Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Hybrid View

  1. #1 Why I Cannot Blame Russia and India for Taking on the Gays 
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,259
    Why I Cannot Blame Russia and India for Taking on the Gays
    By Robert Oscar Lopez
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/..._the_gays.html

    Russia and India: Defenders of Decency, Bogeymen of the Gay Lobby

    Russia remains stalwart in its laws that aim to curb the influence of the West's gay-friendly culture on Russian youth. Meanwhile, last week, in a stunning turn of events, India's high court reinstituted a nineteenth-century law against sodomy. On cue, the ligbitist kibitzers are going crazy in such homophile haunts as the New Yorker and the Guardian, expressing total outrage that there should exist, anywhere on the globe, nations that do not think it's normal or appropriate to subsidize and celebrate men sodomizing boys.

    I cannot blame Russia, India, or any nation for reacting to what they see in the West with measures that I would ostensibly oppose on principle. Russia's ban on promoting homosexuality to children does impinge on free speech. India's ban on sodomy is an intrusion into the sex lives of consenting adults. But we don't live in an ostensible world. We live in a real world, where there are real gay organizations in the West, who are engaging in real machinations to spread their sickness all over the globe.

    It's time to admit it, my gay brothers: Our culture is sick

    Gay male culture in the United States, Canada, Latin America, and much of Europe is sick. It is literally plagued with disease -- not only HIV (which is rising again), but also syphilis (which has made a comeback). And Michelangelo Signorile, the dowager prince of gay news at the Huffington Post, admitted at long last what gay watchdog groups had been denying for decades upon decades: the chronic, timeless state of the homosexual man is to chase after pubescent boys.

    Signorile has been busy defending 39-year-old Dustin Lance Black, the screenwriter who seduced a 19-year-old boy -- and yes, a teenager is a boy, period, even if he is a gold medalist; for heaven's sake, he can't even legally drink alcohol in the U.S. Signorile called the sleazy predation "intergenerational sex" and explained to all the "homophobic" people who might object that in the gay world, it's normal for old men to sodomize boys.

    Signorile says this is "nurturing" and educational, kind of like being someone's private tutor, only the tutelage involves lubricant, preparatory enemas, and the tearing of the boy's rectal lining, all in the name of initiation. It's also unsanitary, painful, and likely to interfere with whatever development the boy might have toward eventual sex with women.

    Two weeks after Signorile's ode to sleaze, the Daily Mail broke yet another story of a homosexual dad sodomizing a boy and sharing him with his male partner. This time, the boy in question was not a teen, but nine, and he was Carl Herold's own son. So in two weeks we go from "it's legal, so why not?" to "oh, darn, it's illegal; I guess I shouldn't be encouraging this."

    Scratch that second quote, since the gay writers at Salon and such will never admit wrongdoing. I assume Michelangelo Signorile would rather die than admit that by glamorizing the act of sodomy between men and boys, he would have anything to do with Carl Herold's rationalizing of his own kind of "nurturing" "intergenerational" sex. Sometimes the people who are plunging down the slippery slope don't see the slippery slope; those of us standing at the top screaming "stop the madness" can see it, but nobody listens to us.

    Because part of the gay world's sickness is the diabolical insistence that people are "born" gay, gays like Signorile and Black think of boys as already certified gay flowers waiting to be plucked. Often this comes from their having rewritten their own childhood and adolescence, to convince themselves, as so many vocal gay men do, that they knew they were gay from the time they were five. All of which is nonsense. Read the work of researcher Lisa Diamond. Sexuality is fluid well into our twenties. She focuses on women, probably because she doesn't want to deal with bitchy gay men despising her for playing into the hated "ex-gays'" hands, but the same goes for men. Sexuality is fluid. If you sodomize a boy when he's a teenager, you're imposing your homosexual narrative on him, not awakening something that's inside him waiting to blossom.

    But to understand these truths, gay men would have to tune out the cacophony of rhetoric tied to National Coming Out Day, It Gets Better, Gay-Straight Alliances, and all the other civic institutions devoted to convincing the whole West of the lie that people are born gay and teens need to expedite an online profile so the buzzards can circle overhead, looking for fresh meat.

