainly 6th grade as that's when all the girls were starting to develop and the hormones were kickin in. Before then, say 3rd and 4th grade, we were all playing "doctor" and I was dry-humping girls not knowing what to do, lol. But once those hormones kicked in and finally had a hard-on, now we all knew what was supposed to happen whereas before I was wondering how in the hell am I supposed to get this into that?

Too bad Sex Ed didn't happen until the end of 6th grade when quite a few people in the class were already sexually active as it would have made us a bit more aware of the dangers of having sex. This is why I'm all for teaching it at a slightly younger age. Moms may be worried and call those schools bad names, but they're just ignorant mothers because I personally know from experience, that all of those things happen at a much younger age and nope, no way in hell did I ever tell my parents just as my mom thought I was an innocent angel too, yet wasn't. Kids learn things damned fast and they're much brighter than you may think. Generations improve and I wouldn't doubt that they're having sex as even younger ages now, especially in the time of Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Horny Rap Videos, Free Internet Porn, Webcams and all that.


It means that biologically a male's dick is so made that even someone he considers his sister, if she prods it enough can make him hard and cum (I know its disgusting, but I had to make you understand!). But it doesn't mean that he likes to have sex with his sister (or mother or whatever!), or that his consent is there.

By the way, you could get an erection just sitting in a bus!

Oh yeah, I could get an erection sitting on a bus alright, but there'd have to be some good thoughts going through my head. However, I would NOT get an erection being surrounded by a bunch of older high school GUYS that are THREATENING me, even if I there may be girls I'm supposed to be masturbating to. My willie would shrivel up so bad like a turtle I'd get laughed at! And if I did happen to get a hard-on, as Baron Max mentioned, being around a bunch of older high school guys, that'd probably mean I was a homo. Not that there's anything wrong with that, in the immortal words of Jerry Seinfeld.

There's a lot more to getting a hard-on then just being rubbed. It's more mental than physical. Hell, I've been in situations where a girl has wanted to jump my bones but I just couldn't get it up. I just flat out wasn't attracted to her no matter how hard she tried (mainly cause she had an Amazon jungle between her legs which I find absolutely disgusting). It's not as easy as just having someone rub you, even if a sister as you mentioned. The only way that boy is gonna get hard by his sister rubbing him up, is if he's fantasizing about her. And that should tell you a lot just as the poor kid getting a hard-on in front of all those high school bullies.

- N

If the male did NOT want to fuck, i.e., consent, then his little dick wouldn't get hard, would it?

You're wrong. Many male victims of child sexual abuse report feeling tremendously guilty that they got an erection or even ejaculated while being fondled by a pedophile. Erections are bodily reactions. Stimulate the penis, and it may become erect. There doesn't have to be any sexual desire involved.

You're wrong. Many male victims of child sexual abuse report feeling tremendously guilty that they got an erection or even ejaculated ....

Yeah, after the fact!! That's like the girls who fuck without any protection, then claim it was rape so they don't have to take/accept the responsibility for their stupid actions!

Baron Max

That's like the girls who fuck without any protection, then claim it was rape so they don't have to take/accept the responsibility for their stupid actions!

And there are many of those, aren't there?

Yes, there are, James!

Baron Max

Is that what has happened to you?

What society is this? The hetro society.

Well for me, age 10 is what, 5th grade? Yep, that's about the right age for me. I was sexually active in 5th and 6th grade. Mainly 6th grade as that's when all the girls were starting to develop and the hormones were kickin in. Before then, say 3rd and 4th grade, we were all playing "doctor" and I was dry-humping girls not knowing what to do, lol. But once those hormones kicked in and finally had a hard-on, now we all knew what was supposed to happen whereas before I was wondering how in the hell am I supposed to get this into that?

Too bad Sex Ed didn't happen until the end of 6th grade when quite a few people in the class were already sexually active as it would have made us a bit more aware of the dangers of having sex. This is why I'm all for teaching it at a slightly younger age. Moms may be worried and call those schools bad names, but they're just ignorant mothers because I personally know from experience, that all of those things happen at a much younger age and nope, no way in hell did I ever tell my parents just as my mom thought I was an innocent angel too, yet wasn't. Kids learn things damned fast and they're much brighter than you may think. Generations improve and I wouldn't doubt that they're having sex as even younger ages now, especially in the time of Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Horny Rap Videos, Free Internet Porn, Webcams and all that.



Oh yeah, I could get an erection sitting on a bus alright, but there'd have to be some good thoughts going through my head. However, I would NOT get an erection being surrounded by a bunch of older high school GUYS that are THREATENING me, even if I there may be girls I'm supposed to be masturbating to. My willie would shrivel up so bad like a turtle I'd get laughed at! And if I did happen to get a hard-on, as Baron Max mentioned, being around a bunch of older high school guys, that'd probably mean I was a homo. Not that there's anything wrong with that, in the immortal words of Jerry Seinfeld.

There's a lot more to getting a hard-on then just being rubbed. It's more mental than physical. Hell, I've been in situations where a girl has wanted to jump my bones but I just couldn't get it up. I just flat out wasn't attracted to her no matter how hard she tried (mainly cause she had an Amazon jungle between her legs which I find absolutely disgusting). It's not as easy as just having someone rub you, even if a sister as you mentioned. The only way that boy is gonna get hard by his sister rubbing him up, is if he's fantasizing about her. And that should tell you a lot just as the poor kid getting a hard-on in front of all those high school bullies.

- N
Thanks GOD that atleast one another guy is still straight, I though the Homo memetic virus has left me alone in a zombie world. But the question is did someone told U to be hetro instead of homo ? Even if something did , what do U think is the right thing for a kid to ask to be , A homo or hetro ?

You're wrong. Many male victims of child sexual abuse report feeling tremendously guilty that they got an erection or even ejaculated while being fondled by a pedophile. Erections are bodily reactions. Stimulate the penis, and it may become erect. There doesn't have to be any sexual desire involved. Thanks for being on the side of rape victims, this Baron Max can use the same argument to get away with most of the rapes, male or female.

Thanks GOD that atleast one another guy is still straight, I though the Homo memetic virus has left me alone in a zombie world. But the question is did someone told U to be hetro instead of homo ? Even if something did , what do U think is the right thing for a kid to ask to be , A homo or hetro ?

I wound up being a heterosexual naturally. And I don't care whether a person is heterosexual or homosexual, whether through natural means or if they later choose to become it.

Hell, who knows, I wouldn't rule out some day me ever doing something with a guy. Of course, I'm not attracted to guys, only girls, but if some day some chick wants to get freaky or something and it happens, who cares, it's no big deal. Sex is sex. Only get involved with what you can handle. And none of that would be because homosexuals got inside my head or anything like that. I just couldn't care less. I don't see what the big deal is. Am I supposed to be ashamed of something? Of what? Peer pressure is so grade school. Who cares what other's think.

It seems you have a big problem with two guys or two girls getting it on with one another, so you can't handle it. That's fine and I've no problem with it, but don't tell others what they can and cannot do with their personal lives.

- N

Thanks GOD that atleast one another guy is still straight, I though the Homo memetic virus has left me alone in a zombie world. But the question is did someone told U to be hetro instead of homo ? Even if something did , what do U think is the right thing for a kid to ask to be , A homo or hetro ?
You realize that homosexuality isn't a virus or a choosable thing, right? No one tells them how to be, it's just simply how they were born.

You realize that homosexuality isn't a virus or a choosable thing, right? No one tells them how to be, it's just simply how they were born.
Does the same apply to paedophiles?

What I think:

I'm SO freakin jealous. Grr.

Hehe. Punks.

That's about it.

Oh, besides that it's kind of messed up to me that they keep turning them in. Ungrateful snots (for the most part I mean, I'm sure there were some where the chick put undue pressure on them, bla bla, and that's not cool, but I'd guess that most of them try to score and got what they wanted).

Of course, this is a pretty shallow take on the subject, and a friend of mine almost had me convinced a few months ago that indeed this is unnacceptable behavior by the teachers, as they're supposed to be role models, etc. I'm sympathetic to the viewpoint but yet I still lean towards "get some and be cool about it, you ungrateful bastards". Hmm. Yeah I prolly suck.

Does the same apply to paedophiles?
Kinda, since that's a form of pyschosis.

You realize that homosexuality isn't a virus or a choosable thing, right? No one tells them how to be, it's just simply how they were born.

Well it CAN be a choosable thing.

- N

Never met a single gay dude that chose to be so.
On that matter, why would one want to choose to be homosexual, if gays are so rejected by mainstream society? Isn't it much more logical that they are born thusly?

Do you choose to be attracted to women, Neildo?

Rhianna Ellis, 24: New York City teacher who allegedly had a 10-month
affair with an 18-year-old, and allgedly gave birth to his baby.

Whats wrong with this?

You realize that homosexuality isn't a virus or a choosable thing, right? No one tells them how to be, it's just simply how they were born.

U been listening to them lying scientists again. Some of them are born that way sure. Excessive masturbation will make you go gay later in life. Other things can make you go gay. Gay is a condition of the body that is correctable.

Do you choose to be attracted to women, Neildo?

I just am.

What I said is that people CAN choose to be attracted to someone. That means that there are those that are born that way, but there are those that choose to be gay. To say it's ONLY either-or is stupid.

I am attracted to females. Always have. But what if I all of a sudden find or decide to find a guy attractive when I never have before? Or what if, as I mentioned earlier, that if some incident happens where I have sex with a guy and girl even though I'm not attracted to him. Does that all of a sudden mean I actually have been gay all these years? Yeah right.

People can do whatever they like without it all having to be "in the genes". People try to use the "I was born with it" excuse way too much. Everything always winds up being a problem in the genes are opposed to choice. :rolleyes:

- N

Fafnir665:


Rhianna Ellis, 24: New York City teacher who allegedly had a 10-month
affair with an 18-year-old, and allgedly gave birth to his baby.

