John Hawkins at Town Hall (yeah, Town Hall, set Ad Blockers to Maximum) has a piece called “5 Truths You’re Not Allowed To Say About Gays In America.” Which seems like a topic with some potential to evoke discourse. So, here are the short versions:
- You can’t change your gender.
- Some people do choose to be gay.
- Conversion therapy is a good thing if people want it.
- Gay bullies have become commonplace in America.
- Gay scoutmasters would be more likely to molest Boy Scouts.
Let’s see. 1. I guess that depends on the meaning of “change” and “gender.” 2. Well, obviously, remember Anne Heche? 3. I would say “can be” rather than “is.” 4. Well, duh, using power to harass and humiliate those who don’t have power is the very definition of bullying and power is what the gay activist left is all about. 5. At a literal level this is true; he’s not saying it’s inevitable that a gay scoutmaster would molest a Boy Scout, but there is certainly a higher likelihood of it that with a scoutmaster who’s not into dudes at all.
Vas Denken Sie?
1. “Sex” is sex chromosomes and sex organs. You can undergo surgeries to remove or alter your sex organs and breasts into those of the other sex, but you cannot change your chromosomes. “Gender” is how one behaves based on their sex; this, too, can change.
2. I would imagine that this would be more prominent among bi men who are mostly interested in other men and forgo women to appease pure-homo men. This, and countless prison inmates and straight men who act in gay porn prove that one can have gay sex and even enjoy parts of it while still being attracted to the opposite sex.
3. Yes, I would say “can be,” rather than is. I personally have a beef with treatment programs that try to get the men to play sports based on the rationale that men become gay because they don’t do sports.
4. Duh.
5. I agree with your qualifications, which is one of the reasons why I’m leery of gay scoutmasters. This is not to say that gay men can’t ever be involved in the Boy Scouts; asking a gay former scout to demonstrate an activity in a controlled setting would probably be appropriate.
In the early 80’s I was assigned to a team charged with working out the knotty problems of gender reassignment surgery. The physician was a master and pioneer in his field, but the state wanted to be certain that it had taken every precaution to “first do no harm.” I headed up the medical ethics review. Happily, we agreed that we would approach the ethics not from the unique situation of the specific surgery, but from the ancient realm of reparative and restorative medical ethics. As a result of this experience, I have been forever changed in my consciousness of the two different worlds of reality between heterosexuals and those who are not.
I often quote Charles Péguy who noted that everything which begins in mystery ends in politics. That, I believe is where the mystery of being not heterosexual and promoting a gay agenda has arrived.
In politics, power is found in clout and numbers. Therefore, much that is not in the consciousness of the public square has to be forcefully put there and made to be not just a matter of consciousness, but a matter conscience as well.
When I read Hawkins piece this morning, it seems a bit prosaic from my arena of experience, but I realized that he was addressing an audience which has learned to shut up in face of the political correctness harpies.
I don’t think this nation needs to have an endless discussion on sexual attrition like it supposedly needs to have an endless dialog on race.
It would be nice if most of us could reach the “whatever” attitude and judge people by their character.
Regarding #2 and the “choice to be gay,” you could perhaps argue that people are able to shift 2-4 points on the 7-point Kinsey Scale*, but that shifts from one extreme of the scale to the other may be extremely rare. In practical terms, a bi person can choose to be either more gay or more straight; a straight person can choose to be more bi (but not completely gay), and a gay person can also choose to be more bi (but not completely straight).
Regarding #3: Packaged homeopathic cures are NOT a good thing even if people WANT to buy them, because they inevitably cost more than making your own mix of sugar-water plus a few drops of “medicine-y tasting” Listerine — but don’t work a bit better. By the same token, forms of “conversion therapy” that make exaggerated claims about their effectiveness, and therefore raise the client’s expectations too high, ARE NOT GOOD THINGS — they’re quackery.
Regarding #5: More likely compared to WHOM? Sure, a male “Kinsey 6” (totes gay) would be more likely to molest a boy than a male “Kinsey 0” (totes str8). But from this, it does not follow that an openly gay scoutmaster would be more likely to molest a boy than a churchgoing man in a heterosexual marriage, because — big DUH here — some married men who present as heterosexual are in actual in fact “Kinsey Sixes.”
* The unreliability of Kinsey’s data has no bearing, in my view, on the usefulness of the “Kinsey Scale” as a convenient way of describing sexual attractions in relative terms. (I.e., it’s as good as any other “arbitrarily standardized” scale, such as the Scoville scale of pepper-hotness.)
