95% of men have a sexual need for other men

[Buddha1]

Small things do not add up in science in this way. If you want to study the nature of homosexuality in humans you do not base your ideas on carefully selected excerpts from nature. A selection that is selected because they happen to mesh with personal views.

Well 100% and 94% are not small things. And you are ignoring the evidences from contemporary human societies.

You are also ignoring the innumerable evidences I have given of an intense pressure on masculine gendered men to be heterosexual.

I have not yet touched upon history of human beings, which will bring even more evidences.

As far as the accusation of being 'selective' is concerned.......well, if the society proactively destroys, suppresses, hides, censors and distorts the truth, the only way to bring it out is through scattered evidences or tell tale signs that remain here and there --- On their own they may seem trivial. But when they put together they tell the entire story.

One of the ways in which you and others want to hamper my efforts is by trying to stop me from putting together evidences in an understandable manner by deliberately diverting from the issues.

[Communist Hamster]

Then why do you ignore the evidence from polls which say the overwhelming majority of people are heterosexual?

[Buddha1]

And still you provide not ..... any mechanism by which it could possibly be imposed against nature and against our will.

Again I have several times.

The mechanism is extremely complex, indirect and well-hidden. Plainly speaking, if you want to close your eyes and say I see nothing, it will be extremely easy for you to do that.

Social masculinity is the main mechanism by which this is achieved. You are denied social manhood and thus entry into the male herd if you don't comply. In the heterosexual society, social manhood is replaced by 'straighthood'.

Heterosexualisation of the society has isolated men by taking away their own spaces. Men are powerful when they are together. Isolated from each other, they, like the bonobo males are weaklings.

Have you seen mighty elephants being driven by their mahouts, mahouts that they can kill with a single thrust of their trunks. But the mahouts still make them destroy their own natural habitat. Even trains them to use toilets, when doing that is not in their natural interests. The key is social training for which various reward and punishment mechanisms are used.

Religion, Science, Media, Peer-Pressure are some of the other important institutions/ instruments that play a prominent role in facilitating man's enslavement.

There is a strong reward and punishment strategy to force men into their various pressures. The rewards are many, some invisible, superficial, even vain, but seem dizzingly enormous and thus play a crucial role .......others are visible/ solid and provide key social benefits. Social manhood is the key reward. Others include ownership of children, acknowledgement of lineage, access to social resources, opportunities, spaces etc.

But the real thing that forces men is the extreme and unmistaking punishments that are doled out to men who don't comply. These may be:

Ridicule: The most common punishment.

Isolation/ marginalisation/ Outcasting: E.g. by creating a 'gay' space and isolating male-male sexual behaviour there.

Violence: Remember the hanging of two Iranian youths.

Denial of social masculinity: By refusing to accept his as a 'man'.

Imposition of social feminity: that can really cripple a masculine gendered man, who cannot find real solace in a feminine gendered group.

Denial of human rights: As e.g. refusing to let two men get married in the eyes of the law.

Denial of access to social resources, opportunities and spaces.

It is the punishments that really does the trick for men.

----------------------

And then there is propaganda, training and brainwashing of men --- much like they do in Islam. They create a hatred for your own same-sex feelings. There is a strong social mechanism in place that ensures that the same-sex need of boys are killed before they are developed, in their adolescence. That adequate pyshcological barriers (including an intense hatred for their own same sex desires) are put in place within individuals that will keep them fighting their own same-sex feelings all their lives.

[spuriousmonkey]

Well 100% and 94% are not small things. And you are ignoring the evidences from contemporary human societies.

100% and 94% are small things if they refer to 0.1% of all mammalian species.

and

http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=51941

[Buddha1]

Nor an explanation for the failure of anyone in fifty pages of posts on this thread alone to say "Bhudda1, you are right". Here they are, safe in the anonmymity of the internet, able to say - "You know B1, I've always had these feelings, but I thought they were unnatural". Yet not one person has come forward to say that.

The supports are too few and far in between. But they are there, and sometimes they are such quality support that makes me feel reassured.

