Fine. but the link you posted is broken.
Darwin's Is Wrong About Sexuality
- Thread starter Buddha1
- Start date
- Status
Yes, certainly......so when deciding the nature of animals you can extrapolate from animals to humans, but you cannot always extrapolate from humans to animals, especially when we know that the behaviour in question is under heavy artificial manipulation by the human society.superluminal said:
And please no more discussion about humans here. Please go to the thread "95% of men have a sexual need for other men".
funny. You came with swan examples to prove your point.
Why do you use examples that you say dont apply to humanity to try and prove homosexuality is the natural version of sexuality, and then say elsewhere that extrapolating to humans is invalid?
Youre using eveidence selectivly to attempt to prove yourself right, and others wrong. But in all seriousness, has anyone accept your theory as anything other than rubbish?
Youre using eveidence selectivly to attempt to prove yourself right, and others wrong. But in all seriousness, has anyone accept your theory as anything other than rubbish?
I admit I've skipped this entire thread from the first to the post up until now, as well if it's anything like the other forums the likelihood is it would just be a merry dance of this then that back and forth.
My addition to this was just a point made to an explaination of animals acting monosexual (since "Homo" wouldn't fit animals) notibly the supposed record cases involve "Zoo's". This means such animals are in a confined quarters that is infact an unnatural environment, afterall in a truly Darwinistic environment those animals would have the capacity to choose a mate and go futher afield if they couldn't find one. In a zoo the conformities of the walls stop them from being able to travel.
Perhaps looking at Homosexuals in society through this particular understanding your reason that obviously jails are filled with them since they can't escape to mate with the opposite sex. You could also suggest that perhaps the closterphobic nature of the urban jungle where people are squeezed into small spaces in apartment blocks might also mean that some feel entrapped and unable to find the right mate and bond with the wrong ones.
In fact suggestibly it would be intriguing to see a study done involving how the brain reacts in hetrosexual and homosexual people (along with more heinous types like Paedophiles, Beastiles and just plain Nymphomaniac's)
I wouldn't be suprised if the conclusion suggests that Homosexuals suffer a delusion and could probably get medical treatment. How that for some of you folks with concerns, an "Anti-gay pill" if you ever have any doubts.
My addition to this was just a point made to an explaination of animals acting monosexual (since "Homo" wouldn't fit animals) notibly the supposed record cases involve "Zoo's". This means such animals are in a confined quarters that is infact an unnatural environment, afterall in a truly Darwinistic environment those animals would have the capacity to choose a mate and go futher afield if they couldn't find one. In a zoo the conformities of the walls stop them from being able to travel.
Perhaps looking at Homosexuals in society through this particular understanding your reason that obviously jails are filled with them since they can't escape to mate with the opposite sex. You could also suggest that perhaps the closterphobic nature of the urban jungle where people are squeezed into small spaces in apartment blocks might also mean that some feel entrapped and unable to find the right mate and bond with the wrong ones.
In fact suggestibly it would be intriguing to see a study done involving how the brain reacts in hetrosexual and homosexual people (along with more heinous types like Paedophiles, Beastiles and just plain Nymphomaniac's)
I wouldn't be suprised if the conclusion suggests that Homosexuals suffer a delusion and could probably get medical treatment. How that for some of you folks with concerns, an "Anti-gay pill" if you ever have any doubts.
a.) As far as the use of monosexual --- I remember reading about people in western heterosexual settings who have sought to oppose 'sexual identities' by disowning them, and how the vested interest group imposed a new term "pomosexual" on them --- that is those who don't recognise sexual identities. Only, they ended up getting one.Stryder said:
b.) For the most part, I have not used studies on 'zoo animals', so I don't see how the example of zoo is relevant. But let me tell you the reality of zoos in another post.
I've never talked about jails......so I wonder why you should even bring it up.Stryder said:
The fact that I have already provided enough proofs that there is no such thing as 'heterosexual'Stryder said:
or homosexual people --- at least not in the way the west sees it.
A minority of males who are feminine gendered can be said to be truly 'heterosexual', and the same goes for a minority of feminine gendered males who can be called 'homosexual'.
In fact if you scan the brain of these heterosexuals and homosexuals, you'll find a lot of similarities and they would be a lot like the brains of women.
Straight men will show different results from both heterosexual and homosexual men, as well as from women.
We have already discussed this in the thread "homosexuality and posterior hypathalamus"
In the same way you could also have an "anti-hetero" pill. Neither anti-gay, nor anti-hetero pills will work on straight men.Stryder said:
Although the scientific institution controlled by the heterosexual vested interest group will try their best.
The threat to the heterosexual society is not from the minority of 'homosexual' population, but from the straights for the majority of whom their heterosexuality is just a mask.
Last edited:
That's not humour.draqon said:
The original statement of Anamolous sought to marginalise me as a 'homosexual', and with that marginalise everything that I've been saying.
Apart from the blow it gives to my own gender identity, its not good for the discussion. To see it as a homosexual issue, because it is NOT.
The statement is made from the power base of a 'heterosexual' identity in 'heterosexual' society. It's a 'power' statement designed to attack me.
I responded with exactly what is needed to expose that power base. To nullify that power base --- that I don't recognise, because of the strength of my social gender identity (based on my traditional society) and because of everything I learned while working with straight men.
- Status