Whats wrong with this?

Was he 18 at the time of the affair? If so, nothing is wrong, apart from abuse of the student-teacher relationship.


Neildo:


What I said is that people CAN choose to be attracted to someone. That means that there are those that are born that way, but there are those that choose to be gay. To say it's ONLY either-or is stupid.

Have you ever met anybody who told you they chose to be gay (as opposed to being born that way)?


I am attracted to females. Always have. But what if I all of a sudden find or decide to find a guy attractive when I never have before?

Has that ever happened to you? Is it likely to, do you think? Have you ever met anybody that has happened to?


Or what if, as I mentioned earlier, that if some incident happens where I have sex with a guy and girl even though I'm not attracted to him. Does that all of a sudden mean I actually have been gay all these years? Yeah right.

Depends. Are you having sex with the guy, or the girl, or both? Maybe you'd be bisexual. Or maybe you just like group sex.


People can do whatever they like without it all having to be "in the genes".

I'm not so sure. I don't think I could choose to be sexually attracted to men, for example.

I wound up being a heterosexual naturally. And I don't care whether a person is heterosexual or homosexual, whether through natural means or if they later choose to become it.

Hell, who knows, I wouldn't rule out some day me ever doing something with a guy. Of course, I'm not attracted to guys, only girls, but if some day some chick wants to get freaky or something and it happens, who cares, it's no big deal. Sex is sex. Only get involved with what you can handle. And none of that would be because homosexuals got inside my head or anything like that. I just couldn't care less. I don't see what the big deal is. Am I supposed to be ashamed of something? Of what? Peer pressure is so grade school. Who cares what other's think.

It seems you have a big problem with two guys or two girls getting it on with one another, so you can't handle it. That's fine and I've no problem with it, but don't tell others what they can and cannot do with their personal lives.

- N
Try Ansrin this,

1) Do U think its ok for guys like buddha1 who sees man as race to promote homo sexuality instead of guys being hetro ? I am asking about influencing young mind with homo virus on TV and everywhere possible. Think about it just like me for hetro that buddha is infecting here in sciforums with GAY being the right thing, Kids are already in this forum.

2) I dont mind about Lesbania they need something like man in the end to satisfy them physically.

3) Would like to put your hot rod into a hell called AssHole of a gay man, they think its fun; THis discussion itself is disgusting, and hence HOMO MEN.

You realize that homosexuality isn't a virus or a choosable thing, right? No one tells them how to be, it's just simply how they were born. Read the 1st point of my previous post.

Never met a single gay dude that chose to be so.
On that matter, why would one want to choose to be homosexual, if gays are so rejected by mainstream society? Isn't it much more logical that they are born thusly? SO U think its genetic ? So when U were 10 or 12, U started being hard at glance of a sexy horny man, is that anyones experience here ?

... Or what if, as I mentioned earlier, that if some incident happens where I have sex with a guy and girl even though I'm not attracted to him. Does that all of a sudden mean I actually have been gay all these years? Yeah right.... Then U r not a GAY or a Hetro, U r a mess called BiSexual. No one can trust U.

Anomalous:


1) Do U think its ok for guys like buddha1 who sees man as race to promote homo sexuality instead of guys being hetro ? I am asking about influencing young mind with homo virus on TV and everywhere possible. Think about it just like me for hetro that buddha is infecting here in sciforums with GAY being the right thing, Kids are already in this forum.

Has buddha1 convinced you to turn gay?


2) I dont mind about Lesbania they need something like man in the end to satisfy them physically.

You're obviously in that subclass of deluded men who consider the faux lesbianism they see on porn sites to be the same as the real thing.


3) Would like to put your hot rod into a hell called AssHole of a gay man, they think its fun; THis discussion itself is disgusting, and hence HOMO MEN.

I agree. Homophobia is disgusting.

Happeh- Fuck off, you're a retard. You make no sense.

Anomalous- No, it's not genetic. I just said, "IT IS NATURALLY OCCURING", i.e random. It is caused by random imbalance of hormones. I still have no clue what you are talking about, "when u were 10 or 12" and that such crap...you really should take a grammar lesson and learn how to spell. You would probably make more sense thusly.
To note buddha1 is a moron, who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. He's against both sexual orientations, apparently, considering his prior posts during his tenure as a sciforumer.
You, however, Anomalous, need to calm the fuck down and just think before saying random shit, and learn to accept people. That is the first step towards a free society.

Anomalous:

Has buddha1 convinced you to turn gay?

The question is a greate insult of my wits, What is Buddha1 , nothing but genetic garbage.



You're obviously in that subclass of deluded men who consider the faux lesbianism they see on porn sites to be the same as the real thing. Hey I dont care what U think, I enjoy them.



I agree. Homophobia is disgusting. Yes, I agree and I feel sorry for U that U have it, :D

As for me unlike yours my parents years ago as they passed away they thought me all the values I posses and I am gona die with them.

Happeh- Fuck off, you're a retard. You make no sense.

Anomalous- No, it's not genetic. I just said, "IT IS NATURALLY OCCURING", i.e random. It is caused by random imbalance of hormones. I still have no clue what you are talking about, "when u were 10 or 12" and that such crap...you really should take a grammar lesson and learn how to spell. You would probably make more sense thusly.
To note buddha1 is a moron, who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. He's against both sexual orientations, apparently, considering his prior posts during his tenure as a sciforumer.
You, however, Anomalous, need to calm the fuck down and just think before saying random shit, and learn to accept people. That is the first step towards a free society.
Hey cool off I may be chinese.

Thanks for the clue in my crusade against Homophobia. The hormonal imbalance may be the answer to my quest of identifing homos and systematicaly taking care of each and everyone of them.

Happeh- Fuck off, you're a retard. You make no sense.

Sure I make sense. You don't know anything is the problem.

Many gay men are gay because they are unbalanced. You can call it physical or energy imbalance. The want gay sex because of the energy imbalance. There are accompanying physical signs. Oddly enough, they are many of the same signs Happeh Theory predicts for excessive masturbators.

Some men also seek gay sex as a way of health relief. This is really just an offshoot of the imbalance. The unbalanced body causes the health problems. The gay sex offers some alleviation of the health problems.

Mostly it is about energy imbalance. The gay man does not have enough man inside of him. So he goes looking for another man so he can A) suck some man energy out of the other man, or B) get the other man to pump his rearend full of man energy. Afterwards, the gay man is just like a car that got filled up with gas. Only he got filled up with man energy.

That is what women do. That is why gay men are called women. Because they suck the energy out of men the same way women do.

Westerners do piss me off, when they conveniently distort male gender and sexuality be talking about heterosexuals and homosexuals, and then talking about 'homosexuals' as them. It's so convenient in denying and hiding one's own sexual feelings for men.

I'd love to see Anamalous live in the Greek or Roman times, heh.

- N

I'd love to see Anamalous live in the Greek or Roman times, heh.

- N So U think I am HomoPhobic, that would be a greate mistake made by a GAY and thinking so approaching me because I hope that happens and for my protection there will one GAY less in this world.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY

(I posted this in the thread "masculinity and men" but I think it is really relevant to the topic here)

Yesterday I heard a bunch of kids playing outside my apartment. They were big kids like 12 to 16 years. The girls and boys were playing together --- and since I've interacted with them for sometime I was taken aback and dismayed to find them talking about sex.

In my days, they would stop girls from playing with boys as soon as they reached puberty.

But today there are no restrictions on women. And this makes me think:

Women in heterosexual societies have it really good. The heterosexual society is particularly anti-man --- particularly masculine gendered men, and hostile to their needs, especially their special needs (i.e. when they don't concern women).

Women, especially masculine gendered women have all the freedom in the world in such a society. There are no social restrictions, no social responsibilities --- just unlimited rights and freedom --- which soon translate into undue priviliges and exploitative power over men. Their artificial socio-sexual power over men is also increased thousand times.

The society also indulges feminine gendered men --- homosexuals to some extent, but especially the heterosexuals (true ones), who are part of the vested interest group of a heterosexual society.

Why is it relevant here?

So U think I am HomoPhobic, that would be a greate mistake made by a GAY and thinking so approaching me because I hope that happens and for my protection there will one GAY less in this world.

That's funny. This coming from a guy who just praised me for being one of the few heterosexual men left on the earth. Gonna have to try harder with the insults, kid.

And you're not homophobic? Your posts spew of it. Didn't you mention somewhere that you belong to some white power or similar racist group in another thread? What, they're not homophobic? Lol.

- N

systematicaly taking care of each and everyone of them.
:bugeye:


So U think I am HomoPhobic, that would be a greate mistake made by a GAY and thinking so approaching me because I hope that happens and for my protection there will one GAY less in this world.
So, lemme get this straight:
1. You think that gays are ruining the world.
2. You think that gays should be "systematically taken care of".
3. You think that everyone who doesn't agree with you is homosexual.

Wow. Well, retard, homosexuals may be a bit odd and strange, but they aren't ruining the world. Humanity in general is ruining the world.
Systematic slaughter is just wrong and genocidal. So, we can tack "pyschopath" up to the long list of mental diseases you have, along with insanity and an irrational fear of gay people.
In additon, I am not gay. I disagree with you. Whoops, your theory that everyone who disagrees with you is gay just got shot in the head.

In conclusion, you are a closed-minded moron. And yes, that is an oxymoron.

:bla bla bla ...
Systematic slaughter is just wrong and genocidal. So, we can tack "pyschopath" up to the long list of mental diseases you have, along with insanity and an irrational fear of gay people
... bla bla bla.

Who said anything about slaughter. I was talking about treating them with harmone treatments, your imaginations are running wild. Get a mental checkup for your self.

I was talking about treating them with harmone treatments
Just as wrong. That'd be far too similar to eugenics. Simply accepting them as part of society would be easier, and probably better in the long run.

Just as wrong. That'd be far too similar to eugenics. Simply accepting them as part of society would be easier, and probably better in the long run. Why are U in opposition of treating them ? specialy if treatment can be developed.