I have also encountered some indirect support both through posts and private messages. But all in all, yes you're right, not many people were changed.

If you are honest, you should be able to look within yourself and ask why?

Can one man just by making efforts against all odds to bring the unspeakable out change people. Can one man just by telling that oppression exists remove all the psychological barriers and hatred that men have been creating since childhood? It is possible if there was a supportive and safe environment.

Do you think we have a safe environment here? It is no doubt anonymous and there are little chances of physical violence or stuff like that. But what about emotional and mental violence? Do you think the men out there are just waiting for a saviour to come and liberate them? No, the only thing on their mind is how to adjust with the social norms and be eligible for more and more social masculinity points. Because that is what they need for survival.

We have talked about people behaving like there is an 'unseen eye'. People have psychological barriers within themselvs, and they want a heterosexual image in their own eyes. They are not freedom fighters. Why should they risk their manhood in their eyes to support me.

And what have you done to help? You have been one of the main 'conspirators' in trying to ensure a hostile enviornment as your eternal social duty. I don't think I can ever inspire you to look into your own same-sex feelings which I know for sure are there. Because things are not as simple as that.

In fact I don't care if I don't change people now. I want to share everything that I have gathered so far. I know I am speaking the truth. And for whatever truth is worth, I hope that it will shine like a tiny lamp in this immense darkness, that someday, someone will pick up the thread from here, someone who is more knowledgable and capable than me --- who will not have to go through the hardships and the time that I spent trying to gather all this information.

I should also tell you that my experience of raising these issues in my own country with young people have been totally different and extremely encouraging.

In fact when I discussed these issues on a discussion board belonging to my country there was some good support from straight men.
.
I pity your society and the men in it. Because you guys are really enslaved. You are broken from each other too much. You are too weak and scared to come out and claim what is your power, not weakness.

Surely out of the 95% of posters and lurkers we could find one? Apparently not. Does this not cause you the slightest doubt? I guess not - that would be too scientific and you are a self confessed non-scientist, amateur or otherwise.

You mean the fact that I am not able to 'convert' people here should make me think that I'm on the wrong track? What about the things that I see and feel all around me all the time? what I see and experience is so strong --- although suppressed and hidden --- that no matter what anyone says or not says on the net, I am convinced that I'm on the right path.

[Buddha1]

Then why do you ignore the evidence from polls which say the overwhelming majority of people are heterosexual?

There are several reasons why the polls cannot be taken seriously. And I have enumerated many of them on the respective thread.

There are several pressures on men --- that act on them even when no one's watching. I have talked about them in that thread and on others.

Most men have lost their sexual need for men, or are in a confused state because of social conditioning and hostility. Most are not even aware that they have a same-sex need strong enough to make a mockery of their 'heterosexual' identity. Sometimes these men (as I've seen in several counseling cases) are 'rudely' jolted from their privileged 'heterosexuality' status when they meet a man which stirs them deep within.

The heterosexual identity is actually the most important culprit. It gives men a reason to forget, disown or misrepresent their true sexual feelings even when no one is watching.

Of course traditionally men are trained to keep quiet on these issues, and as long as they do this, they are even allowed to enjoy some same-sex eroticism in disguise.

And last but not the least, such polls tend to attract only a particular kind of people who are interested in the outcome of the poll in a certain way. Others just keep away. This problem was also highlighted in a programme on Discovery channel recently (I think it was called "the great sperm race") where a researcher published a survey in a magazine and invited people to fill it up for his study.

[Buddha1]

100% and 94% are small things if they refer to 0.1% of all mammalian species.

and

http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=51941

That's a bogus poll.

There is not a mammal species that I know of, where same-sex eroticism is not the primary drive amongst males.

[Buddha1]

Let's deal with the numbers-
I won't even bother with your conclusion that 100% of mammals engage in non-gender specific sexual behavior, because, even if it were true, it would have zero bearing on this question. It shows that the activity occurs - but we already know that.
The only numbers that matter are the percentages of mammals, who perform non-gender-specific sex acts in the wild, where they have no rules thrust on them from society. These numbers could be extrapolated to become a theory about how humans would act with no social pressure.

