Homophobia

[Flash Caz]

I've known homosexuals to explain homophobia as based on ignorance, and to compare it to racism. I have deliberated over this, and here are my thoughts:

 

Racism involves people of a certain race being labeled to have a quality, which they might not necessarily have, based on their race. Homophobia often involves people that are homosexuals being known to have a quality which they, by definition, do have (i.e. they are sexually orientated towards members of their own sex), and disliked/feared based on their possession of the said quality. On that basis, I don’t think that homophobia is always as repugnant as racism.

 

Maybe it is that some people might simply not be able to endure the concept of two members of the same sex being sexually attracted to each other. However, I think that this viewpoint is of the stubborn.

 

My view is that homosexuality can be practiced in a way that harms nobody, and brings only pleasure. Thus, I tolerate the general concept of homosexuality. Of course, some people go about meeting their homosexual ‘impulses’ in the wrong way, but that's down to individual differences.

 

Homosexuality is not 'un-natural', as some claim, as everything is natural.

 

Having said that, I should acknowledge that homophobia is sometimes based on assuming that all homosexuals have characteristics that they might not necessarily have (for example, I've heard people say that "all gay people are just dicks"), and that is comparable to saying that "all black people are thieves", and on the same level as racism.

 

Does anyone have alternative views?

 

 

[Fade13]

i disagree with you about homophobia being natural, however only to an extent. I feel that you cannot choose to be gay, however i do not think it is correct. Simply for the fact that we are made to reproduce and continue our blood line, which homosexuals do not do.

 

To argue against this people often say that 'most animals paratke in homosexual acts' but i do not see this as a plausible reason, because eventually those animals will mate hetrosexually, thus passing on their genes. Ive never heard about an animal that is truly gay.

 

Also going back to the argument about people being born with this, i still dont feel this makes it 'right'. For if you think about, peadophiles are 'born' with an attraction to children. Now i am in no way saying i condone peadophiles, because it is a horrendous act to commit. But i dont think simply saying that you are born like it makes it right and just. Its simply a 'genetic cock-up' if you will.

 

But saying that, i know several gay people, and personality wise i have no problem with them. But when it comes to sex lives we dont, and i dont think we will ever, see eye to eye.

[Trueno_Drifter86]

I think Homophobia is most likely something that you're tought growing up especialy if you live in a religous Christian or Catholic family.

 

I also know a lot of people who are not religous and still do not like Homosexuals for some reason I think it's the enviroment that you live in becuase you see I live in the country and their are not any homosexuals here as aposed to the city.

 

The number one thing that is talked about when it comes to Homosexuals is religion.

 

Most religous people beleive that being Homosexual or comiting Homosexual acts is against gods will but it does not say anywere in the bible that it is wrong. Although it does say marriage is between a man and a women it does not even mention or touch the posibility of marriage between a man and a man/a women and a women.

[Lloydos]

Homosexuals are slowing down evolution in our world it is wrong. I am not a religious person and i do not believe in God but if it/he/her is real this phrase says it all "God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" I think I maybe a litttle Homophobic but only with the Homosexuals who go around "touching other people up" but I dont mind the Homosexuals who just get on with their life and not bothering with "straight" guys/girls.

[Antinark]

Homosexuals are slowing down evolution in our world it is wrong. I am not a religious person and i do not believe in God but if it/he/her is real this phrase says it all "God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" I think I maybe a litttle Homophobic but only with the Homosexuals who go around "touching other people up" but I dont mind the Homosexuals who just get on with their life and not bothering with "straight" guys/girls.

How the f*ck are they slowing down evolution?

 

Evolution is the process of diversifying and testing all the different products against nature's trials. The products that survive are the ones that mold the gene pool to their favour?

 

AFAIK, humanity is diverse culturally and physically and homosexuals are just a different from the norm human. Diversity is the key to natural sucess.

 

I don't see why people think Darwin was wrong because off of a sudden there are lesbian monkeys.

