Do you as a man have a sexual need for other men

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by spuriousmonkey, Jan 31, 2006.

?

Do you as a man have a sexual need for other men

  1. Yes, all the time

    9 vote(s)
    9.7%
  2. Yes, sometimes

    9 vote(s)
    9.7%
  3. no, never

    67 vote(s)
    72.0%
  4. I'm not a man.

    8 vote(s)
    8.6%
  1. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    The poll is just that --- too simplistic, doesn't take into account the socio-psychological complexities of being a man.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    Anyone engaged in the most elementary animal observation is forced to conclude that animal "homosexuality," "filicide" and "cannibalism" are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Consequently, they cannot be called animal instincts. These observable exceptions to normal animal behavior result from factors beyond their instincts.
    http://www.narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    "Homosexual" Animals Do Not Exist

    In 1996, homosexual scientist Simon LeVay admitted that the evidence pointed to isolated acts, not to homosexuality:

    Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity.
    http://www.narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    In summary, the homosexual movement's attempt to establish that homosexuality is in accordance with human nature, by proving its animal homosexuality theory, is based more on mythological beliefs and erroneous philosophical tenets than on science.
    http://www.narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html
     
  8. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Why should we ever believe in Narth's opinions and not look at the evidences provided by the Biologists!

    Are you so desperate as to resort to religious views in order to defend your interests?
     
  9. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    this is from a peer reviewed book buddha

    · "The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.
    http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=BK04A01

    i have proven you wrong buddha admit it
     
  10. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Why are you using my own arguments against me?

    I've always maintained that homosexuality does not exist amongst animals.

    I've also said that it also does not exist amongst humans.

    And 'homosexual' orientation is a product of the western organisation.

    There is no question of animals or humans having a 'homosexual' orientation.

    Of course animals don't have a heterosexual orientation either.

    We are talking about their sexual nature, not orientation.
     
  11. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Leopold, first let me say that I'm really glad for you, that at least you're trying to discuss like such discussions are supposed to be. In this you're moving away from the likes of Happeh and Anomalous, who don't really have much to say. I hope you keep this up!

    As far as giving NARTH as source, you could as well have read from the Bible in order to support yourself.

    Let's talk about Simon LeVay:

    1. In your link he is quoted as saying:
    "Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity."

    He accepts that homosexual (sic) behaviour is very common in the animals. This is the same as saying that 90% to 100% of mammalian males have a sexual need for males."

    2. Simon Le Vay happened in 1996. Three years before Bruce Bagemihl brought out his extensive and ground breaking work. Human knowledge about animal sexual behaviour has gone a sea change since then. It is upheld as a watermark research.
     
  12. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    I totally agree.

    Just because a majority of male mammals have sexual relations with other males, and the sexual relations with females are feew and far between, doesn't mean that they have a 'homosexual orientation'.

    Like I said, homosexuality is a heterosexual concept. It means feminised male-male sexual behaviour. It is also a 'deviant', 'alternative' and 'minority' same-sex behaviour, which is just not the case in the animals.
     
  13. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Well, I don't identify my self as gay? Does that mean I have no sexual need for other men? Neither do the majority of the Afghanis who have sex with other men.

    I don't identify with the 'heterosexual' identity either! Does that mean I dont' have a sexual need for women? The majority of men in Afghanistan too don't identify with the term 'heterosexual'. If you call a person that he may start a quarrel with you.

    In the initial years, when the term was invented, 'heterosexual' referred to a man who had a pathological interest in sex with women.

    Then again, men don't identify with the sexual identities because they are misleading and confusing. What is offered on the package is not really what is inside?

    Not so fast!
     
  14. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    I've edited my post above so pl. read it again.
     
  15. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    To give the heterosexual society's estimates of head counts in support of your argument is equivalent to circuilar reasoning. It is also the case with this poll on this thread.

    I mean I have already discussed about how there are pressures, and manipulative identities designed to force people to be heterosexual. If everything was so stragihtforward, there was no case for me to say anything in the first place.

    It is just like when a Christian brings in quotes from the Bible to prove that God exists. I mean we all know that the Bible say that the god or the prophet exists. But we are questioning the reliability of Bible.
     
  16. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    The bible is not peer-reviewed.
     
  17. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    We have seen how peers can gang up to uphold a particular point of view however far from reality it may be.
     
  18. Communist Hamster Cricetulus griseus leninus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,022
    Ah, you are back.
     
  19. s0meguy Worship me or suffer eternally Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,635
    Perhaps Buddha1 is right in a way and if you would like to know why, see the wikipedia article for Sigmund Freud and the unconscious. Sigmund Freud thought that our unconscious mind protected our conscious mind from certain fantasies of ours, such as sexual interest in one's parents/children or in this case, in people of the same sex as you are. It does this by making us feel that these fantasies are gruesome. That is, according to Freud. I did some (thinking) experiments with myself, but I really can't get myself to like/enjoy sex with people of the same sex.
     
  20. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,595

    Freud was wrong about a lot of things and mostly talked crap, an early buddha, pushing his fantasies onto the majority!
     
  21. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    But he did it with an Austrian accent. This is always much more convincing than a Texas drawl, or mid-atlantic whine.
     
  22. Theoryofrelativity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,595
    yeh

    "howdie pardner, wanna ride ma horse"

    symbollically 'pardner' of course being 'mother', 'horse' of course being 'cock'
     
  23. Buddha1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Actually it is. By religious peers. And they can be as manipulative as the scientific peers.
     

Share This Page