Serious LGBT Discussion

[GunCar Gary]

what I was calling into question was the claim that homos were having sex with dogs.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/monkeypox-detected-in-dog-what-to-know

Two men, ages 44 and 27, visited a hospital in France on June 10, 2022, with rashes, headaches, fatigue, and anal lesions.

The men, who live in the same household and are non-exclusive partners, developed anal ulcerations six days after having sex with other partners.

Twelve days after their symptoms appeared, their dog — a four-year-old Italian greyhound with no underlying health issues — developed mucocutaneous lesions, abdomen pustules, and an anal ulceration.

two men living together with multiple decades age difference, having sex with multiple partners, and their dog getting an mpox anal ulceration from being fucked by them? typical gay couple

 

[Cherry Eyed Hamster]

two men living together with multiple decades age difference, having sex with multiple partners, and their dog getting an mpox anal ulceration from being fucked by them? typical gay couple

I think it's more likely that the disease spread to their dog because they're two promiscuous homos who shared the same bed and let the dog slept in the bed with them.

However if they did indeed boink their dog, that's because they're French.

 

[YHWH's Strongest Soldier]

Zweig was a sex pest who killed himself and his wife with barbituates before his secret could get out.

Now this is something that I must hear more of. Is it the age difference that Stefan had with his second wife? That's not exactly a secret, but still a disturbing and surprisingly widespread problem.

---

Deviant psychology, that is. It was a "part of psychology" in the way that incest and dog rape was. You're so dishonest it's actually sad. We already teach kids about it well enough by telling them not to talk to strangers like you. That's all the information they need.

Your direct intent is to predispose children towards the normalization of your fetish.

Can you hold a conversation without trying to insinuate that someone has bad intent towards children? Yes, it should be taught that homosexuality was perceived very differently in the early stages of psychology similar to how women's trauma from sexual assault was often excused as hysteria. The medical and psychology fields in general are full of crazy stories that will teach adolescents that you shouldn't trust everyone with a fancy title. It shouldn't be taught to children, but I think that high school kids can handle this.

If they genuinely look childlike those guys are nowhere near the norm. I already mentioned weebs. Other than that, you can't pretend that getting yellow fever for grown women is anything like the problem that the gays very publicly and obviously have, so I'm done.

They do look childlike and neoteny is eerily celebrated over the globe as long as it is heterosexual. It shouldn't be tolerated in both homosexual and heterosexual relationships in my opinion. There is a reason for rampant sex tourism by Americans and Europeans in SEA and the outrageous popularity of plastic surgery in East Asia. These men aren't weeaboos and I also find it funny that you are labeling another group, weeaboos, as pedophilic too. Could you give me an example of a group that you wouldn't call pedophiles?

Why am I referencing the actual position of the group that @Overachiever is dishonestly trying to squeeze an appeal to tradition—a famous logical fallacy—therefrom? Because it shows that his argument is incoherent. If you have a problem with it, take it up with him. He's the one implying that their models are sufficient to model out education systems after.

I think that you misunderstood my reference to psychology and the reintroduction of ancient languages in schools. I do not believe that we should reintroduce old schooling systems wholesale. Instead, I think that we can learn plenty from them and reintegrate some of their parts to create a more well-rounded education system. Adolescents should learn about biology, history and classical languages because it would turn them into better people. They should also learn how these fields of science changed. Similarly, I hope that more people who are now excluded from the arts will be motivated to rejoin them.

I am shutting down the conversation, because you're just doing transparent poopdick pederast apologia.

Just don't respond or talk about my posts in a roundabout way. You're not even acting like a child, but an actual retard. Null created an ignore button for cases like this.

---

The only intelligence in this debate went out the window when statistics suddenly became voldemort because giga brain overachiever posted a document that blatantly states that yes, homos are more likely to be pedophiles.

You posted an old study, I listed my concerns with it to which you still have not responded in any way. In my response, I also shared a ridiculous, peer-reviewed study which concluded that pedophilia has no negative consequences for children in order to show you that single studies are often flawed and come to stupid conclusion. You ignored this as well. Finally, I shared a report from the USCCB which discussed the issue of pedophilia amongst Catholic priests in USA and its peak between the 60s and 70s to illustrate that even recent times had an issue with pedophilia in supposedly virtuous institutions. The report indeed found that USA's Catholic priests are more likely to target young boys which you extrapolated to all gays everywhere. Do you sincerely believe that it is the right conclusion to draw from that report?

Let's say homos are more likely to be pedophiles. Through whatever mechanism, it doesn't matter for this hypothetical. Even if they are more likely to be, it shouldn't be such a point of contention for you three, right? I mean, you're all one of the good ones, right? With no need to defend yourselves on this particular front. Right?

No. Homos aren't more likely to be pedophiles and men aren't either. I won't agree to your hypotheticals because I see the malice behind them. You're upset that I called you a coomer, a sexual deviant and a furry so now you feel obliged to paint me as a faggot. I will be generous and assume you aren't trying to call me a pedophile as well. Remember, you are a self-admitted coomer who doesn't want to specify what weird shit he has jerked off too. This leaves the worst to the imagination. You can keep calling people fags, zoophiles and pedophiles, but it will never remove the suspicions that you raised for your own past, especially knowing you still openly like scaly ladies.

Also, do you understand why people defend themselves so vehemently against accusations of pedophilia? Do you know how quickly that label sticks to both groups and individuals? Null is still getting called a pedophile because angry lolicons from 8chan wanted to take revenge on him. He always defended himself but that label stuck. Do you really think that people will let you call them pedophiles because your feelings were hurt and they will say nothing back? Do you think it's right of you to call so many people pedophiles?

 

[Inco G. Nito]

Your direct intent is to predispose children towards the normalization of your fetish.

It shouldn't be taught to children, but I think that high school kids can handle this.

Page 12: "Overall, 81% of victims were male and 19% female. Male victims tended to be older than female victims. Over 40% of all victims were males between the ages of 11 and 14."

Hmm... Just gonna leave this here.

You posted an old study, I listed my concerns with it to which you still have not responded in any way. In my response, I also shared a ridiculous, peer-reviewed study which concluded that pedophilia has no negative consequences for children in order to show you that single studies are often flawed and come to stupid conclusion. You ignored this as well. Finally, I shared a report from the USCCB which discussed the issue of pedophilia amongst Catholic priests in USA and its peak between the 60s and 70s to illustrate that even recent times had an issue with pedophilia in supposedly virtuous institutions. The report indeed found that USA's Catholic priests are more likely to target young boys which you extrapolated to all gays everywhere. Do you sincerely believe that it is the right conclusion to draw from that report?

There is no need to bring them up because they have been entirely superseded by the by the catholic priest statistics, which we both seem to agree on are true. What we don't agree on is that you insist there is somehow this total disconnect in the psyche, interpersonal dynamics, and mental inner workings of gay pedophile catholic priests, vs gay pedophiles. Yes. I sincerely believe that a study that shows that gay men are dramatically disproportionately pedophiles, shows that gay men are dramatically disproportionately pedophiles. It's a good thing that you have given up on statistics entirely since this incident.

No. Homos aren't more likely to be pedophiles and men aren't either. I won't agree to your hypotheticals because I see the malice behind them. You're upset that I called you a coomer, a sexual deviant and a furry so now you feel obliged to paint me as a faggot. I will be generous and assume you aren't trying to call me a pedophile as well. Remember, you are a self-admitted coomer who doesn't want to specify what weird shit he has jerked off too. This leaves the worst to the imagination. You can keep calling people fags, zoophiles and pedophiles, but it will never remove the suspicions that you raised for your own past, especially knowing you still openly like scaly ladies.

More of that radical optimism at play, I see. Too radically optimistic to look at statistics you yourself posted lmao. I called myself a coomer first, I invited myself to be called a furry when I made my account based on a character from a game about a paraplegic baryonyx (which you should play by the way), and no I genuinely think you are gay lmao. Also why would you expect me to post an audit of shit I used to jack off to? Anyways, if I wanted to call you a pedophile I would just say so. Fortunately for you it is funnier to continually make the implication by drawing lines to all the things you've said (something you can't do back to me because i don't randomly bring up victorian fucking london to talk about child prostitution lmao) And yes, I will keep calling fags fags, zoophiles zoophiles, and pedophiles pedophiles. Also be fucking real, being gay is more deviant than liking a woman with a differently shaped head. Would you imply someone who wants to fuck a Twi'lek or an Asari is a zoophile? Even if it's about the face these fictional characters have heavily humanized expressions. You're grasping at straws because you are desperate to find anything that can cut me as deeply as I clearly have you.

Also, do you understand why people defend themselves so vehemently against accusations of pedophilia? Do you know how quickly that label sticks to both groups and individuals? Null is still getting called a pedophile because angry lolicons from 8chan wanted to take revenge on him. He always defended himself but that label stuck. Do you really think that people will let you call them pedophiles because your feelings were hurt and they will say nothing back? Do you think it's right of you to call so many people pedophiles?

I do know. Fortunately you and I are both anonymous, there is no way I could contact anyone you know nor you anyone I know. Null did not have that anonymity and people labeled him a pedophile to genuinely smear him and his family. It is on you to care in the first place what a faceless nobody with no power over you, nor any real ill intent against you out on the internet says about you with words on a screen. You put way too much time, effort and mental weight on this thread lmao.

 

[YHWH's Strongest Soldier]

Also be fucking real, being gay is more deviant than liking a woman with a differently shaped head.

Nigga, you want to fuck a dinosaur.

 

[Inco G. Nito]

Nigga, you want to fuck a dinosaur.

Yeah. Because wanting poop on your dick, being very promiscuous, being incapable of monogamy, dying of AAAAAAAAAIIIIIIDS, and being predisposed towards children is so much better. Cope and sneed lmao

 

[California Newt]

Are you seriously insinuating that gay men are fucking dogs now?

> now
> she doesn't know

 

[Whatevermancer]

Gay men are just leading the lifestyle that straight men would lead if sex wasn't gatekept by women.

 

[Doktor Grimm]

Now that "fags r gross" debate #1000 has blown over (wow, a thread milestone!) -- what do people here think of same-sex couples raising children? Is it viable under certain circumstances, or is a kid raised absent a stable mother/father figure doomed to turn out weird and dysfunctional no matter what? If so, can mixed-orientation relationships for the purpose of family life work, or are they a waste of time?

To my knowledge there aren't any homo parents in this thread, but this is something that's been on my mind a fair bit recently and I doubt that I'll be able to get a straight (lol) answer anywhere else. I wonder if any of the older fags here or someone with gay family members could impart some wisdom on the matter.

 

[Alex Hogendorp]

Now that "fags r gross" debate #1000 has blown over (wow, a thread milestone!) -- what do people here think of same-sex couples raising children? Is it viable under certain circumstances, or is a kid raised absent a stable mother/father figure doomed to turn out weird and dysfunctional no matter what? If so, can mixed-orientation relationships for the purpose of family life work, or are they a waste of time?

To my knowledge there aren't any homo parents in this thread, but this is something that's been on my mind a fair bit recently and I doubt that I'll be able to get a straight (lol) answer anywhere else. I wonder if any of the older fags here or someone with gay family members could impart some wisdom on the matter.

I am pretty unsure if same-sex couples could raise children. I don't know if enough exercise in chastity amongst other things would suffice. It feels as if a mother and a father are a necessary compliment that rewards the child with the fullest potential of virtues such a boy and a girl are biologically different.

 

[Cherry Eyed Hamster]

Now that "fags r gross" debate #1000 has blown over (wow, a thread milestone!) -- what do people here think of same-sex couples raising children? Is it viable under certain circumstances, or is a kid raised absent a stable mother/father figure doomed to turn out weird and dysfunctional no matter what? If so, can mixed-orientation relationships for the purpose of family life work, or are they a waste of time?

To my knowledge there aren't any homo parents in this thread, but this is something that's been on my mind a fair bit recently and I doubt that I'll be able to get a straight (lol) answer anywhere else. I wonder if any of the older fags here or someone with gay family members could impart some wisdom on the matter.

Spoiler: PL regarding lesbian families

I know two lesbian couples with children. With one of the couples one of the women carried twin boys, both of whom’ve grown up to be successful, wonderful people, one with a family of his own. I’m sure a big part of this is the lesbian couple both come from large extended families that they’re close to, so there was always masculine figures in their son’s lives, like cousins and uncles. Also when they found out they were having sons they did a lot of research on how to raise boys without the presence of a father. They were very much committed to their children’s success and are one of the best damn parents I know.

The second lesbian couple adopted two siblings from Central America, a son and a daughter. The daughter just got a Master’s degree and is thriving, the son however, is rather unstable and is consistently moving back in with them. Can’t keep a regular job and spends his time getting high and playing vidya. Was this the result of not having a father in his life? Perhaps. I keep in mind, however, that he was also an adopted child, and such children often struggle during adulthood, more so than bio kids. Perhaps if they hadn’t adopted and chose to go through IVF they’d have had a son who was more well-adjusted, like the first lesbian couple.

I’ve already stated my opinion on homosexual men having children, though I will reiterate it here: I do not think they should be adopting kids, and I am very, very much against surrogacy as a whole. Kids need a consistent mother figure, and I don’t think a cadre of female friends that gay men tend to have is an adequate substitute. There have been many studies done on the negative effects of depriving a baby of its mother’s touch. That skin-to-skin contact after birth is so important for an infant, and robbing it of it completely, or cutting contact off after it begins, is devastating to a young child’s development.

Also from my experience, the few times I’ve seen gay men who were interested in raising children, it seemed more like they wanted an accessory, rather than a commitment.

 

[YHWH's Strongest Soldier]

what do people here think of same-sex couples raising children? Is it viable under certain circumstances, or is a kid raised absent a stable mother/father figure doomed to turn out weird and dysfunctional no matter what? If so, can mixed-orientation relationships for the purpose of family life work, or are they a waste of time?

They can work in theory, but in practice? Lol no. Raising a child as a normal, healthy couple seems difficult nowadays and gays bring lots of extra baggage that can mess up a child. The first issue is acquiring the kid which is either adoption or surrogacy. Adopted children also bring baggage. On the other hand, surrogacy is disgusting and might lead to issues later in life when a child realizes they were basically designed and bought like one would a puppy.

The second issue is having the adopted child who is potentially traumatized (imagine adopting Rekieta's kids) acclimate towards having two dads. They too have their preconceptions and two fathers are not exactly the idealized family structure. Older adoptees have issues which two inexperienced dads might not be able to handle. Experienced family might often not be available or even disapprove of the fathers adopting.

The third is raising the child assuming it was adopted as a baby which is unlikely. Even good couples mess this up while expectations for gay men are even lower. Assuming the fathers are perfect, they still have to deal with bad looks and accusations of pedophilia while always having an escape route out of familial life into infidelity and degeneracy. Two women are not viewed fondly by society, but they are not quite the joke that two dads are. While this seems minor, things like these bring quite some strain into a family. This is also discounting any overlooked issues such as the baby being completely bottle fed or being more likely to get bullied in school which could lead to negative outcomes later in life. In practice, the dads also won't be perfect and gay men are more predisposed to drug use and a history of mental illnesses or maladaptive behavior. It seems impossible to raise a child today even without all those extra problems.

 

[Doktor Grimm]

I’ve already stated my opinion on homosexual men having children, though I will reiterate it here: I do not think they should be adopting kids, and I am very, very much against surrogacy as a whole. Kids need a consistent mother figure, and I don’t think a cadre of female friends that gay men tend to have is an adequate substitute. There have been many studies done on the negative effects of depriving a baby of its mother’s touch. That skin-to-skin contact after birth is so important for an infant, and robbing it of it completely, or cutting contact off after it begins, is devastating to a young child’s development.

Actually, now that you mention this I'm having flashbacks to the unit on maternal deprivation I took in A-level psych where I was taught this more or less verbatim. Given that a child's attachment to its mother is THE most important through its early years, it tracks that children raised by two mothers would turn out better than those raised by two fathers, especially if they're cut off from their biological parents at a young age -- I suppose it wouldn't be too different from growing up with a single mum in that regard. Makes me wonder what our place is supposed to be in the child rearing process.

Thanks for the personal stories; it's difficult to find actual testimonies from parents/their children online, and I've never had the chance to speak to someone brought up by gay parents myself.

It seems impossible to raise a child today even without all those extra problems.

True. Adoption is a bit of a gamble at the best of times. Perhaps parenting is an art best left to the stroids...

 

[Jason Wynn]

Now that "fags r gross" debate #1000 has blown over (wow, a thread milestone!) -- what do people here think of same-sex couples raising children? Is it viable under certain circumstances, or is a kid raised absent a stable mother/father figure doomed to turn out weird and dysfunctional no matter what? If so, can mixed-orientation relationships for the purpose of family life work, or are they a waste of time?

To my knowledge there aren't any homo parents in this thread, but this is something that's been on my mind a fair bit recently and I doubt that I'll be able to get a straight (lol) answer anywhere else. I wonder if any of the older fags here or someone with gay family members could impart some wisdom on the matter.

I have no interest in having/adopting kids, so take my opinion with a grain of salt, but I think it’s important for a child to have both a male and female presence/authority figure/role model in their life. Far too many gay guys are only interested in partying, drug use and cooming to actually take the responsibility of raising a child seriously and far too many dykes are physically abusive to their kids (particularly the male children)

Even straight but divorced couples I’d apply this to. Make an effort for both parents to remain in the child’s life. Look how many cows and people who have cowlike traits can be traced back to growing up with only a single mother and no father figure. It’s the people who have both a father and a mother in their lives who often grow up the most well adjusted and ready for what adult life throws at them.

 

[Inco G. Nito]

Humans are evolved to specifically raise their young with a male and female duo that compliment each other's shortcomings. I think a lesbian couples would generally do a better job than fags because women are naturally nurturing (among other reasons lmao), but there is still imbalance, similar to being raised by a single mother.

Gay men are just leading the lifestyle that straight men would lead if sex wasn't gatekept by women.

There's more to life than being addicted to sex lmao

 

[HootersMcBoobies]

I'm not aware of which consequence in particular you're hinting at, tell me.

This is what I was getting at

I am very, very much against surrogacy as a whole

surrogacy is disgusting and might lead to issues later in life when a child realizes they were basically designed and bought like one would a puppy

I didn't realize how insane surrogacy was, or how surrogacy and egg "donation" are banned in a lot of other countries, until I saw an interview with Jennifer Lahal about it. Later I heard about that case in California of a surrogate who was diagnosed with cancer, and even though the baby could have survived a premature birth, the gay couple wanted her to abort. Dave Rubin apparently also had a surrogacy. I hadn't heard of Shane Dawson or Ryland Adams, but they documented their own grotesque surrogacy process.

I realize it's not just gay people who use surrogates, but it seems to be a growing option, and I'm against it now for straight couples as well.

Buying a baby after it's born is illegal, but paying someone to have one is fine? It's really nothing less than human trafficking.

 

[Whatevermancer]

There's more to life than being addicted to sex lmao

You don't have to be addicted to sex to enjoy having lots of it.

 

[Cherry Eyed Hamster]

Later I heard about that case in California of a surrogate who was diagnosed with cancer, and even though the baby could have survived a premature birth, the gay couple wanted her to abort.

That doesn’t even make any sense. It’s extremely rare for cancer to pass from the mother to a developing fetus. What horrible people

 

[YHWH's Strongest Soldier]

That doesn’t even make any sense. It’s extremely rare for cancer to pass from the mother to a developing fetus. What horrible people

It does make sense if you consider it from the perspective of them purchasing a designer baby. The mother developed cancer which means that the child may also be predisposed to it. This cuts into the value of the fetus as its pedigree is clearly tainted and it becomes less desirable for the buyers. I compared surrogacy to buying a dog for a reason. It is an utterly vile practice.

Mind you, I am taking the story at face value and the lack of details about the baby's rapid death after induced delivery makes me question whether there is more to this. Still, this doesn't change my opinion of surrogacy one bit.

 

[HootersMcBoobies]

Mind you, I am taking the story at face value and the lack of details about the baby's rapid death after induced delivery makes me question whether there is more to this.

That doesn’t even make any sense. It’s extremely rare for cancer to pass from the mother to a developing fetus.

There are other articles, and this interview with her (skip to 27:30) that state her cancer got more aggressive (spread to her liver), and the doctors said they had to induce the baby, so she could get the higher chemo dosage she needed. The couple who got the surrogacy didn't want a child that early and threatened to sue the hospital. She offered to pay back all the fees and "adopt" the baby instead (she had other parents that were intersted) and it turned into a legal fight with their lawyers insisting on either termination or (if the baby was born) no "life saving measures." I thought there was another article that detailed the judge/legal case, but I forgot to tag it and can't find anything. All she says in the interview is that her lawyers and her OBGYN both advocated and failed on the legal routes.

She had the baby at a different hopital, but refused to say if the baby was born alive (she likely cannot say for legal reasons).