95% of men have a sexual need for other men

[Theoryofrelativity]

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM A TRADITIONAL SOCIETY

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.

Well having worked in health also Budha, can honestly say that this business of your patients (80-90%) getting hardons when "bringing their stuff out" is unique to you! Bravo!

Although I am of the opinion that men will have sex with anything with a comfortable hole, and that may be a woolly sheep on an isolated farm.

[Buddha1]

Well having worked in health also Budha, can honestly say that this business of your patients (80-90%) getting hardons when "bringing their stuff out" is unique to you! Bravo!

Well, that has not always been the case. It happened during a particular phase in my life and in certain circumstances. I have tried to formulate my own theories about how and when this can happen, but that is not quite related with the topic we are discussing here.

Although I am of the opinion that men will have sex with anything with a comfortable hole, and that may be a woolly sheep on an isolated farm.

Avoid, avoid, avoid admitting the truth --- and whoa, it doesn't go away!

[Buddha1]

Although I am of the opinion that men will have sex with anything with a comfortable hole, and that may be a woolly sheep on an isolated farm.

I can use the same argument to contend that this is how men train themselves to be heterosexuals and adjust with a heterosexual lifestyle --- in the face of intense pressures (including rewards and punishments) to be heterosexual ----- in a heterosexual society.

[Buddha1]

Nonsense Bhudda1. (At least your absence has not corrupted your consistency.) I think 42 pages of drivel on the subject pretty well amount to a request to express one's position on the matter. I for one am quite happy to trust s0meguy not to make a pass at me if we should chance to meet.

That doesn't prove anything --- not even your own sexual disinterest in men.

[s0meguy]

Rule no. 1: Never trust a man when he offers the information that he has no sexual interest in men without the asking.

Okay, let's say I have sexual interest in men (Although I find the idea of this gruesome). When would you think that this expresses itself?

Do you think you're one of those 5%? Where and how did you 'observe' such a thing and why have you reached your 95% conclusion?

[Theoryofrelativity]

That doesn't prove anything --- not even your own sexual disinterest in men.

Budha its ok for you to be gay,

The porn industry seems to do pretty well out of hetero sex, so clearly you are talking bollocks, give it up.

be gay, be happy. You don't have to persuade that which cannot be persuaded? Just enjoy your sexuality and power to give men hardons.

[Buddha1]

Budha its ok for you to be gay,

The porn industry seems to do pretty well out of hetero sex, so clearly you are talking bollocks, give it up.

be gay, be happy. You don't have to persuade that which cannot be persuaded? Just enjoy your sexuality and power to give men hardons.

I'll accept I'm gay if you accept you're a wimp. Because that is what a true heterosexual is.

I don't think you'll understand anything about human sexuality if you stick to your concepts of hetero-homo. I can't really have a discussion with you unless you leave these stupid western concepts. I can talk about porn industry and any other thing that you want to bring up --- but I refuse to discuss on the 'standards', labels and definitions set up by the west --- not unless you are able to answer the questions raised by me about them.

[Buddha1]

Okay, let's say I have sexual interest in men (Although I find the idea of this gruesome). When would you think that this expresses itself?

One of the ways is an intense hatred towards same-sex need or its expression. Most guys would be comfortable having limited sexual fun on the sly as long as nobody says anything and nothing is acknowledged. It must not look like its a sexual act indulged in for its own sake. Their has to be a socially acceptable excuse.

But it's not necessary that you should have a conscious sexual need for men. You could be amongst the minority. It is not at all about you or other individuals like you. It's about the male community as a whole.

[Buddha1]

Forced heterosexualisation of a traditional society

I see male pairs being replaced by male-female pairs on T.V. programmes as presenters, newsreaders, etc., who now come in heterosexual pairs. And I see that it’s so unnatural.

I also see that in a society where it was not done for men and women to dance together, and even a ball dance had to be between two men or two women --- it being forcibly made unacceptable (by the western forces) for two men to dance together, and becoming alright for a man and woman to dance together or show other physical proximity.

[Buddha1]

Etching in Heterosexuality

Scientist RamaKrishnen said on Discovery Channel that just like repeated streams of water flowing down a cliff leave permanently etched marks on the slopes, repeated patterns of behaviour can get etched on our brains. Thus artificial pressures that force men towards women also leave their mark when it is repeated generation after generation --- making heterosexuality seem natural.

[Buddha1]

SAME SEX NEEDS AND MALE HERDS

If males did not have a constant and primary sexual need for other male, there was no way they’d stick together in herds or form male companionships. They’d be too busy fighting and competing with each other.

