INTENSITY²
Politics, Mature and taboo => Political Pundits => Topic started by: Squidusa on August 04, 2011, 06:51:57 AM
-
ARE GOING TO HELL!!!!!! :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame:
But in all seriousness.... :P
I once read a book where the ratio of Gay to Straight people was reversed as well as opinions on sexuality and discrimination , so there were anti-straight organisations. :laugh:
It just popped into my head and I think it would be an interesting philosophical "What if" scenario , especially interesting if you were to present this idea to a radical homophobe.
But now to actually draw a point to my rambling (Caffiene induced I'm afraid) what kind of reverse "What if" scenarios can you all come up with? , could be interesting. :orly:
-
Wouldn't that represent the last generation of humanity?
-
Wouldn't that represent the last generation of humanity?
No, new generations would still be born, just at a slower rate that our planet's resources could
more easily sustain, and of course there would also be many gay couples having kids, as there are now. :thumbup:
-
If it was reversed you could set up your own "Pray them Gay" camps :zoinks:
-
What if the only material available to make guns from was spaghetti?
-
What if the only material available to make guns from was spaghetti?
PPK would be knee deep in pasta!
-
What if the only material available to make guns from was spaghetti?
PPK would be knee deep in pasta!
That's a pastability.
-
What if the only material available to make guns from was spaghetti?
Then all guns would fire meatballs! :drool:
-
What if the only material available to make guns from was spaghetti?
Then all guns would fire meatballs! :drool:
With Parmesan cheese gunpowder.
-
Great post squid!
Thought provoking! I can only think of 'what if animals were more intelligent than humans, and if they ruled
the world?' would we be doing tricks?
(http://www.1000funfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/what-if-dogs-ruled-the-world-01.jpg)
-
Great post squid!
Thought provoking! I can only think of 'what if animals were more intelligent than humans, and if they ruled
the world?' would we be doing tricks?
(http://www.1000funfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/what-if-dogs-ruled-the-world-01.jpg)
There's a book about that called "City".
It was written in 1952 by Clifford D. Simak and it won a Hugo award for Science Fiction.
You should read it sometime, it's a quick read and you'll laugh the whole way through it. :green:
-
If it was reversed you could set up your own "Pray them Gay" camps :zoinks:
And we would all worship this guy. :zoinks:
(http://kylesmithonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/bondage_jesus.jpg)
-
Hmmpf, Jesus, if he really existed, was probably gay or a NAMBLA member anyways. ::)
He always surrounded himself with men and children.
-
Hmmpf, Jesus, if he really existed, was probably gay or a NAMBLA member anyways. ::)
He always surrounded himself with men and children.
:lol:
Elton John said a little while ago that Jesus was gay , needless to say not many people were happy. :zoinks:
-
Speaking of pasta and homophobes.....
Pastor Fred Phelps Minister of hate Westboro Baptist Church (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuR22urjfP4#ws)
-
ARE GOING TO HELL!!!!!! :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame:
But in all seriousness.... :P
I once read a book where the ratio of Gay to Straight people was reversed as well as opinions on sexuality and discrimination , so there were anti-straight organisations. :laugh:
It just popped into my head and I think it would be an interesting philosophical "What if" scenario , especially interesting if you were to present this idea to a radical homophobe.
But now to actually draw a point to my rambling (Caffiene induced I'm afraid) what kind of reverse "What if" scenarios can you all come up with? , could be interesting. :orly:
I end up in limbo either way. :asthing:
-
ARE GOING TO HELL!!!!!! :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame:
But in all seriousness.... :P
I once read a book where the ratio of Gay to Straight people was reversed as well as opinions on sexuality and discrimination , so there were anti-straight organisations. :laugh:
It just popped into my head and I think it would be an interesting philosophical "What if" scenario , especially interesting if you were to present this idea to a radical homophobe.
But now to actually draw a point to my rambling (Caffiene induced I'm afraid) what kind of reverse "What if" scenarios can you all come up with? , could be interesting. :orly:
I end up in limbo either way. :asthing:
:lol:
-
I'm safe, as we don't believe in either heaven or hell as actual places.
They only exist as states of mind.
-
I'm safe, as we don't believe in either heaven or hell as actual places.
They only exist as states of mind.
When a whole society thinks you belong in hell, you'll live in hell while you are alive.
Beliefs about heaven or hell existing or not after death will not make any difference there.
-
I'm safe, as we don't believe in either heaven or hell as actual places.
They only exist as states of mind.
When a whole society thinks you belong in hell, you'll live in hell while you are alive.
:indeed:
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
Hell, in my case, was a place called Papillion, Nebraska. :tantrum:
-
I'm safe, as we don't believe in either heaven or hell as actual places.
They only exist as states of mind.
When a whole society thinks you belong in hell, you'll live in hell while you are alive.
:indeed:
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
Hell, in my case, was a place called Papillion, Nebraska. :tantrum:
I hope you wear that proudly amongst all those christards.
-
What if the only material available to make guns from was spaghetti?
Then the flying spaghetti monster would be a god of war.
Hmmpf, Jesus, if he really existed, was probably gay or a NAMBLA member anyways. ::)
He always surrounded himself with men and children.
And female hookers!
-
Jesus' Twelve Apostles were all men. That should tell you something.
-
Jesus' Twelve Apostles were all men. That should tell you something.
Some of them looked effeminate, according to da Vinci.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
-
Jesus' Twelve Apostles were all men. That should tell you something.
Some of them looked effeminate, according to da Vinci.
Jesus himself wasn't any less effeminate than they were. :autism:
-
Jesus' Twelve Apostles were all men. That should tell you something.
Some of them looked effeminate, according to da Vinci.
Jesus himself wasn't any less effeminate than they were. :autism:
It's a common misconception that Christ looked as he did in the da Vinci painting. He would have looked more like this:
(http://en.kingofsat.net/jpg/arab-tv.jpg)
Without the headdress and the clean appearence.