Because they're born that way. It'd be wrong and unnatural to change people. Besides, they don't bother none.

Because they're born that way. It'd be wrong and unnatural to change people. Besides, they don't bother none. DO U feel the same about Child Rapist ? DO U think they too should be in society without treatments ? I am asking about curing people, not changing, they are already changed by nature in an unrequired fashion.

DO U feel the same about Child Rapist ?

Uh, *NEWSFLASH*

Child rapists cause harm to others, homosexuals don't. Well, unless you happen to be a homophobe who gets their feelings easily hurt such as yourself. I hope you didn't get butt-hurt as a child by some rampaging homosexual.

- N

Uh, *NEWSFLASH*

Child rapists cause harm to others, homosexuals don't. Well, unless you happen to be a homophobe who gets their feelings easily hurt such as yourself. I hope you didn't get butt-hurt as a child by some rampaging homosexual.

- N Poor thing called human, thinks from a self perspective.

Do U have anyidea what it must be like to be a Gay and take a no from every prospective man, in the end U have to rape another man if he dosent respond. Just as females get raped if the desperate man gets no from everyother woman.

Hence I will fix them all.

Wow. Well, retard, homosexuals may be a bit odd and strange, but they aren't ruining the world.


Sure they do. Wasn't it revealed that the King liked to take it in the butt? Didn't Mark Oaten just quit because of a homosexual affair? Wasn't Jeff Gannon a homosexual prostitute working in the white house? Wasn't Golan Cipel a homosexual who was blackmailing the governor of New Jersey? Isn't Barney Frank an openly homosexual congressman? Don't the world's rich people meet yearly at a place called Bohemian Grove? Isn't Bohemian Grove located in a notorious homosexual getaway?

How do you explain this? Front and Back.

http://www.happeh.com/Images/BushRove.jpg

So what do child rapists have to do with people who like to have sex with 15 year old people? I don't like the idea of having sex with 15 year olds, but they're old enough to know if they are willing or not. I think that consent was forcibly removed from them to torture them, not to improve their lives in any way. Calling it "rape" is using a term to prejudice people and manipulate them.

In other words, I think age of consent at 18 is just so only approved groups can screw teenagers over.

There is a gender inequality involved here, but I do not believe that it is properly addressed by seeking greater punishment for women who are involved with boys. I think it is better addressed by reducing or eliminating penalties for men who are involved with teenage girls.

Most stat. rape charges dont stick. Usually unless its something extreme, like a 30 year old and a 13 year old, the DA's dont even prosecute, becuase it would be pointless...

Most stat. rape charges dont stick. Usually unless its something extreme, like a 30 year old and a 13 year old, the DA's dont even prosecute, becuase it would be pointless...

Where did you hear/read that??? An adult having sex with a minor is a criminal offense ...the state MUST prosecute ...it's required by law for them to prosecute.

Please explain your statement and, if possible, provide some evidence for making it.

Baron Max

And then we get these high-profile prosecutions for what shouldn't even be a crime that are aimed at supporting efforts to remove the rights of adults. These things always do that. Adults are forbidden sex and sexually explicit literature because children might get a hold of it. They make it work as if adulthood is some looming disaster that has to be averted or delayed at all costs. This is why we have so many people in their twenties and on up whose mental development has been stunted in important ways. They do it on purpose. Removing adulthood from select people disables them from contributing meaningfully, so the people who retain the ability to grow up, however poorly, achieve dominance. You will notice, Fafnir, we have an anti-sexual president in a White House that gives passes to male prostitutes who then come and go when needed. He is not anti his own sexuality, and he's not anti allowing teenagers to have sex with the old men who he approves of. He is acting to keep it away from everyone else. The man who tells me that I cannot have sex with a 16 year old girl (as if I would even want to), then tells me that I can't have sex with a 30 year old (in a sideways manner they do this), he is the one who is likely to have sodomized pre-teens after knocking them out with alcohol or animal tranquilizers.

I put it in just that blunt a set of terms because those who pretend to be suspicious of us, those who organize society against those who would think and live more freely, those who use this kind of crap against all of us need to have it thrown back in their faces and pushed up their butts. The finger they point at us needs to be pointed back at them, with every attempt to make it a painful experience. They're the ones who need to have their feet held to the fire and a few other things too painful to describe. Why do you think that the screechy witch of the west types get away with so much that any one of them can get a passel of people arrested on totally trumped up charges? It's because they use this stuff for social control. They smell out people who are just a little too free with the exercise of their human rights for these tastes. They point the finger at a group who most likely are totally inoffensive, and being inoffensive is just part of their criminal nature, and bring the forces of Hell down upon them for not being righteous in exactly the correct way, for the crime of thinking that their being innocent and inoffensive entitles them to act without continuous fear of the God who loves us all so very much.

Where did you hear/read that??? An adult having sex with a minor is a criminal offense ...the state MUST prosecute ...it's required by law for them to prosecute.

Please explain your statement and, if possible, provide some evidence for making it.

Baron Max

Don't complain, Baron. They didn't prosecute you for where you had your dick.

Apparently Baron, you havn't been to court. The state isnt required to prosecute anything, the state posecutes what the DA feels it must prosecute. While the majority of crimes fall under this, stat. rape isnt one of them. If a 20 year old has sexual intercourse with a 16/17 year old, the DA usually does not prosecute. Thats why I noted that unless its something extreme, for instance anyone usually under the age of 16, having sexual intercourse with someone over 22 - 24 gets prosecuted. People may think that the court system is black and white in what it has to do, but it really isnt.

I remember one time I was in the courthouse and someone in my graduating class from highschool (he would have been 19 at the time) was in there for stat. rape on a 17 year old girl. The parents were trying to get him in trouble for it, but the DA plead him out at pretrial probation, meaning he didnt even have to go to trial, and pre-trial probation is erased from your record on the completion. I believe it was for one month. Basically, pre-trial probation says 'we think you may have done something wrong, but neither you nor I want to go through the process of this shit to prove anything, because its a waste of time to us both'.

I do not suggest going out there and commiting crimes to gain experience, but maybe go to a district courthouse and sit in for a few sessions? Its open to the public.

If a 20 year old has sexual intercourse with a 16/17 year old, the DA usually does not prosecute.

If you know that, then you have evidence/facts of such crimes taking place ...including what state, city and county. If so, please provide them here so I can see to it that justice is meted out appropriately and that DA and court be taken into custody to await trial for criminal behavior. Please provide your evidence/facts.


The parents were trying to get him in trouble for it, but the DA plead him out at pretrial probation, ...

If the parents and their attorney did NOT agree, then it could NOT have been accomplished! And just so you know, any "deal", such as pretrial probation, IS, in fact, considered "justice" ....so long as the prosecution agrees to it.

I'm still interested in the cases, evidence and facts for the situations that you'd noted in your first statement. Please provide it, and I'll see that justice is done appropriately.

Baron Max

Like I said Baron, go sit in on a few court sessions and see for yourself.

Like I said Baron, go sit in on a few court sessions and see for yourself.

So what ye're saying is that you don't have any proof or evidence for the outlandish statements that you made earlier, right? Didn't think so. :)

Baron Max

Like I said Baron, go sit in on a few court sessions and see for yourself.

..In other words, I think age of consent at 18 is just so only approved groups can screw teenagers over... I think boys and girls should be of consent age whenever they complete thie final degree. They must focus on study instead of fucking.

Mostly it is about energy imbalance. The gay man does not have enough man inside of him. So he goes looking for another man so he can A) suck some man energy out of the other man, or B) get the other man to pump his rearend full of man energy. Afterwards, the gay man is just like a car that got filled up with gas. Only he got filled up with man energy.
Interestingly most warrior societies in the ancient times did consider anal intercourse a way of ingraining manhood/ masculinity in adolescent boys --- as a rite of manhood.

The boys till adolescence used to live with the women's group. After reaching adolescence they were taken in the men's group (after the requisite manhood tests and initiations). And one important rite was that the boy was infused anally with the semen of an older youth with whom he was paired off. This was meant to symbolise the removing of femininity from the boy (he was believed to have acquired femininity by virtue of staying with women all these days!), and to infuse the boy with seeds of masculinity.

(Example: the tribal communities of Papa New Guniea).

Why is it relevant here?
It is relevant because it shows how homosexuality and heterosexuality are making men subservient to women.

Hey, BW, I can go on whole night with women; Ya if there is no disgusting homo in the room to enjoy watching me. Me and my women no males please when I am making love.
I don't know about homos (I am sure they have good tastes too!), but a real man will not want to puke at an ugly person like anamalous, leave alone touch him with a barge pole, he is really a psychological case, plus he is very old with grown up kids.

He has to be living in a world of illusion to believe that any man worth his name would even bear to be near him. Maybe a sexually deprived and sick person with extremely low tastes may do it.

I hope Homos too have a 'taste'. I am sure they would puke green and blue if they were to see Anamalous naked (ugghhh, he ruined my day by mentioning something like that --- I think he should be banned for saying such nauseating things!). I am sure Homos would rather do it with an animal. So much for his day dreaming of a 'gay' guy approaching him!

Interestingly most warrior societies in the ancient times did consider anal intercourse a way of ingraining manhood/ masculinity in adolescent boys --- as a rite of manhood.

The boys till adolescence used to live with the women's group. After reaching adolescence they were taken in the men's group (after the requisite manhood tests and initiations). And one important rite was that the boy was infused anally with the semen of an older youth with whom he was paired off. This was meant to symbolise the removing of femininity from the boy (he was believed to have acquired femininity by virtue of staying with women all these days!), and to infuse the boy with seeds of masculinity.

(Example: the tribal communities of Papa New Guniea).

Sounds like a round about way to justify child butt rape.

"Me big warrior anally infuse you with me powerful semen!"

Are you a member of NAMBLA?