** Some studies have suggested that “bi pedophiles” are quite rare — most have a marked preference either for boys or for girls, but not for both. Furthermore, pedophiles with a strong preference for girls tend to be more sexually responsive to adult women than to adult men, despite the fact that their overall response to adults is quite weak. For boy-oriented pedophiles, the opposite is true — they’ll ping the plethysmograph a bit more strongly in response to naked adult men than to naked adult women.
Sean L …………. Bullseye. However, can someone tell me why we all seem to go after gay man to the exclusion of lesbians?
Amen.
In assessing the quackery or non-quackery of “conversion therapists,” here’s a rather obvious question that OUGHT to be asked of them:
“What percentage of potential clients do you TURN AWAY for conversion therapy (but possibly refer them to, say, a substance-abuse program when applicable) because pre-therapy interviews allow you to predict that in their particular cases, conversion therapy is unlikely to change their homosexual orientation?”
Organizations like NARTH are notorious for not turning away paying clients, and instead blaming the frequently unsuccessful outcomes on “unmotivated patients” — because they don’t want to admit that the Scientific Theory underlying their therapy may in fact have laughably poor predictive power.
(A practical example: When asked to account for the observed reality of gay men who didn’t have absent or aloof fathers, NARTH’s Joseph Nicolosi has responded, at least in the past, that such men were “probably not being honest about their relationships with their dads” — because Nicolosi’s first loyalty is to Freudianism, and patient well-being comes much farther down on his list.)
In my opinion, the greatest danger of openly gay Scoutmasters is not that they themselves would molest the boys, but that they would turn a blind eye to warning signs that, say, a 16-year-old Scout is behaving inappropriately with a 13-year-old Scout. (“Boys will be boys!”)
Adult gay men with severely Over-Rosy Nostalgia about their early sexual experimentation are, after all, far more numerous than actual pedophiles!
1. facebook has 50 genders that you can change but a bitch aint one
2. You can shift a little bit, otherwise gay for pay
4. He is right
5. I wouldn’t trust anyone I know from the bars with my relatives. Fully grown guys have been carried off while unresponsive
So if Gays who fight for their rights are bullies. What does that make the NRA?
The tactics are the same. Litigation, vilification, “in your face” tactics, mockery & grandiose hyperbole.
The only real difference I see is most here agree with the NRA.
1. I have no idea here. Just that I’ve never been able to change my gender identity and I’d never want to. I can, however, live the life of a (barren) young woman with everything that entails (up to and including maxi pads – don’t ask), and I’m perfectly happy with that – and with my life today.
2. I went from 0 on the Kinsey scale (straight ‘male’) to … 0 on the Kinsey scale (straight female) to somewhere in the middle during the past three years. As far as I can tell, orientation isn’t a preset number that never changes – it’s a matter of what you’re comfortable with and what makes you comfortable. Beyond that it’s anyone’s game.
We should revisit this issue of bullying when the NRA forces people to bake cakes for them or hounds private citizens out of their jobs for disagreeing with them.
@ Throbert: At the most, I am a 5 on the Kinsey Scale. I made out with a couple girls in my youth and enjoyed it, but I never considered women in a overtly sexual manner. I sometimes consider the thought as “interesting,” but my primary sexual interest will always be men.
@ Charles: I don’t talk about lesbians because they are women. Being a man who is primarily interested in interactions with men, I consider myself just about the last person to discuss any women, let alone those who are primarily interested in interactions with women.
By the way, I want to add that my criticism of NARTH for trying to shoehorn all homosexuals into the same (Freudian) etiology certainly applies to the “We’re born that way!” Gay-BLT mainstream — they’re just as Procrustean, but in a different way.
Both sides ignore the possibility that there may be several distinct forms of homosexuality (or transsexuality) with quite different causes. And both sides ignore hypotheses that don’t fit their ideological views.
Some years ago, a physicist named Greg Cochran proposed that a hypothetical infectious pathogen might account for the observed 2-5% rate of male homosexuality far better than any “gay gene(s)” possibly could. (The basic argument was that Natural Selection would inevitably tend to reduce the incidence of “genetic homosexuality” to something more like 1 out of 4000 live births, not 1 out of 40.)