-
What if the only material available to make guns from was spaghetti?
Then all guns would fire meatballs! :drool:
With Parmesan cheese gunpowder.
But we're just spaghulating.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
Homophobic troll is homophobic.
-
Jesus' Twelve Apostles were all men. That should tell you something.
Some of them looked effeminate, according to da Vinci.
According to Dan Brown, at least. :P
-
Jesus' Twelve Apostles were all men. That should tell you something.
Some of them looked effeminate, according to da Vinci.
According to Dan Brown, at least. :P
I wonder if he borrowed the Enigma device from Bletchingley Park and ran it over the Bible to get his version of events.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
-
You're also forgetting that half of that complete-gay population would be lesbians, who are much less likely to do the anal
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
-
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex.
:duh:
No! No! No! ::)
AIDS spread faster in gay men due to the fact that they're far more promiscous than straight men.
It's no more or less likely to spread through anal or vaginal sex. :duh:
-
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex.
:duh:
No! No! No! ::)
AIDS spread faster in gay men due to the fact that they're far more promiscous than straight men.
It's no more or less likely to spread through anal or vaginal sex. :duh:
Indeed. That's why it spread so fast in Africa.
The tighter or less lubricated the cavity, the bigger the chance of small ruptures, and thus contamination though.
Sorry, prude mode. :P
-
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex.
:duh:
No! No! No! ::)
AIDS spread faster in gay men due to the fact that they're far more promiscous than straight men.
It's no more or less likely to spread through anal or vaginal sex. :duh:
Not ALL gay men are more promiscuous than straight men sadly. :'(
Although apparently anal sex does increase chances due to the tissue around the anus being less resilient or something. :dunno:
Often, people think that sex between men is all about anal sex - it isn't, but anal sex carries the greatest risk in terms of contracting or transmitting HIV. You can't 'create' HIV or an STD by having anal sex, but it is a high-risk activity. You can reduce the risks by using a condom properly. Some men prefer to use female condoms when having sex with other guys.
Try not to tear or damage the inside of the anus - this will increase the chances of HIV being transmitted when having anal sex or when licking or touching the anus.
Compared to anal sex, oral is much less risky, but there are a number of STDs that can be transmitted when giving or receiving oral sex.
http://www.avert.org/young-gay-sex.htm (http://www.avert.org/young-gay-sex.htm)
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speed of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
-
I wonder if anal sex was in fact natural? I mean, you have the male "P-spot", which can only be stimulated with the penetration of the anal cavity. :zoinks:
-
I wonder if anal sex was in fact natural? I mean, you have the male "P-spot", which can only be stimulated with the penetration of the anal cavity. :zoinks:
Consider a doctor shoves his finger up your arse to check your prostate, it shouldn't seem unreasonable for richard's BIG FUCKING PETER to stimulate it as well.
-
No doubt at all that anal sex in males would stimulate the prostate glands.
now how many straight men would want to be fucked up the arse to get this sexual benefit?
OK now we have the answer as to why this is a mute point.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
Unprotected anal sex is more likely to transmit HIV, I think because rectal tissue is more likely to be torn or abraded during sex than vaginal tissue. In places where female "circumcision" or dry sex is more prevalent, I think that unprotected vaginal sex is also a good way to transmit HIV.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
:indeed:
No doubt at all that anal sex in males would stimulate the prostate glands.
now how many straight men would want to be fucked up the arse to get this sexual benefit?
OK now we have the answer as to why this is a mute point.
Actually not as cut and dry as that.
“Straight guys come in looking for the Aneros,” says Riccardi, “but once they get all their questions answered, they’ll walk out with something more fun and less medical for themselves. Or their girlfriends will come in looking for ways they can be the penetrator, too.” When Riccardi first started working at Babeland three years ago, she would gently ask straight female customers if they’d ever tried sticking a finger up their boyfriend’s or husband’s bum, and they’d shoot her looks of horror. “Now when I ask them that question, they almost all say, ‘Oh, sure.’ ” The store’s strap-on sales have never been higher.
“My wife is totally turned on by the idea of ‘having’ me, as that’s just not something women really get to do most of the time, and it’s not something that guys have usually had done to them. It really is a reversal in the most primal of ways,” explains newlywed Brooklynite Anthony. “I think anyone who doesn’t enjoy it or thinks they wouldn’t is hindered by their own hang-ups. It feels good, period. And breaking taboos is sexy. Variety is sexy. Being vulnerable is sexy.”
I seem to remember Eris talking about using strap on's with her subs too , and there are high numbers of straight men into BDSM / Humilation iirc.
-
It really doesn't have to be as cut and dry as all that though Squiddy. The fact is that not all gay men are into prostate stimulation via prostate and not all straight who engage in this are gay BUT as a straight male I have no interest in seeking this out.
So when it comes to the question as to "whether I would find male to male anal sex pleasurable?", I doubt it, prostate gland notwithstanding. Would I venture here experimentally, to know for sure? Nope. I will die wondering maybe but you know I can live with that easily.
-
It really doesn't have to be as cut and dry as all that though Squiddy. The fact is that not all gay men are into prostate stimulation via prostate and not all straight who engage in this are gay BUT as a straight male I have no interest in seeking this out.
So when it comes to the question as to "whether I would find male to male anal sex pleasurable?", I doubt it, prostate gland notwithstanding. Would I venture here experimentally, to know for sure? Nope. I will die wondering maybe but you know I can live with that easily.
I know , I was merely pointing out that not all straight men avoid it just as not all gay men seek it.
If I'm quite honest the idea of it sounds horrifying to even me. :P
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
If homosexuality were the norm, the planet's overpopulation problems would be solved.
