The Problem with Faggotry

[Taliesen]

Homosexuality is a mental illness called Same Sex Attraction.

Like most mental illnesses a cure is uncertain, but that doesn't mean people are "born that way".

And it certainly doesn't mean we should be enabling and empowering those who suffer from the condition.

The Problem with Faggotry

Most of the confusion about homosexuality comes from the fact that we often conflate the three different aspects of it. Those aspects are:

I. Same Sex Attraction (SSA)
This a mental illness. The two triggers of which are well understood:

1. sexual abuse as a child (which is why the North American Man/Boy Love Association's [NAMBLA] motto is "Sex before eight, or else it's too late"), and

2. not bonding properly with one's father by the age of three (which is one of the many reasons the "Left" works so hard to drive father's out of children's lives).

From this, we can see that although nobody is "born this way," there is a genetic component to SSA, because not everybody who is molested or who doesn't bond properly with their father will turn out to suffer from it. Like most mental illnesses, a cure is uncertain.

II. The Sexual Perversion
The act of engaging in sexual congress with someone of the same sex is a sin. Although nobody chooses to be mentally ill this is most definitely a choice, because whom one chooses to have sex with is, by definition, a choice.

The argument that they can't help whom they love and it's an unfair burden to forbid them engaging in such self-destructive and socially destructive behavior is also false, because the over-whelming majority of heterosexuals are forced to do the same. The fact is that most people are unattractive and all of us are really only attracted to a small number of attractive people, so most of us (because we're unattractive) are forced to settle for someone equally unattractive. So should unattractive men be able to argue that rape is natural and should be legalized because they were born that way and can't help whom they love?

Of course, a standard argument against rape is that sex must be "consensual". Studies have shown, over and over again, that the single most common fantasy for women is to be "taken" (incidentally, the word "rape" comes from the Latin "raptio", which means to be "taken away" or "taken up", it's also the root of the word "rapture"), so since it is a commonly recurring fantasy of women, one could argue that in fact women are consenting.

Obviously this argument is fallacious and society is right to outlaw rape. For the simple reason that it is destructive to the stability of society. Homosexuality has always been illegal for the same reason, it always destabilizes society and leads to it's collapse.

III. The Queer Agenda
(Often called the "Gay Agenda," but I don't use the word "gay" when referring to homosexuality, because, let's face it, there's nothing happy about it)

The politics of homosexuality, is designed to "turn" as many people as possible into homosexuals (or at the very least into those who support the agenda). Because queer activists understand the root causes of SSA (listed above), today it is aimed primarily at young children. It is a major plank in the White Genocide platform, and any support for it must be seen as treason.

[joeylowsac]

Originally Posted by Taliesen

Homosexuality is a mental illness called Same Sex Attraction.

Like most mental illnesses a cure is uncertain, but that doesn't mean people are "born that way".

And it certainly doesn't mean we should be enabling and empowering those who suffer from the condition.

The Problem with Faggotry

Most of the confusion about homosexuality comes from the fact that we often conflate the three different aspects of it. Those aspects are:

I. Same Sex Attraction (SSA)
This a mental illness. The two triggers of which are well understood:

1. sexual abuse as a child (which is why the North American Man/Boy Love Association's [NAMBLA] motto is "Sex before eight, or else it's too late"), and

2. not bonding properly with one's father by the age of three (which is one of the many reasons the "Left" works so hard to drive father's out of children's lives).

From this, we can see that although nobody is "born this way," there is a genetic component to SSA, because not everybody who is molested or who doesn't bond properly with their father will turn out to suffer from it. Like most mental illnesses, a cure is uncertain.

II. The Sexual Perversion
The act of engaging in sexual congress with someone of the same sex is a sin. Although nobody chooses to be mentally ill this is most definitely a choice, because whom one chooses to have sex with is, by definition, a choice.

The argument that they can't help whom they love and it's an unfair burden to forbid them engaging in such self-destructive and socially destructive behavior is also false, because the over-whelming majority of heterosexuals are forced to do the same. The fact is that most people are unattractive and all of us are really only attracted to a small number of attractive people, so most of us (because we're unattractive) are forced to settle for someone equally unattractive. So should unattractive men be able to argue that rape is natural and should be legalized because they were born that way and can't help whom they love?