Cochran didn’t claim that homosexuality itself is pathological; nor that the hypothetical pathogen, if it existed at all, could in practice be avoided or eliminated; nor that it would even be a good idea to TRY preventing “pathogenic homosexuality” (because, possibly, any attempt to block the gay-ifying effects of the germ could result in unforeseen side effects like flipper-babies, or whatever). And despite the fact that Cochran is a physicist and not a geneticist, his Thought Experiment certainly appears to fit the math — at the very least, it’s “not implausible.”
But, of course, he was bitterly denounced as a meany-head gay-hating crank by people whose knees jerked violently at seeing “pathogen” and “homosexual” in the same sentence.
mikey!
Welcome back! Mayhaps you can point to the NRA lawsuit for the gun shaped cake, or maybe someone being dragged in front of the ‘civil rights comission’?
Oh, you can’t?
I assume you’re going to go silent now, like you did when called out about your defending an admitted war criminal, and not the troops that the administration were defaming…
I hate to be the one to tell you but lesbians are not gay men. They dislike that we have double & occasionally triple male privilege. Lesbians in real life are usually more pro gun than gays.
Its leftists that believe “never let a crisis go to waste” not the NRA. You don’t see the NRA pointing out that the killers of the 260 Chicago public school kids killed from 2009-2011 look like Obama’s sons. Its amazing to see the look on leftists faces when they find out some gays own guns, its like they forgot the entire victimhood racket.
I happened across a very interesting article on Schone Seelen, a gay-centric lifestyle site (WARNING: NSFW). The article squarely blamed the rampant promiscuity, body dysmorphic disorder, and depression among gay men, not on rejection by straight people, but on the superficiality and shallowness of gay culture- tops must be muscly and over 6’0, bottoms must have massive bums and know Beyonce’s latest songs by heart. Fashion, looks, music. “As a gay man,” the article says, “you have to be the best of the best, even if that means selling your soul or your body and morals. … It’s simpleminded ideals such as these that are leading to deeper issues within ourselves.”
There you have it, from the mouth of gay men themselves: for gay men, it’s a matter of societal structures, not necessarily inherent mental issues, that make so many gay men crazy and miserable.
Livewire, – Unfortunately, once a post goes below the fold I often don’t go back. I noticed that you snuck in a response well after I assumed it was dead. It appears Comments are closed for that items, so I will provide you with your requested links.
However, its very clear from your response that you need to read before responding. I get that it s fun for you to use your catchy catchphrases, but unless they are apt they just seem a bit…tired
Regarding links to NRA resorting to litigation:
Any quick Google search of “NRA files suit” will bring you to countless articles articles of the NRA suing litigation seeking activist judges to overturn the will of the people – Which is exactly what the supporters of Gay rights are doing.
But here is two:
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=15127
http://www.nraila.org/legal/articles/2014/nra-files-suit-against-sunnyvale-over-magazine-ban.aspx
In fact, the NRA has whole link outlining all of their legal fights:
http://www.nraila.org/legal/litigation.aspx
If you have anymore link requests to common knowledge, it might be better if you try a simple google search.
Livewire –
Here are the links you requested on Kerry and his comrades who were on his boat backing his events:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/kerry/articles/2004/08/20/kerry_comrades_have_credibility_on_their_side/
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/20/politics/campaign/20swift.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/5843180/#.U5fMWXKSyBI
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/bush/articles/2004/08/27/kerrys_medals_were_deserved_says_widow_of_slain_comrade/
http://orig.courier-journal.com/localnews/2004/08/26ky/A1-swift0826-9879.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=128984&page=3
http://www.mailtribune./2004/0826/local/stories/01local.htm
And if you still doubt, take it from the Special Forces Solider who credits Kerry with saving his life:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21239-2004Aug21.html
But here is the key quote:
“Everybody aboard Kerry’s boat, including Rassmann, says there was fire from both riverbanks, and the official after-action report speaks of all boats receiving “heavy a/w [automatic weapons] and s/a [small arms] from both banks.” The Bronze Star citations for Kerry and Thurlow also speak of prolonged enemy fire.”
Please, go through each link before commenting.
Livewire
It appears my responses have been hit by the Spam filter. Hopefully the crew here will release them, when they do please go through each link before responding.