Just like they do in the western heterosexual movies (and societies). No friend will ever die for his friend. It would not be a socially worth bond to die for.

[Buddha1]

SAME SEX NEEDS AND MALE HERDS

If males did not have a constant and primary sexual need for other male, there was no way they’d stick together in herds or form male companionships. They’d be too busy fighting and competing with each other.

Just like they do in the western heterosexual movies (and societies). No friend will ever die for his friend. It would not be a socially worth bond to die for.

More importantly if males in nature had a primary, constant and omnipresent sexual need for females they’d instinctively live together in heterosexual societies like the west.

[Ophiolite]

That doesn't prove anything --- not even your own sexual disinterest in men.

It proves that I am fed up with your infantile, uneducated, moronic claptrap. It demonstrates I am fed up with poster after poster refuting your puerile nonsense only to have you claim that nobody has contested anything you have said. It is prima facie evidence of my growing loathing of your mind numbingly self deluded fantasy. You have not demonstrated that 95% of men have a sexual need for other men: you have demonstrated that faced with persitent recalcitrant ignorance I can develop homocidal feelings rather than homsexual feelings for at least one other man.

[Christopher3]

You sound like a closeted fag!

[Buddha1]

It proves that I am fed up with your infantile, uneducated, moronic claptrap. It demonstrates I am fed up with poster after poster refuting your puerile nonsense only to have you claim that nobody has contested anything you have said. It is prima facie evidence of my growing loathing of your mind numbingly self deluded fantasy. You have not demonstrated that 95% of men have a sexual need for other men: you have demonstrated that faced with persitent recalcitrant ignorance I can develop homocidal feelings rather than homsexual feelings for at least one other man.

You should loathe your own failure to defend your stand or to refute mine.

Sure, you're fed up......because it hurts everything you stand for.

People saying they disagree does not consitute a valid rebuttal.

All I want is a logical opposite point of view, of which there have been none.

Since none are forthcoming, I have just decided to share my observations and analysis from my work, without bothering about nitwits like you who have been disproved at every point, but they still hamper about 'scientific procedures' but only to obscure the truth. It's a sort of red tapism.

Ophiolite, how about facing up the issue for once. Why don't you confront the issue with some real discussion. Go learn a few things if you have to. But don't just whimper.

If there is absolutely no point that you can discuss on here, then quit complaining and accept that I may be right.

[Buddha1]

You sound like a closeted fag!

Are you a non-closeted one?

[Christopher3]

NO I am not gay at all, but maybe you are, in that case you can suck my big fat cock!

[Ophiolite]

If there is absolutely no point that you can discuss on here, then quit complaining and accept that I may be right.

You have been refuted on the facts time and time again, yet you continue to deny this. You have enraged me with your rudeness - failure to acknowledge the systematic demolition of your argument in multiple threads is superlative rudeness. Now fuck off.

[RoyLennigan]

Why do some individuals have the right to decide what is natural for the humanity as a whole --- without feeling the need to justify their claims with evidences or logic ----- or even morals.

Does tradition make something automatically natural or valid?

Or does religion?

no one decieded what was right. its been like this since before humans began to talk. its been like this since before we were even human. i don't complain or argue about others' right to homosexuality, i'm just saying that most people are naturally inclined to be attracted to the opposite sex. most of the time, any feeling for the same sex is due to a person's unique past and their predisposition for something against the grain.

we don't feel the need to justify it just like we don't feel the need to justify breathing.

[Theoryofrelativity]

I'll accept I'm gay if you accept you're a wimp. Because that is what a true heterosexual is.

I don't think you'll understand anything about human sexuality if you stick to your concepts of hetero-homo. I can't really have a discussion with you unless you leave these stupid western concepts. I can talk about porn industry and any other thing that you want to bring up --- but I refuse to discuss on the 'standards', labels and definitions set up by the west --- not unless you are able to answer the questions raised by me about them.

I am a wimp, and gay, yes I've been hiding my cock under my skirt.
You and existabrent are one of a kind, why don't u two get it on? He thinks all women are lesbians. Funny how mankind got it so wrong and you two alone got it right? cor? I have already said in my opinion men will shag anything with a comfy hole, that includes other men, but only in absence of female holes. Most men, prefer women, as if they did not, bearng in mind man ruled the world for how long? Still does, think you'd have kicked us girls to the kirb long ago and got that rainbow flag flying long ago. But thats not what happened is it? Nope, men being majority straight, made straight rules to protect straight men. If men were mainly gay, we'd have had more gay rules longer ago! The end, new thread please