Sounds like a round about way to justify child butt rape.

"Me big warrior anally infuse you with me powerful semen!"
Well there are no dearth of people here who support the rape of male 'child' at the hands of women!

And then most traditional societies have child marriages which is nothing less than child rape.

Many muslim societies have adult men marrying underage girls. That's child rape too!.

But you are ignoring the point here. The ancients knew nature much more than us. And if they did this it was not for nothing --- they knew the essence of masculinity.

That they knew nothing about Judeo-Christian-Islamic values about sex, and did not have the modern westernised middle class values, is something I can't do much about!


Are you a member of NAMBLA?
That's cool! :rolleyes:

That's a perfect way to discourage people from talking about truth. If one talks about facts related with sex between men, say "you're a homo", if one talks about issues of sex between boys and men, say "you're a member of NAMBLA?"

Perhaps you should tell all those men fighting for women's rights that they are women!

And all these men supporting the rape of children at the hands of women --- are they also members of something, or they don't have to be because the heterosexual society gives them ample room to exist in the mainstream.

Yeah! NAMBLA! Butt-rape! Awesome! Am I back in kindergarten, or what???

This is a very weighty conversation: there is much meat!

Never met a single gay dude that chose to be so.

Yet most heterosexuals choose to be so! I.e. if you don't consider the intense social pressures that they go through (since they are invisible and easy to ignore!)

What I think:

I'm SO freakin jealous. Grr.

Hehe. Punks.

That's about it.

Oh, besides that it's kind of messed up to me that they keep turning them in. Ungrateful snots (for the most part I mean, I'm sure there were some where the chick put undue pressure on them, bla bla, and that's not cool, but I'd guess that most of them try to score and got what they wanted).

Of course, this is a pretty shallow take on the subject, and a friend of mine almost had me convinced a few months ago that indeed this is unnacceptable behavior by the teachers, as they're supposed to be role models, etc. I'm sympathetic to the viewpoint but yet I still lean towards "get some and be cool about it, you ungrateful bastards". Hmm. Yeah I prolly suck.

That's an extremely wimpish and unmanly (as in anti-man) stand, masquerading as 'macho'!

It's only when men stop being dependant on such statements for a share of 'social masculinity' that they will think of accessing or developing their natural masculinity.

Do you choose to be attracted to women, Neildo?
Yet most men do choose to like women, or at least exaggerate their attraction several folds. Because a display of sexual attraction for women means 'social masculinity' and power, which we know is extremely important to men. The phenomenon has been proven beyond doubt in the thread heterosexuality is unnatural.

It's simple mathematics!

That's an extremely wimpish and unmanly (as in anti-man) stand, masquerading as 'macho'!

It's only when men stop being dependant on such statements for a share of 'social masculinity' that they will think of accessing or developing their natural masculinity.
Interestingly, this is exactly how peer pressure works in real life situation. Imagine how much effect it will have on a young lad who is eager to establish himself as a man in the world.

Men make such remarks almost unmindfully, in order to assert their 'social masculinity' and to appear man in a 'cheap' way, where they don't have to lift a finger for it.

They have been so trained to compete negatively with other men that they end up harming men as a race.

Being a man is not only about competition. It is more importantly about bonding, uniting with, relating with, understanding and supporting other men. What you get by sucking up to women and her sexual charms is fake, social manhood.

Well there are no dearth of people here who support the rape of male 'child' at the hands of women!

And then most traditional societies have child marriages which is nothing less than child rape.

Many muslim societies have adult men marrying underage girls. That's child rape too!.


It is scientific fact that girls mature in their teens while men mature in their 20's. It makes common sense for older men to marry younger women for fertility reasons.

It is only in the insane world of the west that acting as nature intended, older men protecting younger fertile women, that human nature is turned into "molestation".



But you are ignoring the point here. The ancients knew nature much more than us. And if they did this it was not for nothing --- they knew the essence of masculinity.

That they knew nothing about Judeo-Christian-Islamic values about sex, and did not have the modern westernised middle class values, is something I can't do much about!

This is silly. Yes the ancients knew more about life. In the end they were still human. In the end, the powerful always take the young they want for sex. Happens right now in the governments of all countries around the world. Spanish people using orphans as child sex slaves. George Bush the first involved in a child prostition scandal with the usual witness deaths. Allegations that Tony Blair was a spokesman for the war against Iraq because it was discovered that he had child sex. Mark Oaten in a scandal today over sex with young men.




That's cool! :rolleyes:

That's a perfect way to discourage people from talking about truth. If one talks about facts related with sex between men, say "you're a homo", if one talks about issues of sex between boys and men, say "you're a member of NAMBLA?"

Dood. I don't know what mental needs you have, but this stuff is craziness.

What you are asking for is your own dictionary that everyone around the world must obey. You want the entire world to define the word homosexual to mean what you want. Can you see that is crazy? You can invent your own word to give it the definition you want it to have. But to actually expect all of english society to change the definition of a word to please you? That makes no sense at all.

It is scientific fact that girls mature in their teens while men mature in their 20's. It makes common sense for older men to marry younger women for fertility reasons.

It is only in the insane world of the west that acting as nature intended, older men protecting younger fertile women, that human nature is turned into "molestation".
It is also a scientific fact that young men, especially in their adolescence and youth have a strong sexual need for men (Psycholgists call it the homosexual 'phase'!)

So it makes all the sense for men to have relations with other men in their youth and then get married to girls in their late youth or early middle age.

That way they will get the chance to be men.


This is silly. Yes the ancients knew more about life. In the end they were still human. In the end, the powerful always take the young they want for sex. Happens right now in the governments of all countries around the world. Spanish people using orphans as child sex slaves. George Bush the first involved in a child prostition scandal with the usual witness deaths. Allegations that Tony Blair was a spokesman for the war against Iraq because it was discovered that he had child sex. Mark Oaten in a scandal today over sex with young men.
a.) Why don't you learn to argue properly? It's really annoying when you get examples out of context. None of the examples you've given above prove anything but present us with your biases.

b.) I don't see the point about who is exploiting whom if both the younger and the older youth are happy about it.



Dood. I don't know what mental needs you have, but this stuff is craziness.

What you are asking for is your own dictionary that everyone around the world must obey. You want the entire world to define the word homosexual to mean what you want. Can you see that is crazy? You can invent your own word to give it the definition you want it to have. But to actually expect all of english society to change the definition of a word to please you? That makes no sense at all.
You are clearly mistaken. It's not just about languages. It is about distortion of truth through dubious concepts.

Lemme ask you, does your culture have a word for 'homosexual'?

When the entire world is speaking or using English, it cannot just reflect west's concepts and worldview? And even English did not have the word before the end of nineteenth century. So its also about a whole lot of conspiracy!

And Happeh, don't forget that it is not so much about English as it is about science and what is nature and what is not!

So when a word is inappropriate, it needs to be pointed out.

It is also a scientific fact that young men, especially in their adolescence and youth have a strong sexual need for men (Psycholgists call it the homosexual 'phase'!)

So it makes all the sense for men to have relations with other men in their youth and then get married to girls in their late youth or early middle age.

That way they will get the chance to be men.

I have not seen this scientific fact anywhere. From my personal knowledge, young men would screw squirrels. They are sex machines. That does not mean they are really squirrel lovers deep down. It means there were no female humans readily available.

If the tribe says "you have sex with the young girls we kill you", then the men may develop tastes for other men. Like in the USA right now. You have sex with young women, you are bad and need to go to jail. So right now the USA is in the midst of the entire country turning gay. Every show on TV has a gay or is about a gay or is celebrating or proselytizing gay.

Look at other people. Asians, Muslims, Hispanics all have sex with young girls. You don't see their major TV shows promoting gay as the best way to the future.



a.) Why don't you learn to argue properly? It's really annoying when you get examples out of context. None of the examples you've given above prove anything but present us with your biases.

Properly as in buddha friendly? No thanks.



b.) I don't see the point about who is exploiting whom if both the younger and the older youth are happy about it.

If you take heroin and stick it in someone's arm, then ask them if they are happy, they will say yes. They are on drugs. If you stick your penis in someones hiney and ask them if they like it, they will say yes, they are in sexual satisfaction.

If you had treated them right and shown them sex with a women, instead of taking advantage of them and poking them in the hiney, they would say the sex with the woman was what they wanted. They only say they like the man sex because that is what they know and are familiar with.



Lemme ask you, does your culture have a word for 'homosexual'?

When the entire world is speaking or using English, it cannot just reflect west's concepts and worldview? And even English did not have the word before the end of nineteenth century. So its also about a whole lot of conspiracy!

Sure.

Fag. Buttpumper. Fudgepacker. Cocksucker. Dicksucker. Pervert. Gay. Penis Polisher. Cock Gobbler. Girly man. Fairy. Wimp. Pussy. Woman. Parasite. Fagosite. Energy suckers.

I think much of the english language changed in the nineteenth century. We are not speaking nineteenth century english now. I don't think that is a conspiracy.

That's an extremely wimpish and unmanly (as in anti-man) stand, masquerading as 'macho'!

Perhaps you're not at all in touch with a side of you that simply wants the nasty grind with anything remotely fine. I am to some degree. I find often that impulse is at odds with socially acceptable practice. That statement was a confession of my own confused judgement on the issue.


It's only when men stop being dependant on such statements for a share of 'social masculinity' that they will think of accessing or developing their natural masculinity.

Perhaps you misunderstand or presume too much. Apparently you simply can't relate. That's fine.

I have not seen this scientific fact anywhere. From my personal knowledge, young men would screw squirrels. They are sex machines. That does not mean they are really squirrel lovers deep down. It means there were no female humans readily available.

If the tribe says "you have sex with the young girls we kill you", then the men may develop tastes for other men. Like in the USA right now. You have sex with young women, you are bad and need to go to jail. So right now the USA is in the midst of the entire country turning gay. Every show on TV has a gay or is about a gay or is celebrating or proselytizing gay.