Otherwise whats the point of requesting them
Just for fun. . .Sean
Turkish Oil Wrestling
http://s3ak.buzzfeed.com/static/enhanced/webdr01/2013/3/5/10/anigif_enhanced-buzz-27484-1362498868-5.gif
http://s3-ak.buzzfeed.com/static/enhanced/webdr01/2013/3/5/10/anigif_enhanced-buzz-27484-1362498868-5.gif
all 5 points are 100% correct.
In some African tribes where breeding is an imperative and they struggle to hunt to feed themselves there is no such a thing as homosexuality. All this malarkey we see is the product of wealth and ‘progress’ and leftist ideology.
It is well known that a good doctor through hypnosis can completely deform your likes and dislikes including sexual orientation.
But they made homosexuality so appealing (advertising, propaganda) that nobody wants to change. The market consider gays big spenders of futile goods, therefore they need them to sell their crap.
You also can’t say that priests who molest little boys are gay.
Well known?
By whom?
Is it also well known that a good hypnotist can make anyone (selected at random from the audience) believe that they’re a chicken?
I think there is far more flexibility in orientation than most on either extreme (gay left, religious right) will admit. I am not wholly in the it’s all choice or it’s all in the genes camp. I think there is some combination of nature/nurture that leads a person to be sexually attracted to another person.
I think that if I were a gay man I probably wouldn’t want to be in charge of anyone’s children because I would be too afraid of being accused of doing something. Also I often find it odd that we are worried about gay men far more than lesbians. In recent months it seems like lesbian public school teachers have been in the news for inappropriate sexual relations with students than gay men molesting Boy Scouts.
Sean-the article you discuss sounds interesting. I think it’s worthwhile to consider the harmful or superficial aspects of the gay community and how it affects gays. I think some of the things that drive the depression and suicide rate are similar to those that drive but chasers and some of the dangerous risk taking behaviors.
They’ve also made heterosexual relationships a minefield. The kind of flirtatious behavior Alan Alda displayed toward the M*A*S*H nurses in 1973 would be considered sexual harassment today (and M*A*S*H was considered hardcore progressive in its time).
Not too mention on college campuses, a male accused of “rape” (the definition of which has broadened far beyond its traditionally understood meaning) is immediately presumed guilty and subject to punishment without due process. (“Due Process” being one of those tools the Patriarchy uses to oppress Wymmyn, dontcha know.)
Similarly, any man merely accused of “domestic violence” (another term broadened far beyond its traditional meaning) is presumed guilty and loses all of his rights.
I feel sorry for modern heterosexual men; the entire system is skewed against them.
There is a simple way to deal with kicking and screaming littlelettermike.
First, littlelettermike has screamed any source that criticizes John Kerry is “biased” and must be ignored, then we can reverse that and state that any source he cites is biased, the result of partisan bigotry, and can not only be ignored, but also used as proof that mike is a mindless Obama Party syncophant.
Alinsky. Make the enemy — and make no mistake, littlelettermike IS an enemy — live up to its own book of rules.
Second, and along similar lines, littlelettermike’s shrieking insistence that the NRA and its members should be denied due- process rights demonstrates that littlelettermike is a bigot and hypocrite who thinks gays like himself should be granted special rights based on sexual orientation while others are denied their basic Constitutional rights.
Again, Alinsky. Littlelettermike is not acting out of any objective principles if right and wrong; he is simply attempting to use other people’s morality to destroy them, just as his Barack Obama supports Hamas’s policies of using hospitals and schools as human shields for missile batteries. Conservatives must recognize that littlelettermike is not arguing in good faith; he is simply, like his Pajama Boy, a liberal f*ck with no morals who seeks only to attack people. Treat him as such.
Also, the hilarity of littlelettermike’s tantrum in this case is that the NRA is arguing for EXPANDED freedom and rights for all Americans regardless of minority status, while littlelettermike and his fellow gay bigots are arguing that they should be given special powers and privileges to enslave and control others based on their sexual orientation.
You notice this in all of littlelettermike’s comments. He demands that he be allowed to determine how much money everyone else makes, whether it not they’re paying their “fair share”, whether their words are “hate”, whether they should be allowed to work or keep their job, etc.
And then, when asked to apply his own standards to his fellow Obama leftists, he dissolves into tantrums of tu quoque, screaming that Obama and the Obama Party can do anything they want because Republicans are all evil.
Think about that. Littlelettermike and his fellow gays are so mentally unstable that a baker telling them s/he does not want to make their wedding cake will cause them such grievous mental and psychological harm that the government must punish said baker in order to preserve their mental health.