Of course, a standard argument against rape is that sex must be "consensual". Studies have shown, over and over again, that the single most common fantasy for women is to be "taken" (incidentally, the word "rape" comes from the Latin "raptio", which means to be "taken away" or "taken up", it's also the root of the word "rapture"), so since it is a commonly recurring fantasy of women, one could argue that in fact women are consenting.

Obviously this argument is fallacious and society is right to outlaw rape. For the simple reason that it is destructive to the stability of society. Homosexuality has always been illegal for the same reason, it always destabilizes society and leads to it's collapse.

III. The Queer Agenda
(Often called the "Gay Agenda," but I don't use the word "gay" when referring to homosexuality, because, let's face it, there's nothing happy about it)

The politics of homosexuality, is designed to "turn" as many people as possible into homosexuals (or at the very least into those who support the agenda). Because queer activists understand the root causes of SSA (listed above), today it is aimed primarily at young children. It is a major plank in the White Genocide platform, and any support for it must be seen as treason.

I agree that homosexuality is a mental disorder. Most mental disorders are ones people are born with or at least the predisposition for (such as with schizophrenia). The causes you suggest are not supported by science and are contrary to logic and casual observation.

1. That sexual abuse causes homosexuality:
There is no scientific evidence to support this.
By this logic raping a female should turn her into a lesbian or at the very least it should turn a lesbian into a heterosexual. Yet neither is the case.
I don't know if the motto quoted is real but if so I would interpret it to mean that any child older than 8 they have no interest in.
Sexual abuse is far less prevalent than homosexuality. 1 in 53 boys is sexually abused (about 1.8%), 1 in 9 girls (about 11%).

2. That not bonding properly with one's father by the age of three causes homosexuality:
First define "properly".
There is no scientific evidence to support this.
By this logic 75% of negros would be homosexual (or at least 37.5% of males if we arbitrarily ignore the female half, which both of these scenarios do). Since being absent would prohibit "properly" bonding by whatever criteria is used to define "properly". Yet this is not the case.

Furthermore, by what logic would a negative experience result in a desire to repeat the experience?

I don't know for certain if a heterosexual can be transformed into a homosexual. I also don't know for certain if Bigfoot exists. I find both extremely unlikely but more evidence has been provided for the latter (though none of the evidence is compelling). By what mechanism would such a change take place?
Is there even anyone who claims they were completely heterosexual and were turned into a homosexual? There is a long history attesting to the inability of homosexuals to turn into heterosexuals, despite a desire to do so.

On the other hand, There is substantial evidence that exposure to androgens prenatally does play a role in sexual orientation. Some extremely compelling evidence comes from people born with Disorders of Sexual Development (These people used to be called Hermaphrodites, then they were called intersexed, for now they are using this term. The nomenclature is likely to change).
There are a number of different causes of these disorders (e.g., congenital adrenal hyperplasia, androgen insensitivity syndrome, gonadal dysgenesis, Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, 17-hydroxysteriod dehydrogenase, 5α-reductase deficiency, etc.), the list is long. Unlike in the general population, sexual orientation can be predicted in some of these conditions. For example those 46XY with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome are always attracted to men. This cannot be explained by abuse or bonding.
There may be a number of different causes of homosexuality. There are certainly different kinds of homosexuals, some nobody could ever spot (except perhaps another homo) and some anyone could spot more than a block away. There is likely a biological reason for this variation.
Evidence that healthy children whose mothers were prescribed androgenic progestins during pregnancy show increased male-typical play, and that those whose mothers were prescribed anti-androgenic hormones show reduced male-typical play.

Personally, the notion that a man who is not attracted to men can just choose to be attracted to them seems ridiculous. It doesn't seem possible. I can't even choose to like brussels sprouts and unlike homosexuality brussels sprouts are healthy. I've never tasted one but I've seen them and I've smelled them and I know I will die without ever putting one in my mouth. Why can't I just choose to like them? I've also seen and smelled men and I'd rather eat nothing but brussels sprouts for the rest of my life.
There is not indication the people have the ability to just choose to like something objectionable. If a man can choose to like men he should be able to choose to like objectionable smells or music or food. I don't know of anyone that is able to do any of those things.
My instinct is that any man choosing to like putting other men's dicks in his mouth was a homo to start with.