Look at other people. Asians, Muslims, Hispanics all have sex with young girls. You don't see their major TV shows promoting gay as the best way to the future.
You're crazy man. You don't know how logical discussions are conducted. It's a waste of time to meddle with you!


Properly as in buddha friendly? No thanks.
Properly, as a person giving his time to a forum like sciforums should do! If you just want to vent your views, I'm not interested, especially when they are so far removed from reality.

An example:

If you take heroin and stick it in someone's arm, then ask them if they are happy, they will say yes.

Now, I'm sure, noone has talked about anything even closer to manipulating the experiencing sensations of anyone.


If you stick your penis in someones hiney and ask them if they like it, they will say yes, they are in sexual satisfaction.
That is what I've been saying !:rolleyes: But the whole concept of 'heterosexuality' doesn't acknowledge that. It says people are incapable of enjoying eroticism from same-sex.


If you had treated them right and shown them sex with a women, instead of taking advantage of them and poking them in the hiney, they would say the sex with the woman was what they wanted.
a.) something which is natural should come naturally (it will at the right time!). If it has to be taught, it is not natural --- at least not for that time.

b.) Societies have been showing youth how to have sex with women for ages, and they have been discouraging them from sex with men for an equal amount of time.

Why is it that they still have to use such extensive mechanism of rewards and extreme punishments to make men 'heterosexual'? It shows that what you're saying is utter rubbish.


They only say they like the man sex because that is what they know and are familiar with.
a.) the boys in these tribal societies grow up with women. It's only when they reach a certain stage in adolescence that they are transferred to the male group. How come they did not develop a liking for girls earlier?

b.) In many parts of the Muslim world, e.g. in some parts of Afghanistan, it is an acceptable practise for men to have younger men as lovers. The male lovers are kept even when the older youth gets married. The men are known to indulge their male lovers a lot. And this practise is like a universal one --- i.e. it doesn't happen just with a few 'gay' guys.

Clearly, you're wrong again.


Sure.

Fag. Buttpumper. Fudgepacker. Cocksucker. Dicksucker. Pervert. Gay. Penis Polisher. Cock Gobbler. Girly man. Fairy. Wimp. Pussy. Woman. Parasite. Fagosite. Energy suckers.
a.) Those are English words. So you're not from the non-western world. You sounded like you were from out of that part.

We know that the western world has coined the concept of 'homosexuality'. But since no other culture has ever known such a concept --- even when it is regarding such a basic part of our existence, its validity is highly suspect (but that is just one reason!).

b.) these are words of abuse. Societies use words of abuse when they want to discourage people off something. They do it to put pressure on men to desist from their natural needs. They proves nothing though. By force, you can make people say that "the sun comes out in the night"! The truth will not change just on account of what you make things out to be.


I think much of the english language changed in the nineteenth century. We are not speaking nineteenth century english now.
It is not just a matter of language. It is also a matter of how we want our society to be, and what mechanisms we use to put pressures on our men. Language is just a handy tool! If they say there is something like 'homosexuality' they should be able to prove it. (I've already disproved that there is no heterosexuality in nature!)


I don't think that is a conspiracy.
We are not interested in what you think! We want to know what is happening out there in reality --- behind all those forced masks of heterosexuality. And we want to know why?

The only way that boy is gonna get hard by his sister rubbing him up, is if he's fantasizing about her. And that should tell you a lot just as the poor kid getting a hard-on in front of all those high school bullies.
I once read a case where the police locked up a 20 year old man with his mother, stripped them in lock up and then forced them to perform incest!

Most so-called 'homos' in my society end up getting mattied and rearing children. The phenomenon is not unheard of in western society either!

Can you tell me how all that is possible?

And that should tell you a lot just as the poor kid getting a hard-on in front of all those high school bullies.
No one gets a hard on when they feel humiliated and threatened --- whether they are what you call heterosexuals or homosexuals (sic and sick!).

Notwithstanding the above examples, yes erections do give us an insight about what the man finds sexually exciting and what he does not --- especially, when they are involuntary.

And talking about erections, let me narrate some examples, mostly from my work experience, that will shed a light on male sexual nature.

Example 1:

An 18 year old boy narrated how he was made to strip in front of a female officer (she was young too!) along with 20 other boys for a medical test in the army. He felt extremely bad about it. He says the entire group hesitated in pulling their underwears down. And had to be ordered sternly.

He says the female officer inspected everyone's penis closely (without touching it). Only one of the candidates got an erection.

Does it tell us anything about the heterosexuality of men, especially when they are young?

......

In my work I sometimes have to examine penises (now don't laugh, its all part of my work!). And here is what I have observed.

Most of the men that come to me for counseling (or with sexual problems including STDs) are young --- between 15 to 35 yrs (actually most between 18 to 25 years). I'd say that in 80% - 90% of the cases the men get an erection the moment they bring their stuff out!

This is one of the things that made me take the notion that almost everyone has sexual feelings for men, seriously.

I have tried to analyse this phenomenon. And I have found that this is directly linked to how macho I feel or look. In the period (2000 - 2001) that I felt/ looked the most macho, almost 100% of men got an erection --- it was unbelievable!

I know that this happens in the west too, with people who call themselves 'heterosexuals'. But I guess the incidence would be much less in the west --- because the heterosexual identity works as a psychological barrier, and so does the strong social stigma that exists in the west. Mental anxiety can interfere in with erections in a major way!

So what does all that tell us about male sexual nature? Is everybody a 'homo' then? In that case it would be absurd to say that someone is gay. Because it would be like saying he is two-eyed!

We are not interested in what you think! We want to know what is happening out there in reality --- behind all those forced masks of heterosexuality. And we want to know why?

You know Buddha? That is what every thinks about you.

And you ought to remove that hamster from your hiney. The one that you are referring to as we? That is animal abuse.

You know Buddha? That is what every thinks about you.

I wonder why you find yourself qualified to testify as to "what everyone thinks". You also claim to represent "the silent, thinking majority". As if you are privy to their thoughts.

It's rather obvious that you are not.

IMO, this is indicative of megalomania. I think your ego is rampant.

*coughnerdoverlordcough*

And that should tell you a lot just as the poor kid getting a hard-on in front of all those high school bullies.
”

No one gets a hard on when they feel humiliated and threatened --- whether they are what you call heterosexuals or homosexuals (sic and sick!).

That's actually my point.

If that kid gets a hard-on while being humiliated and threatened from the older high school bullies, it means that boy isn't being humiliated and is instead enjoying being forced by those older males which means he's probably a homosexual the same way a boy who gets a hard-on by his sister means he's fantasizing about her.

However, as you said:

"I once read a case where the police locked up a 20 year old man with his mother, stripped them in lock up and then forced them to perform incest!"

I thought people don't get hard-ons when being threatened and humiliated as you mentioned? If that is so, then that 20 year old male that had sex with his mother must have been fantasizing about her to get erect and fool around with her, otherwise his lil willy would have shrivelled up in embarassment being threatened and all.

- N

That's actually my point.

If that kid gets a hard-on while being humiliated and threatened from the older high school bullies, it means that boy isn't being humiliated and is instead enjoying being forced by those older males which means he's probably a homosexual the same way a boy who gets a hard-on by his sister means he's fantasizing about her.

However, as you said:

"I once read a case where the police locked up a 20 year old man with his mother, stripped them in lock up and then forced them to perform incest!"

I thought people don't get hard-ons when being threatened and humiliated as you mentioned? If that is so, then that 20 year old male that had sex with his mother must have been fantasizing about her to get erect and fool around with her, otherwise his lil willy would have shrivelled up in embarassment being threatened and all.

- N
Neildo, I don't think you're getting it!

First of all, the above posts by me where I have talked about how 90 - 100% of men got erections while being examined quite strongly refutes your claims of someone being a homo --- it seems the majority are homos --- by your definition. Or no one is!

Second, although voluntary erection does not come about when one is humiliated, but when you prod someone after a period of time the person will get an erection. That's how our anatomy works! Otherwise, there was no way you could force men to be heterosexuals!

Let me tell you about an incident this gay guy narrated. This friend of him told him that he could never get an erection with another guy. They took it up as a challenge, and the gay guy won!

Buddha1.

Maybe you're just giving off a chick pheremone or something. I've been probed by male doctors and no offense intended, but I never sported wood.

Maybe you just have a sublime ass or something? Hehe.

Have you validated your numbers? Surely someone could gather data from other sources to verify your assertion? I find it to be hard to believe.

Buddha1.

Maybe you're just giving off a chick pheremone or something. I've been probed by male doctors and no offense intended, but I never sported wood.

Maybe you just have a sublime ass or something? Hehe.

Have you validated your numbers? Surely someone could gather data from other sources to verify your assertion? I find it to be hard to believe.
I've shared what I have observed. It is for you to draw your conclusions!

I don't think when men feel attraction for other men, they want or like their ass or to fuck them --- for all your dismissive stereotyping. My observation (not talked about here) also strongly points to the fact that the primary object of men's sexual attraction for each other is 'penis' rather than the 'butt' --- and it surely doesn't mean that they want it inside their butt --- that is just a 'heterosexual' propaganda that sex has to involve penetration of somekind!

And don't forget that my observation strongly says that men seem to be attracted more to masculinity in other men. They would be wary of allowing themselves an erection in front of someone they consider less masculine than themselves.

What you have observed is particular to you. I want to know if there has been any corroboration of the numbers, as I find your observation pretty difficult to believe.

You don't have a sense of humor at all do you?

As far as your observation about the key point of male attraction to one another, my comment was a joke. Lighten up.

Have you asked any other penis examiners if they have similar experience with frequent wood of the examinees? (that's a serious question posed jokingly, as I'm a dork and find humor wherever I look)

If you have not, then I'll just be on my way.

Buddha1,

May I ask what work you do which allows you to examine penis'?