 

Anyways, i beleive homosexuality is natural. It's been proven on many occasions that the x chromosone is much more latent and potent then the why chromosone. In some species the Y chromosone has all but died out. I think it's the fraily of this chromosone in the early fetal stage, that produces homosexuality. As you should know, all fetus's start off more female than androgenous... this is why males have nipples, and why the clitoris is so like the head of the penis.

 

That said, i beleive homosexuality is a great thing. It's making a slight impact on our vastly overpopulating world, and i'd rather put up with Queer Eye For the Straight Guy on Prime Time than starve to death after the inevitable oil peak kicks our asses. Not saying that homosexuality will Directly reduce our numbers and thus our oil consumption, buy hey, it's a start.

 

@Topic - Homosexuality is probably as old as the homosapien. It's probably existed in species before us as a natural means to "thin the heard" so to speak. Something DOES have to hold back the top species from killing itself by overpopulation. It's stupid not to realize that it's a natural thing in life, and that it's rules are as clearly laid out as the fact that men have cocks and women vaginas.

 

Get over it, it's been around forever.

 

 

[Flash Caz]

 

i disagree with you about homophobia being natural

 

Homophobia is natural because humans have a tendancy to be ignorant (which many don't overcome). We like to be able to sum up a whole group of people with a few sweeping opinions (it's a way of conserving the brain's memory space), and the existence of an unusual trait amongst such a group often facilitates the tendancy to look upon such a group in a deploring manner (a fear of what we're not experienced with).

 

 

I feel that you cannot choose to be gay, however i do not think it is correct. Simply for the fact that we are made to reproduce and continue our blood line, which homosexuals do not do.

 

To argue against this people often say that 'most animals paratke in homosexual acts' but i do not see this as a plausible reason, because eventually those animals will mate hetrosexually, thus passing on their genes. Ive never heard about an animal that is truly gay.

 

Also going back to the argument about people being born with this, i still dont feel this makes it 'right'. For if you think about, peadophiles are 'born' with an attraction to children. Now i am in no way saying i condone peadophiles, because it is a horrendous act to commit. But i dont think simply saying that you are born like it makes it right and just. Its simply a 'genetic cock-up' if you will.

 

 

Evolution is what ingrained the whole 'survive and reproduce' concept into our instincts. It's not like we're 'supposed' to reproduce, it's just that the tendancy of evolution has been to make us blokes want to survive and bone ladies, and vice versa. Is that to say that it's 'wrong' to be gay? I don't believe so, and since homosexuality can be practiced in a considerate and harmless manner, I have no problem with homosexuality in general.

 

 

Get over it, it's been around forever.

 

Is that directed or me, or is it a general statement?

 

[Omen of Death]

Isn't fear like an opinion, but racism is projecting a hateful opnion onto someone and excluding them. I could be scared of someone, ex. a child molestor but I wouldn't restrain any rights from that person. People always have opnions of other people, groups, and physical classification groups but don't always show that opnion. I think people fear/hate homosexuals since they hear many conflicting reports on what they do and don't always understand and would rather be skecptical and fearful, since most of fear is not knowing.

You have the right to have any opinion on anyone, but I don't consider it prejudicial to fear or hate homosexuals.

[_-playero-_]

Homosexuality is not 'un-natural', as some claim, as everything is natural.

 

What do you mean by "everything is natural"?

 

From a religious point of view, homosexuality is not normal at all.

 

And even from a general point of view, if humans bond just to procreate, then homosexuality is completely abnormal.

 

Besides, the only good thing it would give is pleasure.

[coylez]

Homosexuals are ok if they dont like try to crack onto straight guys. I mean, if a gay guy is trying to pick up a straight guy, thats just weird.

 

Anyway, just a question...

Why do most (not a generlisation) homosexuals talk with a lisp? Sometimes i just think its a put on to show that they are gay?

[ganja_man_biatch]

well as the saying guys, ppl fear what they don't understand. i think some ppl are threatened by gays and their way of life, these ppl are scared that everything they thought they knew will suddenly change. i'm not a homosexual but they deserve the same respect as anyone else once they breathe the same air as you or me, but comparing it to racism is one point that gets fuzzy for me. they could hide being gay, but others could never hide from having colored skin.

