Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Gay Rights

1234689

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Wicknight wrote:
    Do gay horses or mice "choose" the gay life style?

    I've always wondered how they explained it to thier parents.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Wicknight wrote:
    I think his point was the homosexuality occurs naturally in a lot of other animal species, so where anyone got the idea that it is something abnormal to humans, or a mental illness effecting humans that can be cured or fixed, or a life style choice unique to humans, is beyond me.
    Homosexuality is abnormal. It is abnormal in that it is both a deviation from the biological design of the organism and not constituting to the norm or standard of Society or the species. It is the exception rather than the rule. Deal with it.

    Does this mean it is evil or bad? No. Evolution is entirely based upon the exception to the rule pushing the species forward after all, so it is not necessarily a bad aberration. Having said that neither is it necessarily a good one either. However, simply saying that it is not normal does not damn it.
    Do gay horses or mice "choose" the gay life style
    We don’t choose cancer or schizophrenia either. Indeed, paraphilias are not chosen but are compulsive by definition, having been brought about by a combination of both nurture and nature (politically minded psychologists have been debating the exact mix of the two for years). The question is not whether a paraphilia is voluntary, but whether it is antisocial - directly or indirectly.

    As to the question of Gay marriage, an interesting spin-off has resulted from its legalisation in Spain. The Spanish Federation of Islamic Religious Organizations has demanded the recognition and legalisation of polygamous marriages. Presently only the UK makes a halfhearted attempt at this recognition, and typically the practice is illegal elsewhere in Europe, but overlooked in the case of Muslims (not unlike homosexuality in Ireland less than twenty years ago).

    TBH, I don’t see any reasonable argument against the legalisation of polygamous marriages there following that of homosexual ones, but it has resulted in some very uncomfortable Spanish liberals.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Homosexuality is abnormal.

    I actually said "something abnormal to humans"
    We don’t choose cancer or schizophrenia either.
    Last time I checked cancer or schizophrenia aren't "life style choices"

    Read my posts properly please TC before telling me to "deal" with it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Wicknight wrote:
    I actually said "something abnormal to humans"
    You said that where anyone got the idea that it is something abnormal to humans is beyond you. So I explained - simply - why it is abnormal so it would be less beyond you. You may thank me on another occasion.
    Last time I checked cancer or schizophrenia aren't "life style choices"
    That was my point. I never suggested anything was a "life style choice" in my post.
    Read my posts properly please TC before telling me to "deal" with it
    Ibid.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    So I explained - simply - why it is abnormal so it would be less beyond you.

    Its not something that is abnormal to humans (ie an abnormality unique to only homo sepaians), it occurs in other animals too.

    Which supports the idea that it is genetic or at least biological in nature, not a life style choice or a psychological affliction.
    That was my point.

    Actually it was my original point. :D

    It isn't a life style choice. Horses and mice don't make life style choices. That was my point. Homosexuality occurs naturally in nature. Not that I would have any problem even if it were a "life style" choice. As I said I make a number of life style choices to do with sex for pleasure that I would be rather annoyed if they were considered wrong for being unnatural (BJs for one)

    Anyway, I think we are basically saying the same thing, so not much point arguing ... give us a hug :p


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    The OP wrote:
    No - humans are humans, and animals are animals - we're not the same. Any biologist will tell you that. We're both living beings - yes, but we're not animals.

    ?!

    What nonsense. What biologist were you asking, precisely, and was he pre-19th century?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Wicknight wrote:
    Do gay horses or mice "choose" the gay life style?
    I was under the impression that animals only exhibited gay activity when forced into close-quarters in captivity (like prison:) ), but not in the wild

    Wicknight wrote:
    Hell I make a life style choice to recieved oral sex for pleasure (if I've been very good), which is something unique to humans (and dolphins afaik)
    You forgot gorillas (according to straightdope)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    I was under the impression that animals only exhibited gay activity when forced into close-quarters in captivity (like prison:) ), but not in the wild

    http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/research/story/0,9865,1432991,00.html :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    rsynnott wrote:
    No offence but those ducks sound retarded. Having sex with dead ducks?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Freelancer


    No offence but those ducks sound retarded. Having sex with dead ducks?