-
I wonder if anal sex was in fact natural? I mean, you have the male "P-spot", which can only be stimulated with the penetration of the anal cavity. :zoinks:
It's not "unnatural" since people do it. What's natural and what's not is a matter of taste and that thing called "morality", whatever THAT is.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
If homosexuality were the norm, the planet's overpopulation problems would be solved.
The percentage of unwanted kids would probably drop rapidly.
Overpopulation of the planet could still happen. The wish to have kids isn't related to sexual orientation.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
If homosexuality were the norm, the planet's overpopulation problems would be solved.
The percentage of unwanted kids would probably drop rapidly.
Overpopulation of the planet could still happen. The wish to have kids isn't related to sexual orientation.
:indeed:
-
Overpopulation is a problem. The fact that the stupid people outbreed the intellectual is an even bigger problem.
-
Overpopulation is a problem. The fact that the stupid people outbreed the intellectual is an even bigger problem.
Even if the intellectual people could outbreed the stupid people it would take forever to rebalance the world.
I remember reading a bit is SF years ago. It seems that the solar system orbited out of a "cloud" that dampened the intellect. That allowed the "average intelligent" people to become geniuses. They built space ships and left to explore the Universe. They left behind the "retarded" who had now had normal intelligence. I'm always sad when I think of that story because I feel sorry for those left behind.
-
And now an advertisment from your friendly food distributor:
Soylent green trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVpN312hYgU#)
IT'S PEOPLE! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpE#ws)
-
@Penty. I dont think stupid people outbreed smart people. Underprivilaged people outbreed people from more privilaged backgrounds. The underprivilaged arent intrinsically more stupid than the privilaged. They just have less chance of a decent education, and a good life.
This isnt a genetic issue that youre describing. IMO its a problem with the unfair society that is America, and that Britain is intent on following. If the poor were treated better, thwy would not create the offspring that you see as stupid.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
If homosexuality were the norm, the planet's overpopulation problems would be solved.
The percentage of unwanted kids would probably drop rapidly.
Overpopulation of the planet could still happen. The wish to have kids isn't related to sexual orientation.
:indeed:
But the hard-wired production mechanism is, so I'd say there would be a lot less kids.
-
And here was me thinking that homosexuality means you would find the idea of fucking a woman extremely appalling.
I mean, as a straight guy, I know I would never want to have sex with any creature that happens to have a penis, so I thought it'd make sense to think something similar about homosexuals when it comes to people of the opposite gender. But it seems like homosexuality is not exactly the opposite of heterosexuality.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
If homosexuality were the norm, the planet's overpopulation problems would be solved.
The percentage of unwanted kids would probably drop rapidly.
Overpopulation of the planet could still happen. The wish to have kids isn't related to sexual orientation.
:indeed:
But the hard-wired production mechanism is, so I'd say there would be a lot less kids.
That's assuming we're talking about breeding :P
I think QV is referring to surrogacy and adoption, actually I've heard of studies which have observed gay "couples" in the animal world adopting abandoned young , I'm not sure on the validity and haven't seen these studies but I've heard about them , if I find them I'll post them.
And here was me thinking that homosexuality means you would find the idea of fucking a woman extremely appalling.
I mean, as a straight guy, I know I would never want to have sex with any creature that happens to have a penis, so I thought it'd make sense to think something similar about homosexuals when it comes to people of the opposite gender. But it seems like homosexuality is not exactly the opposite of heterosexuality.
Actually you have a lot of cross dressers who are gay and maintain normal gay relationships with another man , so it isn't quite as cut and dry as that.
Oh and fornication is not the only method to create kids anymore.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
If homosexuality were the norm, the planet's overpopulation problems would be solved.
The percentage of unwanted kids would probably drop rapidly.
Overpopulation of the planet could still happen. The wish to have kids isn't related to sexual orientation.
:indeed:
But the hard-wired production mechanism is, so I'd say there would be a lot less kids.
That's assuming we're talking about breeding :P
I think QV is referring to surrogacy and adoption, actually I've heard of studies which have observed gay "couples" in the animal world adopting abandoned young , I'm not sure on the validity and haven't seen these studies but I've heard about them , if I find them I'll post them.
Oh and fornication is not the only method to create kids anymore.
Indeed. Sperm-banks, surrogate moms. "dating"-services for biological parents to meet. Different family structures. Plenty of possibilities.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
If homosexuality were the norm, research on defeating HIV would be world-wide top priority. There might even be a cure or a vaccine then.
If homosexuality were the norm, the planet's overpopulation problems would be solved.
The percentage of unwanted kids would probably drop rapidly.
Overpopulation of the planet could still happen. The wish to have kids isn't related to sexual orientation.
:indeed:
But the hard-wired production mechanism is, so I'd say there would be a lot less kids.
That's assuming we're talking about breeding :P
I think QV is referring to surrogacy and adoption, actually I've heard of studies which have observed gay "couples" in the animal world adopting abandoned young , I'm not sure on the validity and haven't seen these studies but I've heard about them , if I find them I'll post them.
Oh and fornication is not the only method to create kids anymore.
Indeed. Sperm-banks, surrogate moms. "dating"-services for biological parents to meet. Different family structures. Plenty of possibilities.
:indeed:
-
And here was me thinking that homosexuality means you would find the idea of fucking a woman extremely appalling.
I mean, as a straight guy, I know I would never want to have sex with any creature that happens to have a penis, so I thought it'd make sense to think something similar about homosexuals when it comes to people of the opposite gender. But it seems like homosexuality is not exactly the opposite of heterosexuality.
And going by strict definition, homosexuality is an anathema. If what everyone is saying is correct.
-
And here was me thinking that homosexuality means you would find the idea of fucking a woman extremely appalling.
I mean, as a straight guy, I know I would never want to have sex with any creature that happens to have a penis, so I thought it'd make sense to think something similar about homosexuals when it comes to people of the opposite gender. But it seems like homosexuality is not exactly the opposite of heterosexuality.