What you have observed is particular to you. I want to know if there has been any corroboration of the numbers, as I find your observation pretty difficult to believe.
Wesmorris, the laws of nature don't change for me or any particular individual.

Having said that, yes there are several factors that work.

a. My society is very accepting of male eroticism for other men (at least if it happens without talking about it!) and accepts even expects men to have such feelings for men. It is considered a part of 'masculinity' and men would be expected to feel sexual if in such a situation with another man.

b. Outside our office, you'd find posters (amongst a lot of others that talk about men's gender and sexual health issues) that treat the issue of male-male sexuality with acceptance --- as a masculine and mainstream feeling. That can work to put people at ease about their suppressed sexuality --- which suddenly comes to the fore when you've to show your penis to a man.

c. Of course, the sexual aura of the examiner would also count --- and in my analysis the biggest component of this aura for straight men is the 'straightness' of the examiner --- besides other things. (here by straightness I don't mean heterosexuality, but masculinity, including social masculinity. Heterosexuality would become important only as far as it is considered important for social masculinity, and a lack of it is considered detrimental to acquiring social masculinity).



You don't have a sense of humor at all do you?

As far as your observation about the key point of male attraction to one another, my comment was a joke. Lighten up.
I have a sense of humour, but male sexual interest in men has been denigrated a lot, and men joke about it a lot to remove their discomfort in peer groups --- therefore, as someone who cares a lot about men's issues, it is not something I can just joke about --- especially when I know its power to scare men away from their same-sex needs.

But I have not really minded your joke and I do take it in a spirit of comaraderie!

Have you asked any other penis examiners if they have similar experience with frequent wood of the examinees? (that's a serious question posed jokingly, as I'm a dork and find humor wherever I look)

If you have not, then I'll just be on my way.
Like I said, Wesmorris, the laws of nature don't change for me or any particular individual.

I think I spoke to a Doctor about it, and he said that it is a common thing, although not as common as my experience. I think with doctors it is a completely different scenario than with counsellors. I was myself examined a couple of times by Doctors/ other staff, even prodded and touched --- but except once I've never had an erection --- that too when I was prodded for a long time by a lower staff who was examining me. It's just too formal with them.

I have read internet sites about this phenomenon, and it seems the thing is common in the west too, but of course the frequency is much less than what I've experienced, but way too much than what the heterosexual ideology would have us believe. But then like I said the social conditioning, the sexual and more importantly the 'masculinity' mores of the society --- all has a lot of effect on the phenomenon.

Also you have to understand that my observation about men universally having sexual need for men has been corroborated with a horde of other experiences in various fields and aspects of life.

Buddha1,

May I ask what work you do which allows you to examine penis'?
I'm a counsellor on sexual health. People come to me with a horde of sexual problems (and other problems of course). In my country sexual health counsellors are also trained to screen and in some cases prescribe medicines to people with STDs, because Doctors are in short supply --- at least in AIDS prevention programmes.

Dr. Buddha! I have this thing on my thingy. Would you.. could you.. look at it please?

LARF LARF LARF!!!!

Dr. Buddha! I have this thing on my thingy. Would you.. could you.. look at it please?

LARF LARF LARF!!!!
Don't laugh. It's part of my work. And I'm sharing it only because it sheds a light on human sexuality.

Of course it's been three years since I have done one to one counseling (now the few counseling I do is on phone!). And I don't think the response will be quite the same as earlier.

I don't know why those sex disease doctors pretend they are doctors. They just want the opportunity to play with sex organs.

I went to one of those sex disease places when I was a kid. I was a sheltered teenager. The guy says he needs to check for stuff from the penis so I sit there while he does his thing.

Years later, after I had occasion to go to another sex clinic, I had a realization. The first doctor was a pervert. He masturbated me basically. I bet he did that to all the sheltered teenagers.

I had the same test the second time I went years later and the doctor barely touched me. That first guy was a pervert playing with my dick for minutes. I didn't know any better.

It's OK Buddha. Now we know why you have 20 threads going on about homosexuality.

I gotta say: sexual need is psychological. Since the individual's mind is at least in part conditioned by their society, need is somewhat defined by the society. In other words, what you experience as men's sexual need is not necessarily so in terms of the human animal, but in terms of a society that is accepting of it. As such it would be just as real that in a society where it is not as accepted, the need as you percieve it might not be as real.

You follow that?

Such as asians being attracted to armpits, while we're attracted to tits and ass.

Looking to the post above my last, I think the root of Happeh's obsession is unwittingly revealed.

I am a psychic. Did I tell you that. I was laughing hours ago at the joke you just made.

I am not really psychic. What I do is easy really.

I think to myself, "If I was a scum sucking piece of fecal matter, what would I do in this situation?".

My answers are 99% correct about what the other person does. I knew when I wrote that story that someone would say what you did. That is how people are.

I gotta say: sexual need is psychological. Since the individual's mind is at least in part conditioned by their society, need is somewhat defined by the society. In other words, what you experience as men's sexual need is not necessarily so in terms of the human animal, but in terms of a society that is accepting of it. As such it would be just as real that in a society where it is not as accepted, the need as you percieve it might not be as real.

You follow that?
You are right that human needs, including sexual needs are in part created by the society. In fact, I can say that society has the greatest influence in deciding our needs, which can sometimes go totally against our biological nature.

Lets understand this process in detail. Society cannot create anything which the nature has not provided for. It can extend the nature's limits to some extent, and even to do that it has to apply continuous and enormous pressures. (please refer to the thread nature vs nurture).

Our sexual need is basically biological. But society can artificially add social value to certain human needs and thus humans will seek that, even if it goes against their basic nature.

My society only accepts same-sex desires marginally. It doesn't validate such desires, it just accepts that they're there. But we are supposed to fight against them and it is part of 'proving' that we are men. :rolleyes: The west is only different in that it doesn't even acknowledge that men have such a need.

My society does allow a superficial expression of such desires on the sly as long as men perform their basic social duty of getting married and procreating.

But my society does not add any positive value to it, nor does it put any pressures on men to relate sexually with other men. Even if it did, it can not create a desire in them which does not already exist.

But whether in the east or the west, the societies add immense artificial social value to sex with women. Plus they apply enormous pressures on men to have sex with women. Now this doesn't create a sexual desire for women, though men do extend it as far as possible (beyond its natural limit) and then pretend the rest.

I don't know why those sex disease doctors pretend they are doctors. They just want the opportunity to play with sex organs.

I went to one of those sex disease places when I was a kid. I was a sheltered teenager. The guy says he needs to check for stuff from the penis so I sit there while he does his thing.

Years later, after I had occasion to go to another sex clinic, I had a realization. The first doctor was a pervert. He masturbated me basically. I bet he did that to all the sheltered teenagers.

I had the same test the second time I went years later and the doctor barely touched me. That first guy was a pervert playing with my dick for minutes. I didn't know any better.

It's OK Buddha. Now we know why you have 20 threads going on about homosexuality.
Sick and pervert minds always think sick! I don't think I need to waste my time doing any explanations as we all know by now who and what Happeh is! I mean Leopold got banned because he couldn't help abusing happeh! I am trying to restrain myself in order to avoid being banned. But I admit, its hard. The guy is not only insane, he is sick and disgusting!

Our sexual need is basically biological. But society can artificially add social value to certain human needs and thus humans will seek that, even if it goes against their basic nature.
Societies can also put people off certain natural needs of theirs by attaching artificial negative values to them. E.g. many 'religious' men with strong sexual need for men may make them hostile towards such needs.

It's been proven that men who have what the west calls 'homophobia' harbour strong sexual need for men, and are often aware of this need and are not wary of fulfilling them secretly.

Sick minds always think sick! I don't think I need to waste my time doing any explanations as we all know by now who and what Happeh is!

An insightful man who sees thru the smoke to the meat an potatos underneath.



I mean Leopold got banned because he couldn't help abusing happeh! I am trying to restrain myself in order to avoid being banned. But I admit, its hard. The guy is not only insane, he is sick and disgusting!

Leopold was banned? About time. He posted 10 messages of hate in a row in my thread. Then he posted another 5.

Using those words that describe yourself against me will not change your self image Buddha. Sorry.

Just admit you like the weenee, and admit that some people will never like you for it. So what? No matter what you do, someone, somewhere will not like it. Stop trying to force people to respect you. People are shits. You will find maybe 5 people in your whole life who will give you what you desire.

Leopold was banned? About time. He posted 10 messages of hate in a row in my thread. Then he posted another 5.

don't worry i'm back
those 15 messages of hate were questions that you couldn't answer
how would you know anyway?
you posted twice that you had me on ignore
what are you saying, they were messages of hate because you wanted to say it?

Leopold is just jealous he couldnt get lay his teacher back in pre-school

Also, WTF do three or four high-profile cases become an epidemic? Not only has this sort of thing been going on forever, without any sort of damage to society to justify the nasty things they are doing to people who are caught at it (and horrible damage caused by the enforcers of morality who never seem to care what they destroy), three or four cases do not constitute a rash or an epidemic whatever it is that you are talking about. The people who act like it does are screwing us, on purpose.

How can a sexy female teacher screwing a willing (oh hell yes!) 13,14,15,... yr old student be damaging to anything but the egos of the rest of us wondering why our teacher didn't screw us? Oh man! If I could go back and convince my 9th grade spanish teacher to do me... Oh man...!

Well, a lot of people know negative things about my character here, but the kind of lunacy that I am talking about makes me look both rock-solid sane. The stupidity that I am talking about, by comparison, makes me look like a super-genius. There really are forces that deliberately make the law and society do the absolute stupidest, most insane, and sickest things that they can think up, even during times when we are doing the best we can to make it look as if people live in an age of reason and individual freedom.