    No offence :rolleyes: but rysnnott posted it in rebuttal to this piece of nonsense by you;
    I was under the impression that animals only exhibited gay activity when forced into close-quarters in captivity (like prison:) ), but not in the wild

    you made an claim, rysnnott disproved it what on earth point are you trying to make by announcing "those ducks sound retarded"?

    I'm still reelling from the discovery that I'm not an animal and await meeting "any" biologist who'll confirm that.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Freelancer wrote:
    No offence :rolleyes: but rysnnott posted it in rebuttal to this piece of nonsense by you;.
    I was referring to a straight dope article that I read regarding this
    Animals usually engage in homosexual behavior only when crowded, deprived of normal heterosexual contact, or otherwise subjected to stress.

    but when rereading the article I see that although they reverted to hetrosexual behaviour with females the monkeys do seem to have been somewhat gay.
    http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_198.html




    I am aware that straightdope is not always right but i think it is somewhat reliable


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Freelancer


    I was referring to a straight dope article that I read regarding this

    No you weren't you quoted and refered to rysnnots article.

    but when rereading the article I see that although they reverted to hetrosexual behaviour with females the monkeys do seem to have been somewhat gay.
    http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_198.html




    I am aware that straightdope is not always right but i think it is somewhat reliable

    In this case it's wrong.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Afaik Homosexuality has been observed in animals in both in the wild and captivity (I wouldn't necessarily call that "prision")

    This is hardly surprising is it, considering we are animals as well? Is anyone shocked by this?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Freelancer


    Wicknight wrote:
    Afaik Homosexuality has been observed in animals in both in the wild and captivity (I wouldn't necessarily call that "prision")

    This is hardly surprising is it, considering we are animals as well? Is anyone shocked by this?

    I think "the OP" needs to hear it again.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Wicknight wrote:
    Which supports the idea that it is genetic or at least biological in nature, not a life style choice or a psychological affliction.
    It supports the idea that there is a genetic or biological component to homosexuality. You’d be jumping to conclusions to say that it was the principle or, let alone, only cause - indeed, most studies on abnormal sexuality have indicated that they are largely learned. Of course I’m not claiming this is the case with homosexuality, only that you are jumping to conclusions.
    It isn't a life style choice. Horses and mice don't make life style choices. That was my point. Homosexuality occurs naturally in nature.
    My point was that whether it was or was not a choice was ultimately irrelevant. Just because something may occur in nature or even go so far as to be considered natural does not make it a good thing any more than if it is abnormal or unnatural makes it a bad one.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    My point was that whether it was or was not a choice was ultimately irrelevant. Just because something may occur in nature or even go so far as to be considered natural does not make it a good thing any more than if it is abnormal or unnatural makes it a bad one.

    I know, I wasn't making a comment on if it was good or bad. As has been pointed out ducks rape each other, it doesn't mean we should.

    But at the same time, the argument was that homosexuality is not natural, ie some form of social/pyschological haywiring going on in the human brain, and that was a reason to not accept it. If that is the only reason it is a bit of a weak reason


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Freelancer wrote:
    No you weren't you quoted and refered to rysnnots article.



    Very well I was thinking of the article.


    Freelancer wrote:
    If you read the article more carefully the reasons that animals are homosexual are
    Another suggestion is that homosexuality is a developmental phase people go through. He said, "This is similar to the argument of play in young animals to get their brain and muscles to work effectively and together. Off the back of this, there's the possibility you can get individuals locked into this phase for the rest of their lives as a result of the social environment they grow up in."

    But he adds that homosexuality doesn't necessarily have to have a function. It could be a spin-off or by-product of something else and in itself carries no evolutionary weight."

    He cites sexual gratification, which encourages procreation, as an example. "An organism is designed to maximize its motivational systems," he adds.

    In other words, if the urge to have sex is strong enough it may spill over into nonreproductive sex, as suggested by the actions of the bonobos and macaques. However, as Dunbar admits, there's a long way to go before the causes of homosexuality in humans are fully understood.


    This makes it look like a screw-up or perversion more than any other evidence before presented on this thread.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    If you read the article more carefully the reasons that animals are homosexual are


    This makes it look like a screw-up or perversion more than any other evidence before presented on this thread.