That shows a complete lack of coping skills, a self- centered worldview, and an inability to intellectually or emotionally manage any type of rejection or failure.
littlelettermike,
The Second Amendment undergirds the NRA.
The 14th Amendment undergirds the individual.
You have all the same rights I have.
Your sexual activity is NOT protected anywhere in the Constitution. Apparently, you want a civil right status for how you satisfy lust. So, how are you going to explain that to priests who have been nailed with little boys or men who keep a stable of wives, etc.
You and your “respect me” clown car of actors want your acts to have dedicated Constitutional protection.
What next, gay quotas for colors of kites?
And, just for yuks, here’s littlelettermike shrieking that any source he deems “biased” is wrong and can be ignored.
Not to mention his screaming insistence that he doesn’t have to read links from people he disagrees with, contra his demands that everyone read his links before responding.
Probably, heliotrope.
And what makes that hilarious is that littlelettermike and his fellow fascists think they are competent to order us around in kite colors while they lie, cheat, steal, and leave veterans to die so they can get their big bonuses from the VA.
Childish littlelettermike wants ever more power, but has proven he and all Obama supporters like himself are incompetent to manage any power.
“Gender” is how one behaves based on their sex; this, too, can change.
In fact, “gender” deals with feminine, neuter, and masculine word form in various languages.
I think men are more naturally gay than women. Women are the attention-seeking gender, so I can safely assume that most female celebrities, with exceptions like Ellen DeGeneres, are probably being “gay” for attention.
Thanks, Susan, for eloquently demonstrating that Rousseau’s “Noble Savage” myth is not a delusion found only on the left.
I’ve seen claims before that “homosexuality is unknown in some African tribes.” My educated hunch is that such claims are exactly as well-grounded as Margaret Mead’s long-since-debunked “anthropological finding” that Samoans have no negative taboos about sexuality, and do not suffer from sexual shame.
And, as in Mead’s case, the dubious claims about African homosexuality (or lack thereof) may result from cultural biases on the Western observer’s part, but also from a failure to phrase the questions correctly when asking “local informants” about their customs.
For example, “Is it heard of among your people for a man to marry a man?” may get you a VERY different answer than “Is it heard of among your people for a rich man to fool around with a low-caste teenage boy?” (Though both questions are attempting to gather data about male homosexuality.)
I agree with G. Gordon Liddy with regard to the first one. Words have gender. People have sex.
Paul I don’t think women are gay for attention in general (I think there are likely both men and women who may opt to be gay for attention).
I do think women are generally more flexible in their sexuality and may develop attraction to either gender depending on whether that relationship meets some of their emotional needs.
I haven’t done a study but it often seems like there are disproportionate number of lesbians and gays who are addicted to drama compared to the straight population.
Thank you Mikey for conceeding the point.
You still won’t address the self admitted war criminal, nor can you provide proof of the NRA suing individuals. So you show you are perfectly willing to let war criminals slander the troops, as long as they’re your war criminals. You also show you’re willing to support bullying people into doing what you want, but are unable to show where the NRA does so.
Thank you for admitting you can’t defend your point. Obliquely admitting this is the first step to admitting you have a problem. Being able to admit it to yourself will be progress.
Before you ask me to read the links you posted, you may wish to demonstrate your reading comprehension skills first. I can only make the words so small, so feel free to ask for help.
Oh Mikey boy… the facts the facts are calling.
# 29 Helio –
“Your sexual activity is NOT protected anywhere in the Constitution. Apparently, you want a civil right status for how you satisfy lust. So, how are you going to explain that to priests who have been nailed with little boys or men who keep a stable of wives, etc”
I am no lawyer, but other lawyers convinced the supreme court that the gov shouldn’t discriminate so on such grounds…there must be some kind of convincing argument to be had.
The only difference is you agree with the NRA’s litigation tactics to turn to activists judges, but not homosexuals.
Furthermore if you think being gay is simply about ” satisfy(ing) lust” something is wrong with you. Being gay is not about bimarried dudes trying to bust nuts.
Hey Mikey, Can you tell me what is my fair share to pay towards a crack ho with 21 feral illegitimate kids if I never touched her? Given that many states have rejected bills that would prevent TANF/welfare money from being tapped out in bars& strip clubs how many of my hard earned gay dollars should be put in a woman’s thong?
I’d ask for facts to back up mikey’s statement, but he’s already proven unable to rise to the challenge.