And going by strict definition, homosexuality is an anathema. If what everyone is saying is correct.
Your "strict definition" of homosexuality is "something to be loathed and despised"? I feel sad for you.
-
Agreed.
-
I read that myself, and was a little shocked. I assumed I picked him up wrong.
I assume he meant strict definition of anathema rather than homosexuality, and that gay sex is something that the aversge straight person would despise doing. I would despise being screwed in the ass by a man, or a woman with a strap on, therefore anal sex is anathema to me. Doesnt mean that its wrong for people who like it though.
I hope thats what he meant anyway.
-
That's a good point.
-
I read that myself, and was a little shocked. I assumed I picked him up wrong.
I assume he meant strict definition of anathema rather than homosexuality, and that gay sex is something that the aversge straight person would despise doing. I would despise being screwed in the ass by a man, or a woman with a strap on, therefore anal sex is anathema to me. Doesnt mean that its wrong for people who like it though.
I hope thats what he meant anyway.
That's similar to how I read it except that I read it as supporting MCalavera's premise that gay people would not want to have straight sex, that straight sex would be anathema for homosexuals.
It's also possible that he's thinking of a different definition for anathema:
a·nath·e·ma /əˈnæθəmə/ Show Spelled
[uh-nath-uh-muh] Show IPA
–noun, plural -mas.
1. a person or thing detested or loathed: That subject is anathema to him.
2. a person or thing accursed or consigned to damnation or destruction.
3. a formal ecclesiastical curse involving excommunication.
4. any imprecation of divine punishment.
5. a curse; execration.
-
you'll just have to wait until he logs on again.
-
He's probably currently thinking up new creative ways to have a go at Richard and his BIG FUCKING PETER.
-
Yes, he does seem rather fond of Richards big Peter. First we had Rage and Squid.
Iwonder if Steve and Richard will be next.
-
It's also possible that he's thinking of a different definition for anathema:
Yes. Anathema meaning has religious tones to me, so maybe read it different than Hubert or Butterflies.
-
I read that myself, and was a little shocked. I assumed I picked him up wrong.
I assume he meant strict definition of anathema rather than homosexuality, and that gay sex is something that the aversge straight person would despise doing. I would despise being screwed in the ass by a man, or a woman with a strap on, therefore anal sex is anathema to me. Doesnt mean that its wrong for people who like it though.
I hope thats what he meant anyway.
Again, why do people here misread what I say?
Callaway got it right. I was talking about MC post about homosexuals having straight sex, and that by definition (homo = single) and homosexual having straight sex would be anathema.
How hard can it be for people to understand the written word?
-
The words 'homosexuality is an anathema' doesn't really convey 'homosexuals think hetero sex is an anathema', so see how it was misunderstood in more than one way.
-
I'm very sure Steve-O was being sarcastic about homosexuality being anathema ...
You know how sarcastic he can get at times.
-
I certainly dont see straight sex as anathema.
Anathema has more than one meaning, so it was confusing.
-
I certainly dont see straight sex as anathema.
Anathema has more than one meaning, so it was confusing.
Anathema has 6 meanings, none of which mean what he intended so it is easy to see why people misunderstand. In fact they did not misunderstand, he miscommunicated.
a·nath·e·ma /əˈnæθəmə/ Show Spelled
[uh-nath-uh-muh] Show IPA
–noun, plural -mas.
1. a person or thing detested or loathed: That subject is anathema to him.
2. a person or thing accursed or consigned to damnation or destruction.
3. a formal ecclesiastical curse involving excommunication.
4. any imprecation of divine punishment.
5. a curse; execration.
Perhaps the misunderstanding comes from the definition of "detest or loathe". While I have no interest in homosexual sex myself, I do not find the act detestable or loathsome. I would have to have pretty strong feelings on the matter to describe my lack of desire to engage in the behavior in such strong terms. I might almost say that the lady doth protest too much. ;)
-
Jimmy I don't think people misread you - I think you miswrote what you were trying to get across
"homosexiuality is an anethema" doesn't translate to "straight sex is anathema for gay people"
Also I agree with Hubert - being gay isn't necessarily about "loathing" straight sex. I mean someone who's been raped or abused could be in that position themselves, but still be straight.
-
I give up.
-
Did someone say Anathema? :P
Anathema - The Silent Enigma (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqsNCblUZPA#)
-
This is all terribly exciting and interesting.
-
This is all terribly exciting and interesting.
Semantics usually are.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
About two-thirds of gay men have sex. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/) Less people use condoms in anal sex due to the lack of natural lubrication. Lesbians would contract through blood transfusions.
-
Heh, this thread reminds me of that time I got into an argument with that stupid bitch about anal sex and STD risk on WP.
PROTIP: If you want someone to listen, don't go getting pissed and scream ignorance and accusations/insinuations at them, it just makes them less inclined to listen and resort to trolling instead.
Needless to say I did learn something, not by her butthurt ranting, but by the fact I decided to look into the subject more for trolling material and incidentally saw information that corrected me. However, I've now made it my duty to piss off any PC fucktard I come across, purely to reveal their hypocrisy in attitude. :trollface:
There's nothing worse than the attitude of the PC pretentious/self-righteous morons. Hypocrites of their own principle of so-called tolerance and patience. ::)
...Err, sorry about that, don't mind me, I just hate PCfags who think they're morally superior is all.
-
One prime example of that here was GA. God he/she/it/dog was a fucking cunt.
-
One prime example of that here was GA. God he/she/it/dog was a fucking cunt.
lol yeah, thank god that she left. I mean seriously, talk about alienating the audience and being an hypocrite.