There is something wrong with people who can seriously be that damaged and that psycho about a teenager having sex with an adult. Of course, they turn around and tell us that there is something wrong with people who can tolerate it, but what would that thing be? Rationality? The funny thing is, it seems to me that the reasons that are most important to the people who oppose it are nonsensical. Unwanted pregnancies would seem to top the list, but then we find the pregnancy itself not treated as a crime but the fact that the pregnancy is a sign "that a crime was commited." Aren't we just right back to who was offended and why they sghould take offense? Aren't we back to where the reasons they give, none of them, really matter, escept that they are "just offended" and "it's just the thought of it"? Every reason they give is a diversion, and then the real reason becomes a diversion, and then they really are just running us around in circles. I think that's the original intent, I really do. I think they just intend to run us around, screw us around, just to hurt and humiliate us, use us up, take our lives away from us, and I think this is the handle they swing us by.

How can a sexy female teacher screwing a willing (oh hell yes!) 13,14,15,... yr old student be damaging to anything but the egos of the rest of us wondering why our teacher didn't screw us? Oh man! If I could go back and convince my 9th grade spanish teacher to do me... Oh man...!

And I've got to say, in direct reply to this, that I can handle the fact that I couldn't have sex with any of my teachers. I don't have revenge motives against females of any age who didn't want to have sex with me. A lot of these men, and some women, are wound up so tight about this that it is a personal affront, worthy of blood vendetta against everyone of a certain gender, if they are refused or sexually frustrated. This takes all sorts of forms, too, and one of those forms is the pretence of enforcement of morality. This explains how it becomes to deadly and twisted because it is propelled by a revenge motive that never can be satisfied.

How can a sexy female teacher screwing a willing (oh hell yes!) 13,14,15,... yr old student be damaging to anything but the egos of the rest of us wondering why our teacher didn't screw us? Oh man! If I could go back and convince my 9th grade spanish teacher to do me... Oh man...!
The same as when a macho 6 footer when he has sex with a willing 13 or 14 or 15 year old becomes extremely damaging to the society.

But the most important reason is that in the present scenario it is just not possible to know if the willingness in the case of female-male sex is real. When there are such extreme pressures on young people to prove their 'masculinity' (in heterosexual societies prove their 'straight' status) by having sex with women. We know that the majority of these cases is where boys are pressurised by the culture to agree to exploitative sex. Remember: BOYS SAY YES TO WOMEN WHEN THEY MEAN TO SAY NO!

Interestingly, Men/ boys also say 'no' to men when they want to say 'yes', though they signal their 'yes' in other hidden ways. This makes presenting male sex with willing younger males look like the real crime, while real cases of female to male exploitation go scot free because the BOYS ARE SEEN AS HAVING LIKED IT.

Interestingly, Men/ boys also say 'no' to men when they want to say 'yes', though they signal their 'yes' in other hidden ways. This makes presenting male offenders involved with males look like the real culprits, while real cases of female to male exploitation go scot free because the BOYS ARE SEEN AS HAVING LIKED IT.

I can ALWAYS count on you to say such things! :p

In seriousness, there is probably quite a bit of truth in this statement.

I've edited the above post so pl. read it again!

How can a sexy female teacher screwing a willing (oh hell yes!) 13,14,15,... yr old student be damaging to anything but the egos of the rest of us wondering why our teacher didn't screw us? Oh man! If I could go back and convince my 9th grade spanish teacher to do me... Oh man...!

America.. FUCK YEAH!

Man this is my instinct almost verbatum. Get your fuck on and stop your whining you pussies.

Then again, some boys are "sensitive" and can actually be "damaged" (assuming there is such a thing) by the intense emotions for a "role model" that is supposed to be showing them how to behave.

While my instinct says "what a bunch of pussies to think such a thing", I cannot entirely refute the point.

On the side supporting you however, is not "damage" one's birthright? Is it not an integral part of life to do things that are weird and challenging... to follow your circumstance? It is arguable that most great things that have been accomplished have been done in internal retaliation to percieved circumstance. Like an "I'll show them" kind of thing or a better or worse variant on that theme.

Then again to counter that, it seems that regardless should an adult, who is responsible for themselves, be demonstrating this potentially negative behavior to children or "youths" in their care?

IMO, the problem is the subjectivity of the deal. For some boys, fucking the teacher would be a great fucking thing. A badge of honor that could be a great memory for them their whole life, at least a great memory and who knows what kind of good things it could mean personally to the kid. On the other hand, it could be that the get ends up all fucked up from it because they weren't so stable in the first place, and the teacher who is supposed to be taking care of them fucks them up worse.

That makes in a tough subject so society ends up having to deal with it as an aggregate basically, since each case cannot feasibly be properly addressed, we have to pick somethign and go with it even if it's wrong in some cases. What say you?

You are right that human needs, including sexual needs are in part created by the society. In fact, I can say that society has the greatest influence in deciding our needs, which can sometimes go totally against our biological nature.

Hey aren't you the guy who called me a panzy or something before? Hehe.. :) I agree with the above as a generalization.


Lets understand this process in detail. Society cannot create anything which the nature has not provided for. It can extend the nature's limits to some extent, and even to do that it has to apply continuous and enormous pressures. (please refer to the thread nature vs nurture).

Our sexual need is basically biological.

I'll buy this, but implemented subjectively the need is damned near impossible to separate from the desire such that we can examine each for what it is. I think some guys are prone to cock and some not, some buy society, some by their own natural expression of their biology. But it's also easy to argue that a MAN doesn't NEED cock, as cock is for vagina and propogation. I'm just sayin. I think there's a smidge of truth to the latter there, but ultimately the subjective expression of biology and its impact on the individual's psychology leaves plenty of room for cock hungry men IMO. I mean, all humans are .. I think female, by default. The expression of a gene or something like 8 weeks in determines sex. Sure they are pre-destined for the most part to be whatever sex happens at that eight week thing or whatever, because it's a consequence of the interaction between the two contributor's DNA... but for that time we are all basically the default gender from one perspective. I think at minimum, that leave plenty of room for all kinds of expressions of sexual identity later in life.


But society can artificially add social value to certain human needs and thus humans will seek that, even if it goes against their basic nature.

In general of course, in the specific, some more than others..


My society only accepts same-sex desires marginally. It doesn't validate such desires, it just accepts that they're there. But we are supposed to fight against them and it is part of 'proving' that we are men. :rolleyes: The west is only different in that it doesn't even acknowledge that men have such a need.

Generally speaking I'll buy it okay. I'm not sure about the distinction between need and desire though. Seems like a very fuzzy line.


My society does allow a superficial expression of such desires on the sly as long as men perform their basic social duty of getting married and procreating.

Well, that would make perfect sense in terms of evolutionary psychology no? It seems natural to me that a species capable of placing value on things would value the mechanisms that lead to the perpetuation of the species mroe than the individual's sexual desire/need. Is it fair? Not really, but it does make sense to me.


But my society does not add any positive value to it, nor does it put any pressures on men to relate sexually with other men. Even if it did, it can not create a desire in them which does not already exist.

Which makes perfect sense in terms of what I just said...

IMO, it's easier if you think of humans as "complicated apes".


But whether in the east or the west, the societies add immense artificial social value to sex with women.

The term "artificial" in that context is highly debatable, but I think I know what you mean and don't think you're necessarily incorrect.


Plus they apply enormous pressures on men to have sex with women. Now this doesn't create a sexual desire for women, though men do extend it as far as possible (beyond its natural limit) and then pretend the rest.

I'm sure you're right in some cases. In others much less so I'm also sure.

Wesmoris, even though you've quoted superluminal, why does it seem to me that you're actually talking to me? :confused:

Then again, some boys are "sensitive" and can actually be "damaged" (assuming there is such a thing) by the intense emotions for a "role model" that is supposed to be showing them how to behave.

While my instinct says "what a bunch of pussies to think such a thing", I cannot entirely refute the point.
Unfortunately, we all know that it is not the 'pussies' but the 'macho'/ tough kinds who seek to conform more to the pressures of 'social masculinity'. But in the final analysis, no one escapes from it.

We had this stall on mascuilinity in South Africa in a conference. An American middle aged man comes to us and pointing to the posters talking about pressures on men, says with an heterosexual 'air', "We don't have any such pressures in Americal"......then goes on to say that he doesn't feel any such pressures. When my female colleague asked him if in his country men can say 'no' to a woman who approaches them for sex, without feeling less of a man, he thought for a moment and then said "No!" and then went his way!

Let me tell you, that given the nature of male pressures, it is actually the 'softer' males who can say 'no' to women without feeling any less of themselves as a human being (they don't often feel a lot manly in the first place!).

On the side supporting you however, is not "damage" one's birthright? Is it not an integral part of life to do things that are weird and challenging... to follow your circumstance? It is arguable that most great things that have been accomplished have been done in internal retaliation to percieved circumstance. Like an "I'll show them" kind of thing or a better or worse variant on that theme.
I don't quite understand what you're saying here.

On a hunch, let me say that whenever we act under social pressures and do something which goes against our 'nature', we harm end up harming ourselves.

Then again to counter that, it seems that regardless should an adult, who is responsible for themselves, be demonstrating this potentially negative behavior to children or "youths" in their care?
I'd say, if the society condones sex between teens, and in fact promotes it, then it doesn't serve any purpose to stop sex between adults and teens. But then things change when we consider the kind of pressures that men live under.

IMO, the problem is the subjectivity of the deal. For some boys, fucking the teacher would be a great fucking thing. A badge of honor that could be a great memory for them their whole life, at least a great memory and who knows what kind of good things it could mean personally to the kid. On the other hand, it could be that the get ends up all fucked up from it because they weren't so stable in the first place, and the teacher who is supposed to be taking care of them fucks them up worse.
It's not people who are fucked up. It's the society which is all fucked up --- the people are only trying to deal with the fucked up society, especially the young people.

And yes, given the way our society works, teens do preserve any kind of sexual entangle with a woman as a trophy --- it helps them to consider themselves as 'men'. You know pass that eternal test of 'manhood' that men have had since the dawn of civilisation (although it was never sex with women! :rolleyes:!).