Looking at those numbers, your ONLY logical conclusion would be that humans should be non-gender specific in their sexual behavior 5-10% of the time, if that.
Please restate your theory to match the evidence.

The evidence is out their crying out for attention.

I have included dozens of quotes from Bagemihl's book. And yet, they are not the complete picture yet. A large part of same sex behaviour is still hidden, suppressed and destroyed. This is only what has been reclaimed by people like Bagemihl. And it is still enough to destroy the myth of heterosexuality.

[Ophiolite]

And the winner of this week's Definition of the Month is Bhudda1 for elgantly defining ignorance with a practical example, which I repeat here.

There is not a mammal species that I know of, where same-sex eroticism is not the primary drive amongst males.

Yes, Bhudda1, we accept that you really are that ignorant of the facts. Well done.

[Buddha1]

And the winner of this week's Definition of the Month is Bhudda1 for elgantly defining ignorance with a practical example, which I repeat here.

There is not a mammal species that I know of, where same-sex eroticism is not the primary drive amongst males.

Yes, Bhudda1, we accept that you really are that ignorant of the facts. Well done.

Big words Ophiolite, yet they don't match your deeds.

Why don't you show me evidence of a mammal species where we can honestly say that same-sex activities occur in a minority of male members.

[Ophiolite]

Humans.

[Ophiolite]

Kinsey report.

[You see. I can post two threads sequentially also.]

[draqon]

95% of SF members have a strong desire to beat up happeh and buddha1 for this reckless thread...

[leopold]

There is not a mammal species that I know of, where same-sex eroticism is not the primary drive amongst males.

thats why we have such a population problem is because men like to fuck each other.

the driving force of a young man is to find a receptive female and impregnat it

[john smith]

but something is going on inside you.

Yep, the desire to put a 45. round right through the side of your head to stop the slurry which streams out.

Your comments were not about one post. They were about everything I had written till then.

No, your wrong. They were about one post secifically, although i cannot find it now. Also, i was feeling sorry for you, the dumbfuck in the middle whom everyone was 'picking' on, however, after taking a step back, and with your consistant inability to give up on your crazyness i thought "why the fuck should i 'stick up' for this total fucking reject.

Your ideology is baseless, and without proof or standing.

I think people are more honest when they are fucking stoned!

You see hear i agree with you, but dont take that to mean i agree with

everything I had written till then.

For fucks sake give up.

[Buddha1]

Humans.

Correction, modern stinking rich westerners with technological power to go against nature.

[Buddha1]

Kinsey report.

[You see. I can post two threads sequentially also.]

Not only do you not have much to say on the topic you're also obviously pea brained.

[Buddha1]

95% of SF members have a strong desire to beat up happeh and buddha1 for this reckless thread...

You don't even have a good sense of humour. But is that an acceptance that you cannot counter my arguments with anything sensible.

[Buddha1]

There is nothing bogus about it, except that some silly mod put in the option 'i'm not a man'

Is that why you chose not to answer the innumerable reservations about the poll raised by me, Giam and Cross?

[Buddha1]

thats why we have such a population problem is because men like to fuck each other.

Is that why there are such unthinkable pressures on men to be heterosexual?

Although I don't disagree that men also like to fuck women, how does that rule out men wanting to be with other men.

the driving force of a young man is to find a receptive female and impregnat it

Even if we forget all the evidences from the animal world and the humans, what about the intensive pressures. If the driving force of a young man is indeed women and only women, then why does the society work overtime to censor the information about same-sex needs from him. Why do they so desperately want to manipulate information on media and everywhere else?

Why do they hide information about same sex needs? What do they have to fear?

As a wise man once put to me --- if we were to talk about same-sex needs in an accepting manner, everyman will start having sex with men and no one would care to have sex with women.

You know there is evidence of that happening too!