But, not that it's all bad though... :zoinks:
The advantages of such types are that they are so easy to piss off. I don't think you even need to troll them, just say something slightly inaccurate and watch them shit bricks.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
About two-thirds of gay men have sex. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/) Less people use condoms in anal sex due to the lack of natural lubrication. Lesbians would contract through blood transfusions.
Two thirds of gay men have sex yes , but sex between two men is not necessarily anal.
Sexuality is not one straight (excuse the pun) definition , it has many definitions and interpretations between each individual person.
For example , what one person may consider porn is not porn to another , Someone may be into BDSM porn where there aren't necessarily no genitalia showing while another may be a Voreaphile, the definition of porn towards those individuals is completely different.
Some people don't consider anal sex to be sex , more like a fetishism , and just as some gay men like it , others don't and don't wish to participate in it.
-
How many gays enjoy using fleshlights?
Careful. This may be a trick question. :autism:
-
Squiddy - don't confuse him with facts. The idea of an entire world population of gay men having anal sex is what gets him fapping each night, and without that he might not be able to get a good night's rest.
-
How many gays enjoy using fleshlights?
Careful. This may be a trick question. :autism:
:lol:
Honestly I have no idea , I'm actually not entirely sure what a fleshlight is :P
Squiddy - don't confuse him with facts. The idea of an entire world population of gay men having anal sex is what gets him fapping each night, and without that he might not be able to get a good night's rest.
:rofl:
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
About two-thirds of gay men have sex. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/) Less people use condoms in anal sex due to the lack of natural lubrication. Lesbians would contract through blood transfusions.
Two thirds of gay men have sex yes , but sex between two men is not necessarily anal.
Sexuality is not one straight (excuse the pun) definition , it has many definitions and interpretations between each individual person.
For example , what one person may consider porn is not porn to another , Someone may be into BDSM porn where there aren't necessarily no genitalia showing while another may be a Voreaphile, the definition of porn towards those individuals is completely different.
Some people don't consider anal sex to be sex , more like a fetishism , and just as some gay men like it , others don't and don't wish to participate in it.
If you follow Dexter's link, which is from the British Medical Journal, it says that two-thirds of gay men do have anal sex.
Facts and figures
•Two thirds of gay men have anal sex
•Ten per cent of heterosexual couples regularly have anal sex
•The estimate that 6% of the male population are gay may be an underestimate
•No one knows how common sexual problems are in this group
•Their presentation varies widely from clinic to clinic
•Erectile dysfunction is increasingly seen in men infected with HIV
•Retarded ejaculation is common
•Piles and anal fissures are no more common in gay men than in the general population
•Vaginismus, anorgasmia, and low sex drive occur in lesbians as in heterosexual women
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
About two-thirds of gay men have sex. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/) Less people use condoms in anal sex due to the lack of natural lubrication. Lesbians would contract through blood transfusions.
Two thirds of gay men have sex yes , but sex between two men is not necessarily anal.
Sexuality is not one straight (excuse the pun) definition , it has many definitions and interpretations between each individual person.
For example , what one person may consider porn is not porn to another , Someone may be into BDSM porn where there aren't necessarily no genitalia showing while another may be a Voreaphile, the definition of porn towards those individuals is completely different.
Some people don't consider anal sex to be sex , more like a fetishism , and just as some gay men like it , others don't and don't wish to participate in it.
If you follow Dexter's link, which is from the British Medical Journal, it says that two-thirds of gay men do have anal sex.
Facts and figures
•Two thirds of gay men have anal sex
•Ten per cent of heterosexual couples regularly have anal sex
•The estimate that 6% of the male population are gay may be an underestimate
•No one knows how common sexual problems are in this group
•Their presentation varies widely from clinic to clinic
•Erectile dysfunction is increasingly seen in men infected with HIV
•Retarded ejaculation is common
•Piles and anal fissures are no more common in gay men than in the general population
•Vaginismus, anorgasmia, and low sex drive occur in lesbians as in heterosexual women
It also says this.
Mutual masturbation, oral sex, and anal sex can be considered core activities, although many gay men do not practise anal sex at all.
I'm sorry but I call bullshit on that statistic , I highly doubt that many gay men engage in anal sex.
-
who watched all these gay men having sex to form these statistics?
statistics on what every member of some group get upto in bed are never gonna be very accurate
-
who watched all these gay men having sex to form these statistics?
statistics on what every member of some group get upto in bed are never gonna be very accurate
I am sure Squiddy would volunteer for that job if a new study was proposed :zoinks:
-
who watched all these gay men having sex to form these statistics?
statistics on what every member of some group get upto in bed are never gonna be very accurate
I am sure Squiddy would volunteer for that job if a new study was proposed :zoinks:
Honestly I'd rather join in. :P
-
who watched all these gay men having sex to form these statistics?
statistics on what every member of some group get upto in bed are never gonna be very accurate
Good point. I checked on the statistics on the "percentage of gay men who have anal sex" and I found varying numbers, from around one-half to around three-fourths. I think that the percentage depends on the gay men who are surveyed.
-
the fact that many gay men are not openly gay should also be taken into account
I doubt VD was surveyed
also plenty of people aren't gettin laid at all, in the ass or otherwise
-
well i am a straight woman and I have anal sex with men. I mean in their ass :)
I have had guys wonder if they are gay because they are like that. I always answer that with. " well, do you want a dick in your mouth". If they say no, I tell them not to worry they are straight. Then I tell them to bend over n shut up
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
About two-thirds of gay men have sex. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/) Less people use condoms in anal sex due to the lack of natural lubrication. Lesbians would contract through blood transfusions.
Two thirds of gay men have sex yes , but sex between two men is not necessarily anal.
Sexuality is not one straight (excuse the pun) definition , it has many definitions and interpretations between each individual person.
For example , what one person may consider porn is not porn to another , Someone may be into BDSM porn where there aren't necessarily no genitalia showing while another may be a Voreaphile, the definition of porn towards those individuals is completely different.