[ISuck]

Homophobia, as a description of those against the concept of homosexuality is a misnomer. I abhor homosexuality but it is not an irrational fear of mine by any means. This would be equivalent to calling those opposed to public display of religion "theophobes". To say somebody is afraid of something that they just don't agree with is truly ignorant.

[The_man]

Homophobia is not ignorance. Homophoia is a fear. Fears can be based on ignorance, but ignorance is not fear.

 

I agree, that there must be SOME natural basis to homosexuality, because the prostate gland can be anally stimulated...

 

However, Homosexuals are known by anyone with a brain to be spreaders of AIDS. The whole reason this AIDS epidemic happened is because that bothing was done to stop AIDS spreaders for fear of offending gays.

 

Ok... so Gays are men.

 

Men are naturally more promiscous than women. Although some women are sluts, men can far outstrip them in manwhoring, especially gay juggalos... err i mean Gigolos.

 

Anyway, thus a sexually transmitted disease is caught from Darkest africa by a gay sailor, brought to britain. then goes to America.

 

It spreads through gay bathouses and remains a relatively low threat to the straight population.

 

 

Then we have homos donating blood, sharing needles, bis with AIDS, a complete lack of AIDS precautions, and that leads to straights getting AIDS.

Therefore, homosexuality has become the scourge of humanity.

 

 

Owned... by Gay people.

 

 

 

so therefore, my dislike of homosexuality is VERY rational.

[Otter]

 

Homosexuals are ok if they dont like try to crack onto straight guys. I mean, if a gay guy is trying to pick up a straight guy, thats just weird.

 

Anyway, just a question...

Why do most (not a generlisation) homosexuals talk with a lisp? Sometimes i just think its a put on to show that they are gay?

The same reason you try to talk really deep when your hot teacher asks you a question in class. It's to put on a front and display who you are; it's the fact that you don't agree with his decision that really grates you.

 

Anyhow, @ the_man... that's a rather pathetic reason to despise homosexuals. If AIDs wasn't a factor, would you be... "pro-homo"?

Edited October 13, 2005 by Otter

[K^2]

First of all, anyone who says that homosexuality is wrong because it is unnatural should be striped of all possessions and sent to live in the woods, the natural way. Or at very least, sent to an Amish community. Anyone who drives a car and uses this argument is absolutly ridiculous.

 

And speaking of ignorance.

 

However, Homosexuals are known by anyone with a brain to be spreaders of AIDS. The whole reason this AIDS epidemic happened is because that bothing was done to stop AIDS spreaders for fear of offending gays.

Yes, the explosion of AIDS has happened first among gay individuals, but if you really want to blame someone, think of why that happened. It happened because the union between gay couples was not legally recognized in any way, causing the aformentioned couples to last together far less than heterosexual couples. If homosexual unions were recognized since the early 20th century, this would not have happened. Draw your own conclusions as to whos fault that is, since I find it obvious, and I don't want to point fingers.

 

Furthermore, the AIDS epidemic would have happened eventually anyways. Epidemic in Africa has no ties to homosexuality, and with a great precentage of population affected, it would have spread to Europe and US. Yes, it would happen later, but it would grow signifficantly faster, with no chance for pharmaceutical companies to develop the anti-retrovirus drugs that have saved countless in US, Europe, and Africa.

 

Perhaps, all of the people in Africa who live now with HIV that does not develop into AIDS due to anti-retrovirus drugs owe it to the gays in US and Europe who have made the dangers of AIDS known worldwide.

[Otter]

 

It happened because the union between gay couples was not legally recognized in any way, causing the aformentioned couples to last together far less than heterosexual couples. If homosexual unions were recognized since the early 20th century, this would not have happened

 

You, sir, are making very large leaps of logic there.

[K^2]

Perhaps. However, even without proof, the mere possibility of this puts a big hole in The_man's argument.

[Otter]

Yes, if you consider it an "argument." Sounds more like propaganda built up like a house of cards. The origin of AIDS is still very much unknown, and to blame homosexuality for its current state is ridiculous.

 

I wonder if we'll se a response from him any time soon?