    I used to avoid assessing the motives of others at all costs. But I can't help supposing that the myth of people being born gay served a very useful purpose of justifying "intergenerational" sex as some sort of "teachable moment" rather than what it is: selfish, sleazy, old gay men sodomizing boys....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,871
    39 year old hetero men sleep with 19 year old females on a regular basis. It's considered cool in the world of rock and roll. Is a 19 year old female any less a teenager than a 19 year old male?


    Russia is wrong in what they are doing. It's not a good sign of progress toward freedom and human rights. No one can talk about homosexuality in a positive manner any more under the threat of criminal prosecution.

    Next, they will ban gays from restaurants and theaters. Then, they'll make them wear some kind of symbol to single them out from the crowd. We all know what happens after that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,158
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    39 year old hetero men sleep with 19 year old females on a regular basis. It's considered cool in the world of rock and roll. Is a 19 year old female any less a teenager than a 19 year old male?


    Russia is wrong in what they are doing. It's not a good sign of progress toward freedom and human rights. No one can talk about homosexuality in a positive manner any more under the threat of criminal prosecution.

    Next, they will ban gays from restaurants and theaters. Then, they'll make them wear some kind of symbol to single them out from the crowd. We all know what happens after that.
    Then that will be a good thing.
    We're from Philadelphia, We Fight- Chip Kelly
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    39 year old hetero men sleep with 19 year old females on a regular basis.
    Yea, that's a pretty glaring flaw in this flawed article.

    Unless, of course, the author believes that older men sleeping with 19 year old women forces heterosexuality on them before they can decide to be lesbians.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,259
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Yea, that's a pretty glaring flaw in this flawed article.

    Unless, of course, the author believes that older men sleeping with 19 year old women forces heterosexuality on them before they can decide to be lesbians.
    There's a reason for the "glaring flaw." Homosexuality is actually a fluid thing from the mid teens to the late 20s. Heterosexuality at these ages is much more stable. Without intervention of any kind, teens who identify as homosexual can shift their identification in their late 20s.

    Here are links to some of the research appearing in peer reviewed academic journals:

    1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12639578

    Soc Sci Med. 2003 Apr;56(8):1607-15.
    Same-sex attraction in a birth cohort: prevalence and persistence in early adulthood.
    Dickson N, Paul C, Herbison P.
    Author information
    Abstract

    There is a continuing debate about the importance of social versus biological factors in the expression of same-sex attraction. Investigation of prevalence, continuities, and changes over time among young adults growing up in a country with a relatively accepting climate to homosexuality is likely to illuminate this debate. Analyses were therefore undertaken of self-reported same-sex attraction at age 21 and 26, in a cohort of about 1000 people born in 1972/3 in one New Zealand city. Participants were also asked about same-sex behaviour and attitudes to same-sex relationships. By age 26, 10.7% of men and 24.5% of women reported being attracted to their own sex at some time. This dropped to 5.6% of men and 16.4% of women who reported some current same-sex attraction. Current attraction predominantly to their own sex or equally to both sexes (major attraction) was reported by 1.6% of men and 2.1% of women. Occasional same-sex attraction, but not major attraction, was more common among the most educated. Between age 21 and 26, slightly more men moved away from an exclusive heterosexual attraction (1.9% of all men) than moved towards it (1.0%), while for women, many more moved away (9.5%) than towards (1.3%) exclusive heterosexual attraction. These findings show that much same-sex attraction is not exclusive and is unstable in early adulthood, especially among women. The proportion of women reporting some same-sex attraction in New Zealand is high compared both to men, and to women in the UK and US. These observations, along with the variation with education, are consistent with a large role for the social environment in the acknowledgement of same-sex attraction. The smaller group with major same-sex attraction, which changed less over time, and did not differ by education, is consistent with a basic biological dimension to sexual attraction. Overall these findings argue against any single explanation for homosexual attraction.
    2. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15803251

    Arch Sex Behav. 2005 Apr;34(2):173-83.
    Sex differences in the flexibility of sexual orientation: a multidimensional retrospective assessment.
    Kinnish KK, Strassberg DS, Turner CW.
    Author information
    Abstract