Some people don't consider anal sex to be sex , more like a fetishism , and just as some gay men like it , others don't and don't wish to participate in it.
If you follow Dexter's link, which is from the British Medical Journal, it says that two-thirds of gay men do have anal sex.
Facts and figures
•Two thirds of gay men have anal sex
•Ten per cent of heterosexual couples regularly have anal sex
•The estimate that 6% of the male population are gay may be an underestimate
•No one knows how common sexual problems are in this group
•Their presentation varies widely from clinic to clinic
•Erectile dysfunction is increasingly seen in men infected with HIV
•Retarded ejaculation is common
•Piles and anal fissures are no more common in gay men than in the general population
•Vaginismus, anorgasmia, and low sex drive occur in lesbians as in heterosexual women
It also says this.
Mutual masturbation, oral sex, and anal sex can be considered core activities, although many gay men do not practise anal sex at all.
I'm sorry but I call bullshit on that statistic , I highly doubt that many gay men engage in anal sex.
Whatever. I was just being hypothetical, but if it gets your panties in a twist, then I'll admit that homosexuals are superior to heterosexuals and there would be no wars and candy for all if homosexuals ruled the world.
-
Was that the contention? I only just skimmed this all and I think you were talking about the spread of AIDS and the fact that if everyone were gay that the aids epidemic would have fucked up everyone or something.
I did not think it was a matter of who was or was not superior, just whether you were talking out of your arse.
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
About two-thirds of gay men have sex. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/) Less people use condoms in anal sex due to the lack of natural lubrication. Lesbians would contract through blood transfusions.
Two thirds of gay men have sex yes , but sex between two men is not necessarily anal.
Sexuality is not one straight (excuse the pun) definition , it has many definitions and interpretations between each individual person.
For example , what one person may consider porn is not porn to another , Someone may be into BDSM porn where there aren't necessarily no genitalia showing while another may be a Voreaphile, the definition of porn towards those individuals is completely different.
Some people don't consider anal sex to be sex , more like a fetishism , and just as some gay men like it , others don't and don't wish to participate in it.
If you follow Dexter's link, which is from the British Medical Journal, it says that two-thirds of gay men do have anal sex.
Facts and figures
•Two thirds of gay men have anal sex
•Ten per cent of heterosexual couples regularly have anal sex
•The estimate that 6% of the male population are gay may be an underestimate
•No one knows how common sexual problems are in this group
•Their presentation varies widely from clinic to clinic
•Erectile dysfunction is increasingly seen in men infected with HIV
•Retarded ejaculation is common
•Piles and anal fissures are no more common in gay men than in the general population
•Vaginismus, anorgasmia, and low sex drive occur in lesbians as in heterosexual women
It also says this.
Mutual masturbation, oral sex, and anal sex can be considered core activities, although many gay men do not practise anal sex at all.
I'm sorry but I call bullshit on that statistic , I highly doubt that many gay men engage in anal sex.
Whatever. I was just being hypothetical, but if it gets your panties in a twist, then I'll admit that homosexuals are superior to heterosexuals and there would be no wars and candy for all if homosexuals ruled the world.
Happy Birthday Homophobe :thumbup:
-
We would all die from AIDS.
Implying gays already all die of aids. ::)
If homosexuality were the norm, the HIV epidemic would've spread much faster due to the fact that it is more likely to transmit during anal sex. Also, drug users and blood donors would've been more likely to have HIV as well.
Straight couples participate in Anal sex too you know , probably at a higher percentage than gay couples.
No Squiddy. All teh homoseckshuals do the buttsex and none of the "normal" people do. :LOL:
:lol:
I thought I would explain it in basic terms so as not to confuse the poor dear. :angel:
Anal sex as a commonality among straight people has only become a recent phenomena. Even including heterosexual anal sex, it is mainly a one way path. We would have made it a number one priority, but it is not certain that the focus on curing it would be faster than the speeding of the epidemic. Nothing that I have said is ignorant. Anal sex is more likely than vaginal sex to transmit STDs due the the rectal tissue being thinner.
It actually is ignorant to claim that all gay men engage in anal sex. The last figures I read said it was somewhere around 10%. Even if we presume that A) anal sex is a more likely sexual method to contract or spread HIV and B) that when gay men do so they are somehow universally unable to use a condom, your argument still doesn't stand up as gay does not equal anal sex.
Plus you have conveniently ignored the statement that 50% of the population would be lesbian.
About two-thirds of gay men have sex. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114912/) Less people use condoms in anal sex due to the lack of natural lubrication. Lesbians would contract through blood transfusions.
Two thirds of gay men have sex yes , but sex between two men is not necessarily anal.
Sexuality is not one straight (excuse the pun) definition , it has many definitions and interpretations between each individual person.
For example , what one person may consider porn is not porn to another , Someone may be into BDSM porn where there aren't necessarily no genitalia showing while another may be a Voreaphile, the definition of porn towards those individuals is completely different.
Some people don't consider anal sex to be sex , more like a fetishism , and just as some gay men like it , others don't and don't wish to participate in it.
If you follow Dexter's link, which is from the British Medical Journal, it says that two-thirds of gay men do have anal sex.
Facts and figures
•Two thirds of gay men have anal sex
•Ten per cent of heterosexual couples regularly have anal sex
•The estimate that 6% of the male population are gay may be an underestimate
•No one knows how common sexual problems are in this group
•Their presentation varies widely from clinic to clinic
•Erectile dysfunction is increasingly seen in men infected with HIV
•Retarded ejaculation is common
•Piles and anal fissures are no more common in gay men than in the general population
•Vaginismus, anorgasmia, and low sex drive occur in lesbians as in heterosexual women
It also says this.
Mutual masturbation, oral sex, and anal sex can be considered core activities, although many gay men do not practise anal sex at all.