However, it still does not condone their sexual exploitation.

That makes in a tough subject so society ends up having to deal with it as an aggregate basically, since each case cannot feasibly be properly addressed, we have to pick somethign and go with it even if it's wrong in some cases. What say you?
In principle, it sounds good that young people should be free do choose to do sex with whoever they please.

Especially, youth is the main time when the sexual need for men is at the peak, and it can really help the youth if male-male relationships are healthily institutionalised by the society.

But as long as men, especially boys live under pressures of 'fake social masculinity' (including the pressure to prove that they can have sex with women which also gives them masculinlity points that gets them status within the peer-group), we can never ensure that boys indeed want what they say they want!

or that they indeed dont want that they say they dont want!

Let me tell you, that given the nature of male pressures, it is actually the 'softer' males who can say 'no' to women without feeling any less of themselves as a human being (they don't often feel a lot manly in the first place!).
And for the most part, its the softer ones who strongly like males who easily leave straighthood (which is manhood in a heterosexual society: Our language relfects what we want to promote, saying straight = heterosexual is an artificial way to promote it!) ---- and happily take on the 'gay' identity.

It's all a matter of 'gender orientation'.

Hey aren't you the guy who called me a panzy or something before? Hehe.. :) I agree with the above as a generalization.
O.K. I apologise. But your statement was the typical 'power statement' that is so widely used to put pressure on men......and this is the last thing that men should be doing as men!

.....But it's also easy to argue that a MAN doesn't NEED cock, as cock is for vagina and propogation. I'm just sayin. I think there's a smidge of truth to the latter there, but ultimately the subjective expression of biology and its impact on the individual's psychology leaves plenty of room for cock hungry men IMO.
Now that is the artificial pressure being mounted from what --- religious or scientific institution? It's difficult to distinguish, they're both hand-in-hand in spreading lies about male gender sexuality.

We have discussed this before, but since you're obviously a sincere debater I'll enumerate some of the important points here:

1. Our body organs and qualities can be for multiple important purposes. Mouth is used to eat. But it is also used to speak. Then again, you can also kiss with it! Can you say with any amount of fairness that mouth is primarily for eating and not for speaking. And if nature did not intend mouth to give sexual pleasure, why did it make it sensual to touch. Everything --- and that means everything in naure has a purpose, even if our science or religion fails to understand that!

2. Nature has created only as much sexual need for procreation in humans as is healthy. Beyond that it starts becoming detrimental both --- to the species and to the nature as a whole. So the argument that sexual need is only for procreation is dangerous to say the least. In nature only a limited number of males indulge in sex with females. This sex happens only once or twice in most males' lives and is restricted to sex for procreation. There is no romance or bonding at all. Furthermore this happens only in the 'mating' (a misnomer and how our language tries to taint our perceptions --- there is hardly any mating going on, just pure sex, often for a couple of minutes) season. Everseen two males fighting for sex with a female. Notice how the rest are coolly chewing grass in the background!
(the above is true for all species, especially mammals, but excludes birds).

3. In nature (non-bird species, i.e.), on the other hand a lot of bonding between males (and between females) takes place (pl. consider the latest researches by a series of biologists like Paul Vasey, Bagemihl and Johann Roughgarden). This bonding is often life-long and even monogamous --- except for the couple of times in their lifetime that the males go for reproductive sex. In mammals these sexual bonds cover 90% to 100% of males. The same figures are just not true for even male-female reproductive short-sex, leave alone bonds --- which occur as an exception in the wild. Now humans beings are basically mammals and there is no reason why we should be different, especially when other things prove otherwise.

(please refer to the thread "heterosexuality is unnatural")


I mean, all humans are .. I think female, by default. The expression of a gene or something like 8 weeks in determines sex. Sure they are pre-destined for the most part to be whatever sex happens at that eight week thing or whatever, because it's a consequence of the interaction between the two contributor's DNA... but for that time we are all basically the default gender from one perspective. I think at minimum, that leave plenty of room for all kinds of expressions of sexual identity later in life.
More lies that are spread as part of the pressure tactic (even if you sincerely believe in them!)

I don't know if all humans are females by default (this is probably true!), but most certainly that notion that it is femininity in males that leads to a sexual desire for women is another lie spread both by traditional societies and by the science.

I've already shown how femininity and 'softness' in males is related to heterosexuality (heterosexuality by the way does not refer to male-female sex that is for procreation; it refers to male-female sex for emotional bonding) in the now merged thread "Heterosexuality is queer".

Give me time and I'll show how a sexual desire for men in masculine men is nothing but the essence of their natural masculinity. In gay men it works differently of course.

Let me take an example to show the difference between a real straight man (who would have a basic drive to bond sexually with men!) and a real heteroseuxal guy (straight would be the last suitable word to describe the thing!):

The brave father in the movie 'the Lion King' would be an example of the first kind (even though he is shown as a 'heterosexual', while the 'cunning' uncle who kills the lion through treachery would be a negative example of the second kind.

Although the above is a negative example of a typical heterosexual man, heterosexuality is not essentially negative. Cunningness is a typical heterosexual trait (but not bravery!). Real heterosexual men are practical and take good care of children.

It is not surprising that foxes (who are cunning) have more share of 'heterosexuals' than are common amongst the mammals.


Generally speaking I'll buy it okay. I'm not sure about the distinction between need and desire though. Seems like a very fuzzy line.
I'm not making a distinction between need and desire. Our desires often reflect our needs! They should in nature.

Well, that would make perfect sense in terms of evolutionary psychology no? It seems natural to me that a species capable of placing value on things would value the mechanisms that lead to the perpetuation of the species mroe than the individual's sexual desire/need. Is it fair? Not really, but it does make sense to me.
If there is anything like evolutionary psychology then we should have moved away from heterosexuality long back --- when the first signs of overpopulation started showing.

It does not make any sense at all, when the modern society invests millions in condoms --- which harm the environment and other harmful/ costly/ artificial/ painful contraceptive methods on the one hand and overvalues sex with women on the other.

And evern if we were to believe in having the kind of evolutionary edge you're talking about, there is no evolutionary sense in forcing men away from their natural needs by way of social pressures --- because men can very well do both --- bond with men and have procreative sex with women.

Neither is there any evolutionary sense in forcing heterosexuality, i.e. male-female long or short term bonds. More so if they are the non-marital, casual stuff that is not going to help in raising children.

Peace!


The term "artificial" in that context is highly debatable, but I think I know what you mean and don't think you're necessarily incorrect.
Let's debate. That's what sciforums is for! :) :m:

Buddha, it's late for me here at the moment and I'm beat. I just wanted to make the quick point that evolutionary psychology is a perspective, like trying psychology from an anthropological view sort of, even thogh that's not quite right. I'm far from an expert on the topic, but really dig it the general idea as I have bastardized it in my own context.

If you've never heard of 'memes' I suggest you google and think about them a bit in terms of the argument you're presenting. I think you'll like it. Of course you're not obligated, I just think you'll like the ideas there, even if you don't embrace them. I find them a very useful conceptual tool for examining these types of problems. I don't generally think of them explicitely, they are usually implicit to my thinking.

A grown person should not be exploiting a child REGARDLESS of the child's gender. :mad: How can you consider it molestation when its a male teacher with a young girl and think it's great when a female teacher does it to a young boy?!?!
It is a crime and a horrible atrocity for an adult to take advantage of a child. Yes sometimes teens have fantasies, that does not mean they have the mental capacity to enter into a sexual relationship with an adult. I have 2 sons, and a daughter. ANY adult touches any of my kids & I guarantee they will regret it

Nothing surprises me about this issue. Neither the long list of offenders, nor the reaction of people to it.

In fact the reaction of the following reader sums it up all:


I think we can compare it with the reaction that was sought to be raked up when by this BBC reporter (some Mohammed guy) who was enraged at Michael Jacksons sexual relationships with adolescent boys.

I'm not surprised and my entire research about the oppression of men points to what this thread amply highlights. A heterosexual society is keen to train its boys to be 'heterosexual', and it does not look at such incidents as serious. On the contrary it actually subtly encourages such incidents. The serial "The opposite sex" had an episode which actually glorified this schoold kid being attracted to an adult woman.

A man having sex with a boy is seen as one of the worst crimes, because it threatens the fragile but elaborate mechanisms that the society has built to kill a boys power to have sexual bonds with another male. It's been the same even in pre-heterosexual societies, especially in the west.

But there is a difference between how men and women are treated. A heterosexual society seeks to protect and indulge its women. Therefore, if an adult man has sex with a minor girl, that becomes an issue. Men are anyways treated as secondary citizens in a heterosexual society, and they have few rights in any case.

The heterosexual society brushes off the sexual exploitation of men/ boys at the hands of women.

When a woman has sex with a boy, the western heterosexual society rather sees it as if the woman is doing a favour to the boy by encouraging/ teaching him to be heterosexual.

And if you combine this with the intense pressure that boys live in the west to be heterosexual you get an exact picture of their exploitation. Like one boy narrated to me in a counseling session:

This teenage boy used to go to an adult female tutor to study. He said, the tutor started behaving funny and would sit close to him and one day started to rub his pants.

The boy did not fancy that girl and in fact was not looking for sex with anyone (boys in my society don't usualluy have sex before marriage!). But, he could not say no or resist her unwanted advances, because otherwise the woman would have seen him as 'impotent' or worse a 'homo'. He was under intense pressure to have sex, and he did.

This happened a couple of times, and then he stopped going for his tuitions. But could not tell his parents what happened. Nevertheless, the guy brags the incident amongst his peers to gain 'social masculinity'.

What do you people think of this incident?
Finally someone is thinking about this rationally!

No, it just makes you look like a retard who hasn't a good enough grasp at the English language.
However, I do agree that female teachers fucking male students is okay, and male teachers fucking female students is not.

Why??

What happens to a female to damage her, that does not happen to a male?

This thread is 4 years old.