[The_man]

Oh yes, you will. It isnt a propaganda statement at all. And to say that it was caused by society not accepting gay couples is ridicoulous. Even now, when gay marriage is legal in some states, lots of gay couples are trying to get divorces. The only problem is... massachusettes didnt make provisions for gay divorce. hehe.

 

Right now im not even talking about lesbians.

 

Yes there are gay peopel who keep to themselves. They dont flaunt their sexuality.

 

These are generally the same gay people who would commit to one partner. I know a few gay couples who are like this, and I admire them for that.

 

But those who put their gayness in your face are the promiscouos ones. IF they were straight they d be talking about all the girls they f*cked.

 

If we dont know exactly where AIDS came from... then why is it that the gay lobby is so devoted to claiming that AIDS came from an african monkey, who was bought by a European woman, and then taken to denmark? The monkey either bit the lady or had sex with her, and thats how AIDS spread to the populace...

 

No Joke, this was part of the diviristy classes at my Dad's job about 5 years ago when he used to work for the state.

[Otter]

 

then why is it that the gay lobby is so devoted to claiming that AIDS came from an african monkey, who was bought by a European woman, and then taken to denmark?

 

Where the hell are you getting this stuff? From your dad's "diviristy" classes?

[The_man]

And what they taught me in Health/sex ed classes a couple years ago...

 

Seriously... this is the story.

 

But MY info on where AIDS comes from is based on the fact that the first recorded case of AIDS was in a british sailor who got it on shore leave in africa.

[K^2]

I don't think there is ANY way to trace it that far back. Untill AIDS became common, it wasn't even recognized by most doctors as a separate illeness. It just looks like a sudden failure of imune system, after which a person dies from a simple cold, or something like that. To say that there were records of the first case of AIDS is ridiculous.

 

Edit: And the imune system failure CAN happen without HIV or any other agent, so untill it becomes obvious that it is transmitted, you can classify it as an Acquired Imuno Deficiency Syndrom.

[Saggy]

I don't think there is ANY way to trace it that far back. Untill AIDS became common, it wasn't even recognized by most doctors as a separate illeness. It just looks like a sudden failure of imune system, after which a person dies from a simple cold, or something like that. To say that there were records of the first case of AIDS is ridiculous.

 

Edit: And the imune system failure CAN happen without HIV or any other agent, so untill it becomes obvious that it is transmitted, you can classify it as an Acquired Imuno Deficiency Syndrom.

Why is this discussion even being carried on? The only reason the gay community would be responsible for spreading AIDs, if statistics even show that to be true, is because unprotected sex would be more prominent among them in the 60's-80's without the fear of pregnancy; it's that same tolken that caused there to be a huge explosion of other STDs including AIDS amongst straight couples that used other methods of contraception that didn't protect againts them.

 

The idea that gays are responsible for AIDs is and has been mostly pushed by ultra-conservatives like Reverand Fred Phelps, and practically never by any credible medical association after indepth research on AIDs was done in the 70's and 80's. While this argument is about ignorance, you could say that this idea that held by so many that gays are the biggest spreaders of AIDs is ignorance in itself.

 

I think homophobia is caused by quite a number of things, but the word itself doesn't encompass all of the feelings about the gay community held by those that have such strong convictions about them. For instance, Reverand Fred Phelps will picket the funerals of gay people that were killed as part of hate-crimes, and chalk it up to his religious beliefs. However, you maymeet an athiest the next day that will share the same feelings about them, and be unable to justify his reasoning.

 

I believe ignorance about homosexuals is actually just a branch off of the true problem, which is fear. I know many share this same idea, but to me it's just one of the only things that makes sense. Say a person grew up in a community that's mostly Christian, but is not Christian himself. Now, imagine that person has harbored some thoughs of homosexual exploration, on the mildest level. Due to his circumstances, he's most likely to repress those feelings. Because of that, he'll most likely wind up fearing homosexuals and anything about them, in fears that those "harbored feeling" (however insignificant) may be looked on further; it's sort of a protective measure. But, say someone questions why he doesn't like homosexuals. The true reasoning may be those feelings he harbors, but coming to terms with that is confirming that those feelings are there, which he doesn't want to do. So, instead of realizing why he hates them, he instead conjurs something up; something like, they're responsible for spreading AIDS.