I'm sorry but I call bullshit on that statistic , I highly doubt that many gay men engage in anal sex.
Whatever. I was just being hypothetical, but if it gets your panties in a twist, then I'll admit that homosexuals are superior to heterosexuals and there would be no wars and candy for all if homosexuals ruled the world.
Good boy.
Now get back in your chains like a good little gimpy closet case. :squiddy: :thumbup:
-
We all know AIDS came from some sick monkeys who raped a couple of gays.
-
We all know AIDS came from some sick monkeys who raped a couple of gays.
Dexter thinks it was the other way around.
-
We all know AIDS came from some sick monkeys who raped a couple of gays.
Dexter thinks it was the other way around.
What can I say?
I definately want to marry a chimp and fuck it's brains out. :autism:
-
We all know AIDS came from some sick monkeys who raped a couple of gays.
Dexter thinks it was the other way around.
What can I say?
I definately want to marry a chimp and fuck it's brains out. :autism:
It's clearly because you're a homosexual that you're such a pervert. :autism:
-
We all know AIDS came from some sick monkeys who raped a couple of gays.
Dexter thinks it was the other way around.
What can I say?
I definately want to marry a chimp and fuck it's brains out. :autism:
It's clearly because you're a homosexual that you're such a pervert. :autism:
You mean the two things are seperate?! :o
-
You know what the irony is in this?
Who started the widespead epidemic that is AIDS? Straight men and straight women.
Started in Africa in the 1930's orhaned baby monkeys valued by some african tribes were (if the were still suckling) nursed by african native women.
They often were infected and passed on the infection through the trasmission of bodily fluids namely blood and breast milk.
Back then the Aids virus had not transmuted.
Unfaithful husbands and some unfaithful women would have sex with locals from other tribes and so it progressed out towards the ports of Africa, in time. Now we are not talking Aids as we know it. But the virus evolved. By the time tourists and sailors bought home the gift of Aids from their time inport with local women, back home, Aids had started to takle its toll.
Come 1980's it was a nasty killing virus.
Why was it mainly in the gay and drug using communities? Well the sharing of needles and as one gay an said in a documentary. "Well we did not ever use condoms. I mean neither of us would get pregnant."
Aids history 101.
There is irony. Were it not for straight women and men not being able to keep their "affections" limited to their partners Aids would not have spread past the villages in Africa
-
You know what the irony is in this?
Who started the widespead epidemic that is AIDS? Straight men and straight women.
Started in Africa in the 1930's orhaned baby monkeys valued by some african tribes were (if the were still suckling) nursed by african native women.
They often were infected and passed on the infection through the trasmission of bodily fluids namely blood and breast milk.
Back then the Aids virus had not transmuted.
Unfaithful husbands and some unfaithful women would have sex with locals from other tribes and so it progressed out towards the ports of Africa, in time. Now we are not talking Aids as we know it. But the virus evolved. By the time tourists and sailors bought home the gift of Aids from their time inport with local women, back home, Aids had started to takle its toll.
Come 1980's it was a nasty killing virus.
Why was it mainly in the gay and drug using communities? Well the sharing of needles and as one gay an said in a documentary. "Well we did not ever use condoms. I mean neither of us would get pregnant."
Aids history 101.
There is irony. Were it not for straight women and men not being able to keep their "affections" limited to their partners Aids would not have spread past the villages in Africa
Well then maybe it wouldn't have become an epidemic. I really hope Tart and Hubert are trolling, because it is ridiculous how defensive they are about homosexuality.
-
Point is, if everyone were gay, and I mean homosexual and not just happy, there would be a population implosion. Why? Gay couples would be forced to adopt, or go surrogate, and I don't think the laws have changed that much to allow gay couples the freedom to have children at the same rate as hetero couples.
And imagine if things got tighter, through the generations, we wouldn't have to worry about AIDS killing off people, it'd be our own sexuality that would do it.
Just sayin'.
-
I have successfully masturbated to lesbian pornography. Am I gay ?
-
I have successfully masturbated to lesbian pornography. Am I gay ?
Were you smiling?
Sheryl Crow - If It Makes You Happy [HQ.] (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHd2B9Az2hk#)
-
Well then maybe it wouldn't have become an epidemic. I really hope Tart and Hubert are trolling, because it is ridiculous how defensive they are about homosexuality.
I can't speak for Hubert on this but I found it pretty shocking how you actually still thought that old myth. :LOL:
-
Point is, if everyone were gay, and I mean homosexual and not just happy, there would be a population implosion. Why? Gay couples would be forced to adopt, or go surrogate, and I don't think the laws have changed that much to allow gay couples the freedom to have children at the same rate as hetero couples.
And imagine if things got tighter, through the generations, we wouldn't have to worry about AIDS killing off people, it'd be our own sexuality that would do it.
Just sayin'.
If the majority of people were gay, then it's unlikely that there would be any problems with allowing gays to adopt, as homosexuality would be the norm, rather than the exception.
If the majority of people were gay, then there would be far less accidental pregnancy, therefore far less children to adopt anyway.
It's pretty easy for gay people to have kids. If the majority were gay, it would become a lot easier. It would be as simple as a guy providing a woman with a sample of his man-juice.
People would not stop reproducing simply because they were gay.
The world is already overpopulated, and getting worse. If people had to go to the bother of setting up a surrogacy agreement, they are only likely to go to the bother if they really want a kid. Accidental pregnancy would almost cease to exist, and that would go a long way towards reversing the worlds problems with overpopulation.
-
I have successfully masturbated to lesbian pornography. Am I gay ?
Were you smiling ?
I was making more of this face :autism:
-
I really hope Tart and Hubert are trolling, because it is ridiculous how defensive they are about homosexuality.
I have no idea who you are, as you haven't been active the entire time I have been here. But I find it ridiculous how uneducated and backwards you are.
