95% of men have a sexual need for other men

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by Buddha1, Jan 29, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    O.K. here I'm back with the unfinished business.

    This thread is to prove to others what I have observed while working with men for 10 years and from what I found out by studying history/ cultures/ biology:

    "95% percent of men have a sexual need for other men"

    This point is the key to whatever I have been saying so far, including that sexual orientation is an unnatural, invalid and harmful concept.

    Of course when I say 95% I actually mean a near total majority, and not exactly that number.

    I would be proving the above contention through the following evidences:

    - Evidences from the wild life, especially mammals,

    - Evidences from human societies:
    (a). Ancient civilisations
    (b). Contemporary but traditional societies
    (c). Modern heterosexual societies.

    - Evidence of the nature and strength of pressures that play on men to suppress their same-sex needs.
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2006
  2. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Of course the last time round we took this subject up, there was a heated exchange of words for pages and pages, until I gave my first scientific evidence --- that of such a need amongst mammals, and then everybody went quiet. That was when a behind the scence 'consipiracy' started to ruin my threads.

    Before the discussion can start, expect some whining and complaining and pouring out of frustrations from those who are part of the 'vested interest group' (I'd like to have a thread to analyse this group). And once they tire up, we can start the discussions.
  3. leopold

    leopold i miss my coco.

    buddha, if there were 2 men and 1 woman stranded on an island
    from birth what do you think will happen?
  4. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    A threesome?

    What if it was only 2 men?

    What if there were no women?
  5. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    Dear Buddha,

    If you whittled that number down to about 50% or less, I would believe it. But 95% is very hard for me to believe.

    Only saying.
  6. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Leopold that is an irrelevant and hypothetical question. Societies are not built that way. Surely, there will be sex between males as well as with the females. But if there are no social pressures, the emotional bonding will happen only between the males. Now, it is no use for you to ask this question just to know my opinion. My opinion is totally unimportant. Why don't we prove this.....and try to understand male behaviour through a rational analysis.
  7. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    Of course, why "faggot" is a dirty word is a good indication that people have their sexual paths already plotted for them.

    Why do people kill themselves, rather than admit to being attracted to their own gender?

    I've never heard of anyone doing that because of HETEROSEXUALITY. Could it be that there's some kind of stigma against being attracted to your own kind?

    Nah! A myth.
  8. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Giambattista, frankly, I don't care what you believe, or anyone else for that matter. I'll prove what I have observed and then people can go on believing what they want.

    I already know how people will react.

    The real straight men will almost all relate to this immediately, even when most will not be able to support me on this because of the pressures of social masculinity.

    The real gays and heteros, together with the women (i.e the vested interest group) will not like to believe it, and will continue to hold on to their biases, but now they will be painfully aware that the ideology that they hold on to is not the 'majority' and thus not 'straight'.
  9. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    I am glad you don't care what I believe. :rolleyes:

    It's only that it is hard for me to grasp.
  10. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    I am Giovanni Battista! Here me meow! Pitifully!

    Take pity on the homeless kitten! Kittens make such cute noises!
  11. leopold

    leopold i miss my coco.

    maybe not.
    but i can say this, there have been plenty of people murdered because of a heterosexual relationship
    there have also been suicides because of a heterosexual relationship
  12. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    Good! As there should be. Perfect PROOF that OPPOSITES DO ATTRACT! Eh????
  13. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    What's that? Your girlfriend is actually attracted to something that isn't worth being attracted to?

    Say it ain't so!

    Oh, you don't have a girlfriend? Well, I'm not exactly Sylvia Brown, you must understand.
  14. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    And of course, the 50% divorce rate is also proof that men and women were meant to to be together!
  15. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Evidence from the nature (animals)

    This is one of the strongest evidences that supports my contention.

    According to the ground breaking research by Bagemihl --- based on data accumulated from work done by other scientists over a period of 200 years……..amongst mammals the instqances of reported same-sex activities is extremely high --- between 90% - 100% (as in the case of the Bonobos one of our nearest cousins!)…..E.g., it is about 94% amongst the Giraffes. Imagine, the national geographic channel has been making out as if the only kind of interaction that males have amongst themselves is when they bang their heads to mate with the females.

    In fact males in the wild often show their amorous need for each other through wrestling and jostling (for the scientists though they are only practising for the big fight for the female --- the only reason why males are supposed to exist).

    Noone has collected a data for this……because heterosexuality is taken for granted and does not need a cause --- but it seems quite a lesser number of males in the wild ever mate with females than is projected. But the only available evidences whow that the number of males who mate regularly year after year – is quite, quite low.

    Now, the last that I heard was that humans are mammals too!
  16. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    And then they'd have us believe that science only works on proofs and not assumptions! :rolleyes:
  17. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    May I ask other people to post evidences they know of, whether for or against this contention.
  18. Giambattista

    Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss

    I have no such evidences, for or against.
  19. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    More evidence from the animals as well as from traditional societies

    There is an ancient practise amongst some parts of Eastern Europe to artifically inseminate the cows.

    They need the semen of the best of the bulls to inseminate the cows. But the problem is that bulls are not always ready to have sex with the cows, besides not all bulls fancy that. In fact until they think its time for procreation, the bulls are not even aroused by the cows so that the farmers can take their semen artifically.

    So what they do --- and this has been the practise since as far as one can tell --- is to stand up all the bulls in a circle in a manner that each bulls behind is directly in front of the other bulls face.

    The bulls get so aroused at this proximity that they immediately get an erection --- and then the farmers take their semen using artificial vagina.

    This is a technique which never fails. Unlike bull-cow sex.

    It is like 100% sexual arousal rate amongst males and its instant!
  20. Buddha1

    Buddha1 Registered Senior Member


    Here is something I posted earlier on the thread "Female sexepidemic":

    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!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page