 

That's just one scenario, though, and it's probably not true with every single person that harbors negative feelings about homosexuals. I just think that a large part of it is fear of being different or accepting difference. You can relate it in some ways to the Civil Rights movement. There were many whites that felt that the persecuation of blacks was wrong, but they wouldn't dare let their feelings be known because of the ostrasizing that could occure, which coined phrases like "ni**er lover". However, when you speak in terms of homosexuals, it's not apparent whether someone is or isn't gay as is race, so that person may very well be accused of being gay themselves for accepting gays.

 

The role that I believe ignorance plays, is just a supporting one--the less peope know about gays, the more likely they are to fear them. In the same boat, however, they may be fearful of having anything but ignorance of the gay culture.

 

So, really, I can't see ita s being any one thing that causes negative feeligns against the gay community, but I think the two major players are fear and ignorance, and both play an equal role as does your brain and your heart in keeping your body functioning.

 

 

 

 

[i love misty]

"Everybody has a homosexual nature.

 

"In society, however, the class struggle prevents many people from expressing their sexuality. If you were living in India and has to be wedded to someone in your caste by arranged marraige, how could you tell your parents you were gay?

 

"The class struggle also groups people who choose to express in a group called 'homosexuals' and excludes them from the rest of society. Notice how all these corporations cater to 'gay audiences,' excluding poor people with less time and money from expressing their inclinations.

 

"The only way to end homophobia is to end capitalism." -Misty

Edited October 25, 2005 by i love misty

[The_man]

With all your finger pointing at conservatives you fail to recognize that these ultra conservatives WERE NOT SPREADING AIDS AT THE TIME.

 

You choose to leave out the fact that gay bathouses were huge breeeding grounds for AIDS.

 

And the sailor i spoke of was the first recorded cause of AIDS. its a fact, not a ridiculous claim.

[K^2]

"Everybody has a homosexual nature.

 

"In society, however, the class struggle prevents many people from expressing their sexuality. If you were living in India and has to be wedded to someone in your caste by arranged marraige, how could you tell your parents you were gay?

 

"The class struggle also groups people who choose to express in a group called 'homosexuals' and excludes them from the rest of society. Notice how all these corporations cater to 'gay audiences,' excluding poor people with less time and money from expressing their inclinations.

 

"The only way to end homophobia is to end capitalism." -Misty

This engire post is full of false statements. First of all, I can honestly say that I have never felt sexually attracted twoards anyone of the same sex. That disproves your first line by counterexample.

 

Second, I don't see what class has something to do with it. Yes, you have an example from a society where cast system is used, but that doesn't mean anything. How could a person who's parents are zealously christian and believe that all homosexuals will go to hell tell them that he or she is gay? This is absolutly regardless of wether it is a poor or rich family. This problem has no class boundaries.

 

The claim that the class struggle causes homosexuals to separate into an excluded group is absolutly unsupported. And the following says that the corporations exclude poor people by targeting homosexual audience? Where is that even coming from? And in any case, none of this points to any ties between homophobia and capitalism, so the conclusion makes no sense whatsoever.

 

 

And the sailor i spoke of was the first recorded cause of AIDS. its a fact, not a ridiculous claim.

AIDS could only have been identified, and therefore recorded, after it became widespread. You cannot identify the first case of AIDS. It cannot be done untill you know the symptoms of it. So whoever was the first recorded case, was not the same person who spread it. This is why your claim is ridiculous. Very much so.

[The_man]

I never said he was the first person to get it. Also, at the time of his death this sailor (forgot the name, will have to look it up) did not know what killed him. Neither did his doctors. You’re right; it was only until AIDS became widespread that the Syndrome was given a name. History looks back. And when historians and doctors looked back at him, they discovered that his symptoms were most likely AIDS...a loss of white blood cells was recorded, as well as lesions and other AIDS specific symptoms.

 

Countless others who had visited Africa were dying of the same disease after this sailor's death.