-
Point is, if everyone were gay, and I mean homosexual and not just happy, there would be a population implosion. Why? Gay couples would be forced to adopt, or go surrogate, and I don't think the laws have changed that much to allow gay couples the freedom to have children at the same rate as hetero couples.
And imagine if things got tighter, through the generations, we wouldn't have to worry about AIDS killing off people, it'd be our own sexuality that would do it.
Just sayin'.
If the majority of people were gay, then it's unlikely that there would be any problems with allowing gays to adopt, as homosexuality would be the norm, rather than the exception.
If the majority of people were gay, then there would be far less accidental pregnancy, therefore far less children to adopt anyway.
It's pretty easy for gay people to have kids. If the majority were gay, it would become a lot easier. It would be as simple as a guy providing a woman with a sample of his man-juice.
People would not stop reproducing simply because they were gay.
The world is already overpopulated, and getting worse. If people had to go to the bother of setting up a surrogacy agreement, they are only likely to go to the bother if they really want a kid. Accidental pregnancy would almost cease to exist, and that would go a long way towards reversing the worlds problems with overpopulation.
Very good point on accidental births.
That was sort of my point, about population. Because there would be less liklihood of accidental and unwanted pregnancies, most (if not all) children born to gay parents (or adopted by gay parents) would be planned.
Yes, the norm. Only real problem is if the fundie Christians still had power in govt, as a lot of them still see homosexuality as the 'devil's work'.
Would be interesting times, indeed.
-
Point is, if everyone were gay, and I mean homosexual and not just happy, there would be a population implosion. Why? Gay couples would be forced to adopt, or go surrogate, and I don't think the laws have changed that much to allow gay couples the freedom to have children at the same rate as hetero couples.
And imagine if things got tighter, through the generations, we wouldn't have to worry about AIDS killing off people, it'd be our own sexuality that would do it.
Just sayin'.
If the majority of people were gay, then it's unlikely that there would be any problems with allowing gays to adopt, as homosexuality would be the norm, rather than the exception.
If the majority of people were gay, then there would be far less accidental pregnancy, therefore far less children to adopt anyway.
It's pretty easy for gay people to have kids. If the majority were gay, it would become a lot easier. It would be as simple as a guy providing a woman with a sample of his man-juice.
People would not stop reproducing simply because they were gay.
The world is already overpopulated, and getting worse. If people had to go to the bother of setting up a surrogacy agreement, they are only likely to go to the bother if they really want a kid. Accidental pregnancy would almost cease to exist, and that would go a long way towards reversing the worlds problems with overpopulation.
Very good point on accidental births.
That was sort of my point, about population. Because there would be less liklihood of accidental and unwanted pregnancies, most (if not all) children born to gay parents (or adopted by gay parents) would be planned.
Yes, the norm. Only real problem is if the fundie Christians still had power in govt, as a lot of them still see homosexuality as the 'devil's work'.
Would be interesting times, indeed.
But surely the majority of fundies would be gay as well, same with fundie Muslims. If they were almost all gay, then I'm sure they would quickly change their objections to it.
-
Point is, if everyone were gay, and I mean homosexual and not just happy, there would be a population implosion. Why? Gay couples would be forced to adopt, or go surrogate, and I don't think the laws have changed that much to allow gay couples the freedom to have children at the same rate as hetero couples.
And imagine if things got tighter, through the generations, we wouldn't have to worry about AIDS killing off people, it'd be our own sexuality that would do it.
Just sayin'.
If the majority of people were gay, then it's unlikely that there would be any problems with allowing gays to adopt, as homosexuality would be the norm, rather than the exception.
If the majority of people were gay, then there would be far less accidental pregnancy, therefore far less children to adopt anyway.
It's pretty easy for gay people to have kids. If the majority were gay, it would become a lot easier. It would be as simple as a guy providing a woman with a sample of his man-juice.
People would not stop reproducing simply because they were gay.
The world is already overpopulated, and getting worse. If people had to go to the bother of setting up a surrogacy agreement, they are only likely to go to the bother if they really want a kid. Accidental pregnancy would almost cease to exist, and that would go a long way towards reversing the worlds problems with overpopulation.
Very good point on accidental births.
That was sort of my point, about population. Because there would be less liklihood of accidental and unwanted pregnancies, most (if not all) children born to gay parents (or adopted by gay parents) would be planned.
Yes, the norm. Only real problem is if the fundie Christians still had power in govt, as a lot of them still see homosexuality as the 'devil's work'.
Would be interesting times, indeed.
But surely the majority of fundies would be gay as well, same with fundie Muslims. If they were almost all gay, then I'm sure they would quickly change their objections to it.
Would be easy, if it were the case. But I still think that with them, their beliefs and their teachings would make them go against the norm. If homosexuality were the norm back in the OT however, then yes, the fundies would be in step as well.
It's really a good hyperthetical situation, and really makes you ponder what might have been.
-
If homosexuality were the norm there would have never been a human race. When we were all living in caves and eating mammoths we were not going to figure out what caused pregnancy and have the forethought to go against our natural urges to continue to populate the species.
-
I once read that 80% of goats are bisexual.
-
I once read that 80% of goats are bisexual.
Who tested that hypothesis? :autism:
-
Oh, and ALL female hyenas give each other oral sex.
in their hierarchy, the females are in charge. At first scientists thought that hyenas were hermaphrodites because the females have these huge fake penises. but they are fake pensises they actally have vaginas..., they are females and females are the boss :)
and to make that fake penis grow (and also because it feels good i assume) female hyenas are constantly giving each other oral sex.
-
They should pay closer attention to their surroundings. Its the fucking Savannah, not a house party at Andy Dick's place.
Lions kill hyena (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGYP1tVfNZc#)
-
I once read that 80% of goats are bisexual.
Who tested that hypothesis? :autism:
Some perv looking up goatse.