    The flexibility of sexual orientation in men and women was examined by assessing self-reported change over time for three dimensions of sexual orientation (sexual fantasy, romantic attraction, and sexual behavior) across three categorical classifications of current sexual orientation (heterosexual, bisexual, and gay). The primary purpose of the study was to determine if there were sex differences in the flexibility (i.e., change over time) of sexual orientation and how such differences were manifested across different dimensions of orientation over the lifespan. Retrospective, life-long ratings of sexual orientation were made by 762 currently self-identified heterosexual, bisexual, and gay men and women, aged 36 to 60, via a self-report questionnaire. Cumulative change scores were derived for each of the three dimensions (fantasy, romantic attraction, and sexual behavior) of orientation by summing the differences between ratings over consecutive 5-year historical time periods (from age 16 to the present). Sex differences were observed for most, but not all, classification groups. There were significant sex differences in reported change in orientation over time for gays and heterosexuals, with women reporting greater change in orientation over time than did men. Bisexual men and women did not differ with respect to self-reported change in orientation.
    3. http://link.springer.com/article/10....-9088-5#page-1


    Archives of Sexual Behavior
    June 2007, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 385-394
    Prevalence and Stability of Sexual Orientation Components During Adolescence and Young Adulthood

    Ritch C. Savin-Williams,
    Geoffrey L. Ream

    Abstract

    Analyses of three waves (6 years) of the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health data explored the prevalence and stability of sexual orientation and whether these two parameters varied by biologic sex, sexual orientation component (romantic attraction, sexual behavior, sexual identity), and degree of component. Prevalence rates for nonheterosexuality varied between 1 and 15% and depended on biologic sex (higher among females), sexual orientation component (highest for romantic attraction), degree of component (highest if “mostly heterosexual” was included with identity), and the interaction of these (highest for nonheterosexual identity among females). Although kappa statistics testing for temporal stability across waves were significant, they failed to reach acceptable levels of agreement and could be largely attributable to the stability of opposite-sex rather than same-sex attraction and behavior. Migration over time among sexual orientation components was in both directions, from opposite-sex attraction and behavior to same-sex attraction and behavior and vice versa. To assess sexual orientation, investigators should measure multiple components over time or abandon the general notion of sexual orientation and measure only those components relevant for the research question.

    This last study makes it clear that heterosexuality is more stable than homosexuality in young people, although there is some fluidity, especially among young women. This study also suggests that "sexual orientation" is not a statistically viable notion and, quite possibly, should be abandoned.

    On a personal note, I believe that these studies explain Mrs. DeBlasio and her ability to go from "out" lesbian in her teens and early twenties to marrying a man in her 30s.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
    Why I Cannot Blame Russia and India for Taking on the Gays
    By Robert Oscar Lopez
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/..._the_gays.html

    Russia and India: Defenders of Decency, Bogeymen of the Gay Lobby

    Russia remains stalwart in its laws that aim to curb the influence of the West's gay-friendly culture on Russian youth. Meanwhile, last week, in a stunning turn of events, India's high court reinstituted a nineteenth-century law against sodomy. On cue, the ligbitist kibitzers are going crazy in such homophile haunts as the New Yorker and the Guardian, expressing total outrage that there should exist, anywhere on the globe, nations that do not think it's normal or appropriate to subsidize and celebrate men sodomizing boys.

    I cannot blame Russia, India, or any nation for reacting to what they see in the West with measures that I would ostensibly oppose on principle. Russia's ban on promoting homosexuality to children does impinge on free speech. India's ban on sodomy is an intrusion into the sex lives of consenting adults. But we don't live in an ostensible world. We live in a real world, where there are real gay organizations in the West, who are engaging in real machinations to spread their sickness all over the globe.

    It's time to admit it, my gay brothers: Our culture is sick

    Gay male culture in the United States, Canada, Latin America, and much of Europe is sick. It is literally plagued with disease -- not only HIV (which is rising again), but also syphilis (which has made a comeback). And Michelangelo Signorile, the dowager prince of gay news at the Huffington Post, admitted at long last what gay watchdog groups had been denying for decades upon decades: the chronic, timeless state of the homosexual man is to chase after pubescent boys.

    Signorile has been busy defending 39-year-old Dustin Lance Black, the screenwriter who seduced a 19-year-old boy -- and yes, a teenager is a boy, period, even if he is a gold medalist; for heaven's sake, he can't even legally drink alcohol in the U.S. Signorile called the sleazy predation "intergenerational sex" and explained to all the "homophobic" people who might object that in the gay world, it's normal for old men to sodomize boys.