 

In Africa at the time the exact symptoms of the diseases that caused deaths of black people were not well recorded, so it only makes sense that people, especially prostitutes, would not be recorded as AIDS carriers.

 

When AIDS started out it was called GAY CANCER, by those who spread it and those who didn’t.

 

There comes to mind a certain gay flight attendant, who spread AIDS by having unprotected sex in gay bathhouses. He would turn the lights down low. After they were done he’d turn the lights up and show his partner his lesions. He would say "I’ve got gay cancer. I’m going to die and so are you." Some of his companions continued to spread it as well. Others reported him. But nothing was done about him in fear of offending homosexual lobbyists (src---Vision of the Anointed)

 

But that’s not even the main source of my dislike for gays. It’s the culture, and the way they have sex. I find the fact that homosexuals ram their penises up each others asses, and then pull them out and suck on them all full of feces to be disgusting.

If you say that this, as well as rampaging AIDS carriers are just myths then you are quite naive.

Also, the way that flamboyant homosexuals act is annoying. This lisp, the gestures, the being hit on... Leave me alone, I’m not gay.

I have gay friends. But the reason they are my friends is because they dont go crazy on the gay thing. They aren’t the type that walk up to people and go "HEY IM GAY ISNT THAT GREAT HAHAHA" those people get punched in the face and it isn’t because of bigotry or hatred. Well in a sense, that is, but the root of the hatred isn’t fear or ignorance, it’s because gay people are f*cking annoying. If another one of my friends privately confided to me that he was gay or bi I wouldn’t care. I just tell him it wasn’t my thing but I was fine with him being gay as long as he didn’t bring it up. Don't ask don't tell.

 

I’m sure if I went up to someone talking in a big manly voice talking about how I was straight and how id banged all these girls id get punched in the face too.

[Hard Margin]

 

I never said he was the first person to get it. Also, at the time of his death this sailor (forgot the name, will have to look it up) did not know what killed him. Neither did his doctors. You’re right; it was only until AIDS became widespread that the Syndrome was given a name. History looks back. And when historians and doctors looked back at him, they discovered that his symptoms were most likely AIDS...a loss of white blood cells was recorded, as well as lesions and other AIDS specific symptoms.

 

Countless others who had visited Africa were dying of the same disease after this sailor's death.

 

In Africa at the time the exact symptoms of the diseases that caused deaths of black people were not well recorded, so it only makes sense that people, especially prostitutes, would not be recorded as AIDS carriers.

 

When AIDS started out it was called GAY CANCER, by those who spread it and those who didn’t.

 

There comes to mind a certain gay flight attendant, who spread AIDS by having unprotected sex in gay bathhouses. He would turn the lights down low. After they were done he’d turn the lights up and show his partner his lesions. He would say "I’ve got gay cancer. I’m going to die and so are you." Some of his companions continued to spread it as well. Others reported him. But nothing was done about him in fear of offending homosexual lobbyists (src---Vision of the Anointed)

 

But that’s not even the main source of my dislike for gays. It’s the culture, and the way they have sex. I find the fact that homosexuals ram their penises up each others asses, and then pull them out and suck on them all full of feces to be disgusting.

If you say that this, as well as rampaging AIDS carriers are just myths then you are quite naive.

Also, the way that flamboyant homosexuals act is annoying. This lisp, the gestures, the being hit on... Leave me alone, I’m not gay.

I have gay friends. But the reason they are my friends is because they dont go crazy on the gay thing. They aren’t the type that walk up to people and go "HEY IM GAY ISNT THAT GREAT HAHAHA" those people get punched in the face and it isn’t because of bigotry or hatred. Well in a sense, that is, but the root of the hatred isn’t fear or ignorance, it’s because gay people are f*cking annoying. If another one of my friends privately confided to me that he was gay or bi I wouldn’t care. I just tell him it wasn’t my thing but I was fine with him being gay as long as he didn’t bring it up. Don't ask don't tell.

 

I’m sure if I went up to someone talking in a big manly voice talking about how I was straight and how id banged all these girls id get punched in the face too.

Generalisations, stereotypes and bigotry are fun!

 

edit: Almost forgot ignorance and complete horsesh*t.

Edited October 26, 2005 by Hard Margin

[TEoS]

I never said he was the first person to get it. Also, at the time of his death this sailor (forgot the name, will have to look it up) did not know what killed him. Neither did his doctors. You�re right; it was only until AIDS became widespread that the Syndrome was given a name. History looks back. And when historians and doctors looked back at him, they discovered that his symptoms were most likely AIDS...a loss of white blood cells was recorded, as well as lesions and other AIDS specific symptoms.

 

Countless others who had visited Africa were dying of the same disease after this sailor's death.

 

In Africa at the time the exact symptoms of the diseases that caused deaths of black people were not well recorded, so it only makes sense that people, especially prostitutes, would not be recorded as AIDS carriers.

 

When AIDS started out it was called GAY CANCER, by those who spread it and those who didn�t.

 

There comes to mind a certain gay flight attendant, who spread AIDS by having unprotected sex in gay bathhouses. He would turn the lights down low. After they were done he�d turn the lights up and show his partner his lesions. He would say "I�ve got gay cancer. I�m going to die and so are you." Some of his companions continued to spread it as well. Others reported him. But nothing was done about him in fear of offending homosexual lobbyists (src---Vision of the Anointed)

 

But that�s not even the main source of my dislike for gays. It�s the culture, and the way they have sex. I find the fact that homosexuals ram their penises up each others asses, and then pull them out and suck on them all full of feces to be disgusting.

If you say that this, as well as rampaging AIDS carriers are just myths then you are quite naive.

Also, the way that flamboyant homosexuals act is annoying. This lisp, the gestures, the being hit on... Leave me alone, I�m not gay.

I have gay friends. But the reason they are my friends is because they dont go crazy on the gay thing. They aren�t the type that walk up to people and go "HEY IM GAY ISNT THAT GREAT HAHAHA" those people get punched in the face and it isn�t because of bigotry or hatred. Well in a sense, that is, but the root of the hatred isn�t fear or ignorance, it�s because gay people are f*cking annoying. If another one of my friends privately confided to me that he was gay or bi I wouldn�t care. I just tell him it wasn�t my thing but I was fine with him being gay as long as he didn�t bring it up. Don't ask don't tell.

 

I�m sure if I went up to someone talking in a big manly voice talking about how I was straight and how id banged all these girls id get punched in the face too.

Generalisations, stereotypes and bigotry are fun!

 

edit: Almost forgot ignorance and complete horsesh*t.

o man i cant beleeve u took a brake from ur fukin potatos and giness to com on da forums u fukin mik

 

 

Also, thanks for the laugh The_man.

 

 

 

On topic: I couldn't care less if someone is gay or not, no matter how flagrantly homosexual they act. Even if one hit on me (which I doubt they would), I would just view it as a huge ugly fat chick that I wouldn't bone if my life depended on hitting on me: I'd just reject them.

[The_man]

well i just suppose that means that you have a smaller amount of need for personal space...

 

Personal space involves emotional and social as well as physical.

 

I on one hand dislike unwelcome intrusions into my social persoanl space.

 

And hard margin... good job discrediting my post by assigning a few words to it. Its really effective if your still in grade school. Keep up the good work and ill give you a sticker!

 

 

Pff. Saying that my arguments are based on bigotry hatred and generalizations id a form of generalization itself.

 

You need to be tolerant of my intolerance, for that its true diversity in its highest sense.

[Hard Margin]

 

You need to be tolerant of my intolerance, for that its true diversity in its highest sense.

I think you'll find that that is hypocrisy in its highest form, actually.

 

 

but wate u have gay friends so its allrite then am i rite? GAY CANCER

 

edit: Also, about the flamboyant gays. I understand they're annoying, yes, but you're tarring the whole gay community with the same brush here. Attitudes like yours are pretty much the antithesis to their flamboyant "we're queer olololz" acts. Fine, you don't like it, but there's no need to prove you're a straight-as-an-arrow hot-blooded male by posting a bunch of senseless bigoted crap like that, because it just makes you sound as sexually insecure as them.

Edited October 27, 2005 by Hard Margin