Prenatal Androgen Exposure And Children’s Gender-Typed Behavior And Toy And Playmate Preferences - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7856278/

Prenatal Endocrine Influences On Sexual Orientation And On Sexually Differentiated Childhood Behavior - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3296090/

Lastly, I must say the part about rape was completely asinine apart from resorting to Reductio Ad Absurdum (Although the bit about the hardships of unattractive people did make me laugh. I'm hot and I settle plenty, up to and last night, LOL). Fantasies about rape and actual rape bear little resemblance to each other. In a fantasy they get to choose everything and none of it happens. I reality they get to choose nothing and it all happens. Nobody has ever needed medical treatment from something that happened in a fantasy.

[Taliesen]

Originally Posted by joeylowsac

Prenatal Androgen Exposure And Children’s Gender-Typed Behavior And Toy And Playmate Preferences - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7856278/

Prenatal Endocrine Influences On Sexual Orientation And On Sexually Differentiated Childhood Behavior - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3296090/

Jewish sources are not going to convince me.

[joeylowsac]

Originally Posted by Taliesen

Jewish sources are not going to convince me.

These are scientific papers, and none of the authors names appear to be jewish.
Even if they were that would not be an argument against the science. Science must be refuted on a scientific basis not on an Ad Hominem fallacy.

[Gladiatrix]

Originally Posted by joeylowsac

[B][SIZE="3"][COLOR="DarkRed"]I agree that homosexuality is a mental disorder. Most mental disorders are ones people are born with or at least the predisposition for (such as with schizophrenia). The causes you suggest are not supported by science and are contrary to logic and casual observation.

1. That sexual abuse causes homosexuality:
There is no scientific evidence to support this.
By this logic raping a female should turn her into a lesbian or at the very least it should turn a lesbian into a heterosexual. Yet neither is the case.
I don't know if the motto quoted is real but if so I would interpret it to mean that any child older than 8 they have no interest in.
Sexual abuse is far less prevalent than homosexuality. 1 in 53 boys is sexually abused (about 1.8%), 1 in 9 girls (about 11%).

I have read that in boys that it does. The article said it doesn't in girls. It didn't say what causes lesbians. Somebody told me that girls who have been abused often become promiscuous.

Both make sense after reading other stuff about one's first sexual experience being what one will view sex as later in life. I have known a lot of gay men throughout life and many of them had been sexually abused by men or older teens. It usually occurs between ages of 11-15.

[joeylowsac]

Originally Posted by Gladiatrix

I have read that in boys that it does. The article said it doesn't in girls. It didn't say what causes lesbians. Somebody told me that girls who have been abused often become promiscuous.

Both make sense after reading other stuff about one's first sexual experience being what one will view sex as later in life. I have known a lot of gay men throughout life and many of them had been sexually abused by men or older teens. It usually occurs between ages of 11-15.

There's not much that I can do with second-hand anecdotal accounts. I don't know under what circumstances you've had occasion to know "many" homosexuals well enough to be familiar with intimate childhood histories but my first question would be are these confirmed cases of abuse or merely homosexual fantasy? If this were the case, it is possible that homosexuals are more prone to abuse by other homosexuals. More to the point, did any of them claim that they were heterosexuals and the abuse transformed them into homosexuals?
I've also heard that sexually abused females are more promiscuous. Putting aside the questions of what exactly constitutes promiscuity and whether it requires a different explanation in women than in men. It dose seem logical that experience would reduce inhibition but that might be the reason for the belief. I don't know whether or not it is true but none of the sluts I know have ever mentioned abuse, at least not childhood sexual abuse, neither have I ever inquired. I don't know if the matter has ever been specifically researched but there must be some information about it, even if indirect.

A very good paper on sexual orientation:
Neurohormonal Functioning and Sexual Orientation - https://ulozto.net/file/BxVoc6us6yRr...osexuality-pdf