    Signorile says this is "nurturing" and educational, kind of like being someone's private tutor, only the tutelage involves lubricant, preparatory enemas, and the tearing of the boy's rectal lining, all in the name of initiation. It's also unsanitary, painful, and likely to interfere with whatever development the boy might have toward eventual sex with women.

    Two weeks after Signorile's ode to sleaze, the Daily Mail broke yet another story of a homosexual dad sodomizing a boy and sharing him with his male partner. This time, the boy in question was not a teen, but nine, and he was Carl Herold's own son. So in two weeks we go from "it's legal, so why not?" to "oh, darn, it's illegal; I guess I shouldn't be encouraging this."

    Scratch that second quote, since the gay writers at Salon and such will never admit wrongdoing. I assume Michelangelo Signorile would rather die than admit that by glamorizing the act of sodomy between men and boys, he would have anything to do with Carl Herold's rationalizing of his own kind of "nurturing" "intergenerational" sex. Sometimes the people who are plunging down the slippery slope don't see the slippery slope; those of us standing at the top screaming "stop the madness" can see it, but nobody listens to us.

    Because part of the gay world's sickness is the diabolical insistence that people are "born" gay, gays like Signorile and Black think of boys as already certified gay flowers waiting to be plucked. Often this comes from their having rewritten their own childhood and adolescence, to convince themselves, as so many vocal gay men do, that they knew they were gay from the time they were five. All of which is nonsense. Read the work of researcher Lisa Diamond. Sexuality is fluid well into our twenties. She focuses on women, probably because she doesn't want to deal with bitchy gay men despising her for playing into the hated "ex-gays'" hands, but the same goes for men. Sexuality is fluid. If you sodomize a boy when he's a teenager, you're imposing your homosexual narrative on him, not awakening something that's inside him waiting to blossom.

    But to understand these truths, gay men would have to tune out the cacophony of rhetoric tied to National Coming Out Day, It Gets Better, Gay-Straight Alliances, and all the other civic institutions devoted to convincing the whole West of the lie that people are born gay and teens need to expedite an online profile so the buzzards can circle overhead, looking for fresh meat.

    I used to avoid assessing the motives of others at all costs. But I can't help supposing that the myth of people being born gay served a very useful purpose of justifying "intergenerational" sex as some sort of "teachable moment" rather than what it is: selfish, sleazy, old gay men sodomizing boys....
    This is your funniest contribution so far. Clearly Lopez is going over the edge.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    8,067
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    This is your funniest contribution so far. Clearly Lopez is going over the edge.
    What is factually inaccurate with what he said?
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    8,067
    It's not a good sign of progress toward freedom and human rights.
    Since when is your sexual preference a "human right"? You're putting you you choose to gratify you sexually up there with being able to vote own property and keep a firearm. And it couldn't be farther from any of those if you tried.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,871
    Quote Originally Posted by txradioguy View Post
    Since when is your sexual preference a "human right"? You're putting you you choose to gratify you sexually up there with being able to vote own property and keep a firearm. And it couldn't be farther from any of those if you tried.

    This is Russia we are talking about, not the US. A country with a history of pogroms against others, mostly Jews, in the past, in both the former communist government and under the monarchy. So when I'm talking about human rights, I'm not talking about the right to get married to someone of the same gender, I'm talking about the right to be alive and not get shipped off to Siberia in a cattle car for being gay.

    Unless that is okay with you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,259
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    This is Russia we are talking about, not the US. A country with a history of pogroms against others, mostly Jews, in the past, in both the former communist government and under the monarchy. So when I'm talking about human rights, I'm not talking about the right to get married to someone of the same gender, I'm talking about the right to be alive and not get shipped off to Siberia in a cattle car for being gay.

    Unless that is okay with you.
    That's not what Putin is doing. He is not rounding up homosexuals, arresting them, and sending them to Siberia. He is telling them to stop proselytizing to the young. Period. In the US, we have a First Amendment which prevents (or at least curtails) laws like this. That is why Putin's move resonates more here than in other countries, where it is probably considered quite tame. Compared to Uganda, Putin might as well be carrying a rainbow flag.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •