CornBurrito
Member
I'm horny
m2 m8.
I'm horny
I'm horny
I'm socially inept and am in need of sexual satisfaction
L E T . U S . C O P U L A T E
I'm horny
Is there something in the water here?
eww
same
same
I like yours much better.
Chuck Tingle has probably written at length about this precise combination.
We barely talk about vaginas here, seriously look at the first post of each page in this thread alone I agree it can be toxic, but it's hardly for the reasons you presented (that we often say vaginas are gross, it's not done often, at all).Is it? This thread can (inadvertently) be pretty toxic towards women from time to time.
StupidityWhat's with this "being gay is actually a choice for people" sentiment being brought up by posters lately? Is this some new libertarian social stance that I wasn't made aware of? I swear, there's been like fifteen threads now that have ended up like this.
I get what you're saying, and it makes sense but it's the 'not all of us will' bit I'm struggling with. Why? What causes same sex attraction to activate in some people and not others?Well it's not a choice in the conventional way. It's not something that you sit through and decide upon.... "okay so should I like men or women, both or none?"
All I'm saying is that we're all capable of same-sex/opposite-sex attraction but not all of us will.
I think Bisexuals/Pansexuals would be evidence for this claim.
The creepy guy from Wind Waker?
And now there's conflation between fetishes and sexual orientation.
Somehow I feel like I've heard all of this before, but with a completely different set of people...
Oh dearVideogame journalist Steve Hogarty has embarked upon a new column entitled Having Lots of Sex With Men in Videogames. Here is part one (probably not massively safe for work even though any explicit imagery is heavily censored).
The literary mastermind.
Host it so I can delete it. I assume this is what you were looking for?
What's with this "being gay is actually a choice for people" sentiment being brought up by posters lately? Is this some new libertarian social stance that I wasn't made aware of? I swear, there's been like fifteen threads now that have ended up like this.
I get what you're saying, and it makes sense but it's the 'not all of us will' bit I'm struggling with. Why? What causes same sex attraction to activate in some people and not others?
I'm not an expert eitherI would say epigenetics. But I'm no expert, just a hobo. This is all out of speculation. ;_;
Brakke seems to think everyone is fluidly bi.
I don't think he's homophobic, just delusional.
Why would he be homophobic or delusional? He actually presents a really good argument. He isn't the first though, I've read a theory similar to what he is saying. It's somewhat convincing.
So basically people aren't wrong when they tell their struggling gay teens that they are just confused and haven't found the right member of the opposite sex yet?
I guess I don't shed a tear for any gay people who are killed in Uganda or elsewhere. Since they are literally choosing to be gay, and could simply just search harder for an opposite sex partner.
So basically people aren't wrong when they tell their struggling gay teens that they are just confused and haven't found the right member of the opposite sex yet?
I guess I don't shed a tear for any gay people who are killed in Uganda or elsewhere. Since they are literally choosing to be gay, and could simply just search harder for an opposite sex partner.
That's a straw-man. Also, whatt does that have anything to do with sexuality being fluid rather than fixed? Like I said it's not like one sits through and ponders "should I be gay, bi or straight?" - it doesn't work like that.
What I've heard a lot of people say is that even if being LGBT was a choice (which it is not), the right to do so shouldn't be infringed upon regardless. I agree with the sentiment, but it's not the reality of the situation obviously.
"Gayness is a choice" is a running theme among conservative anti-gay propaganda. I don't think I really need to substantiate this?
It's delusional because in our world, it's already an uphill climb getting people to accept gays and bi's. What do you think is going to happen if you stood up and shouted: "Alright, maybe we're not intrinsically gay, but rather that we are all potential gay."
Keep in mind that you're speaking to a populace who is convinced gays being married will threaten the fabric of society. And this only applies to countries where it's not a crime to be gay and you won't be jailed our hung for it.
It's so naive a viewpoint it doesn't merit any kind of consideration.
It's the logical conclusion, not a straw man. People literally wouldn't be wrong to state that those who think they are exclusively gay are simply just confused and haven't met the right person yet.
If being gay is a choice then I have no reason to criticize places like Uganda, other than that we consider secular idealogies as being more valid than religious ones. But there's really nothing that makes one objectively better than the other. And if being gay is a choice I don't have a problem with religious ideaoogies that seek to punish or discourage it.
Again, that's not what the argument is about. No one is reaching the conclusion that being gay is a choice.
I woke up today and you know what? I like dick more than pussy. I'll probably change my mind tomorrow, though. As for Friday, who knows? I might choose something different altogether. It's my choice, after all.
Why does it matter? Honestly, tell me what benefit this course of thought, if it's even at all substantiated by medical studies, has for LGBT rights.Yes, it's a running theme. But fluid sexuality != choice. I don't know how to explain this any better or how to make it clear.
The sarcasm in my post was lost on you. I know full well sexuality is not a choice. In fact, I made a post earlier about it. You don't just wake up and decide you like dick or pusssy or, in my case, both. I have always been attracted to both. It just took a while for me to realise what label my sexuality fell under.Or perhaps you don't choose it, but you have no control over it and it can shift at random like a raging fluid river. Sounds like dedicated relationships would just be impossible.
Coincidentally none of you can say you aren't into animals. Sexuality is fluid. Have you met all the animals in the world to say for sure you wouldn't be attracted to a dog? Didn't think so. How come there isn't a Kinsey species scale?
But that's not practical in real life though.Yes, it's a running theme. But fluid sexuality != choice. I don't know how to explain this any better or how to make myself more clear.
Again, that's not what the argument is about. No one is reaching the conclusion that being gay is a choice.
The sarcasm in my post was lost on you. I know full well sexuality is not a choice. In fact, I made a post earlier about it. You don't just wake up and decide you like dick or pusssy or, in my case, both. I have always been attracted to both. It just took a while for me to realise what label my sexuality fell under.
Sexuality is fluid. So it isn't that I am exclusively gay. I just haven't met the right women yet. Perhaps if I searched harder I could find a woman I find sexually appealing. By not putting effort into that I am essentially choosing to be gay.
Kinsey scale is fucking bullshit, and I wish its cult fanatics would stop shoving it down all of humanity's fucking throat. No, sorry. The world isn't a Clamp anime where everyone is fucking omnisexual.
You know what this reminds me of? Hippies, and communist activists; people who believe that if we just try really hard and think positive thoughts, we can create an ideal egalitarian society.
But that's not practical in real life though.