    Those weren't all the reasons given, and in any cases those articles would imply that, assuming it IS genetic or partially so, it is an evolutionary byproduct. Still NATURAL (though abnormal), though, like lefthandedness, or, indeed, schizophrenia. Being natural, of course, doesn't make anything right or wrong.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    rsynnott wrote:
    . Being natural, of course, doesn't make anything right or wrong.
    I've always thought people made up their own definitions of right or wrong, normally to accomodate what they want to do.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Freelancer


    Very well I was thinking of the article.

    Bully for you, seeing as we're not psychic it wasn't possible for us to know that.


    If you read the article more carefully the reasons that animals are homosexual are


    This makes it look like a screw-up or perversion more than any other evidence before presented on this thread.

    You're being most selective in the bits of the article you're quoting.

    In any case homosexuality occurs in nature, and therefore cannot be considered unnatural.
    I've always thought people made up their own definitions of right or wrong, normally to accomodate what they want to do.

    And what does this non sequitur have to do with homosexuality occuring in nature?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    I've always thought people made up their own definitions of right or wrong, normally to accomodate what they want to do.

    Each person ultimately determines their personal morality, often but not always derived from others. Only the most selfish determine it in terms of what they want to do.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    rsynnott wrote:
    Each person ultimately determines their personal morality, often but not always derived from others. Only the most selfish determine it in terms of what they want to do.

    I'm not saying its a concious decision, but often people "make room" for certain activities eg those rioters in O'Connell street would have wanted to do that anyway but had to find away to let themselves.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    I'm not saying its a concious decision, but often people "make room" for certain activities eg those rioters in O'Connell street would have wanted to do that anyway but had to find away to let themselves.

    Those people weren't the most upstanding member of society, though, were they?

    Do you have a point here (are you saying that people consider homosexuality acceptable only if they want to have sex with the same gender, which would seem to be demonstrably false) or are you just rambling?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    rsynnott wrote:
    Each person ultimately determines their personal morality, often but not always derived from others. Only the most selfish determine it in terms of what they want to do.
    That’s a bit naïve, TBH. If history has taught us anything is humanity’s capacity to justify the expedient as moral.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭Rozie


    Children should never be allowed to be placed in the care of a person or people that would result in their warping as they got older

    http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/13950130.htm

    Good thing that homosexuals are neither, according to essentially every single study ever conducted on the matter.

    Probably best not to use American sources unless they have "Edu" in them.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    rsynnott wrote:
    Do you have a point here (are you saying that people consider homosexuality acceptable only if they want to have sex with the same gender, which would seem to be demonstrably false) or are you just rambling?
    That was actually a tangent just ignore it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    rsynnott wrote:
    Still less fuss being made over it than the bloody blood ban, tho.
    I didn't actually know about that till I went to give blood. I know that HIV transmission is higher among gays but I would have thought that with the spread of condoms that this would have been stopped.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Freelancer wrote:
    Insinuating I'm writing threads on LGB board and talking about pm's you got is just more of the pathetic arguments we've grown used to hearing from you.
    .

    I wasn't insinuating anything. If you look at the thread there is nothing wrong with it, I was just curious if it was you, but since it seems to have been written by an innoffensive and level-headed person then obviously I was mistaken.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    rsynnott wrote:
    Also, again, mixed-race (disgusting term, but you know what I mean) kids tend not to have problems, and didn't even when it was almost unheard of.

    Actually thats not true. [Not a disgusting term but an applicable one and we unfortunately live in a world where these things matter].

    They do have problems, but thats not a reason for people not to mate with other races.

    Personally, Im not comfortable with gay men adopting. They are after all still men. I would be more comfortable with lesbians raising my kid.

    Our concern should be the well being of the children. Considering the illegal sex child ring in south east asia there is no way I would endorce gay men adopting legally.

    Condoms would stop the spread of HIV if people actually used them. But people dont.


  • Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Jordyn Aggressive Mockingbird



    Our concern should be the well being of the children. Considering the illegal sex child ring in south east asia there is no way I would endorce gay men adopting legally.
    What on earth has that got to do with gay men adopting?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    bluewolf wrote:
    What on earth has that got to do with gay men adopting?

    It's more "duhhh... what's paedophilia? I know, it must be the same as gay!", I'm afraid...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    I should also add or single straight men.


  • Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Jordyn Aggressive Mockingbird


    rsynnott wrote:
    It's more "duhhh... what's paedophilia? I know, it must be the same as gay!", I'm afraid...
    I figured it was that, but I thought there was a possibility there was some scandal involving gay men adopting and using kids for sex or something.
    However unlikely.

    What I found annoying was when I read an opinion piece in the paper by some guy insisting gay marriage was the same as polygamy and if we consider one we have to consider the other
    what a load of rubbish


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    If you consider the theory that men are not monogamous beings then you have to consider what its like when two non monogamous beings are in a relationship who are also very very horny.

    rsynnot you know gay men have olympic sex drives and that monogamy is far from de rigeur.

    You know Im right about that.

    Blluewolf - gay men will tell you the exact same thing as the guy in the article did.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    rsynnot you know gay men have olympic sex drives and that monogamy is far from de rigeur.

    You know Im right about that.

    Erm. Have you ever actually met a gay male?

    Have you ever met a straight male?

    Little enough to choose between as far as that goes, as far as I can see.


  • Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Jordyn Aggressive Mockingbird


    If you consider the theory that men are not monogamous beings then you have to consider what its like when two non monogamous beings are in a relationship who are also very very horny.

    rsynnot you know gay men have olympic sex drives and that monogamy is far from de rigeur.

    You know Im right about that.
    Yay for stupid unfounded generalisations.
    Blluewolf - gay men will tell you the exact same thing as the guy in the article did.
    Which article is this


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Freelancer


    I wasn't insinuating anything. If you look at the thread there is nothing wrong with it, I was just curious if it was you, but since it seems to have been written by an innoffensive and level-headed person then obviously I was mistaken.

    What can I say? I tend to react badly to things like the tissues of lies, out bigotry, unfounded accusations, and inane tagents which pretty much sum up the body of your posts on this thread.

    So do you still have a point Firespinner? Still got some inane point about homosexual violence? Did your friends in "the gays" get back to you, or your mate in the "guards"?
    Personally, Im not comfortable with gay men adopting. They are after all still men. I would be more comfortable with lesbians raising my kid.

    Our concern should be the well being of the children. Considering the illegal sex child ring in south east asia there is no way I would endorce gay men adopting legally.


    From much earlier in the thread
    Alfred E. Kinsey, in his landmark study of male sexuality, divided adult sexual interest into seven categories: three categories of homosexuality, one category of bi-sexuality, and three categories of heterosexuality. The Abel and Harlow study used this "Kinsey Scale" in its questions about adult sexual preference.

    The 1,038 men who molested boys reported a range of adult sexual preferences. Contrary to popular belief, only 8 percent reported that they were exclusively homosexual who molest boys followed the general pattern of the U.S. male population in regard to their adult sexual preferences. 51 percent said they were hetrosexual in their adult relationships. An additional 19 percent reported they were predominately heterosexual, while yet another 9 percent said they were equally heterosexual and homosexual in their adult sex life. As with other characteristics, the group of 1,038 men who molest boys followed the general pattern of the U.S. male population in regard to their adult sexual preferences. (emphasis mine)

    Homosexuality and paedophilia aren't the same thing. I swear every new poster onto this thread should just be forced to re read pages 7-11 were this was comprehensivible proven.
    If you consider the theory that men are not monogamous beings then you have to consider what its like when two non monogamous beings are in a relationship who are also very very horny.

    rsynnot you know gay men have olympic sex drives and that monogamy is far from de rigeur.

    You know Im right about that.

    I think the secret stash of homoerotic porn in your closet is lying to you.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    rsynnott wrote:
    Erm. Have you ever actually met a gay male?

    Have you ever met a straight male?

    Little enough to choose between as far as that goes, as far as I can see.

    Im from manhattan and work in theatre and have friends in soft journalism, what do you think?:rolleyes:

    Have you ever met one?

    The difference between gay and straight men is that the former like to **** other men and the latter like to **** women. Did I miss something?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    Im from manhattan and work in theatre and have friends in soft journalism, what do you think?:rolleyes:

    Have you ever met one?

    The difference between gay and straight men is that the former like to **** other men and the latter like to **** women. Did I miss something?

    And do you find that your gay friends have these crazy sex drives you mentioned and find it impossible to be monogamous? That is not my experience, at all.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Freelancer


    Im from manhattan and work in theatre and have friends in soft journalism, what do you think?:rolleyes:

    Have you ever met one?

    The difference between gay and straight men is that the former like to **** other men and the latter like to **** women. Did I miss something?

    No earlier you said
    rsynnot you know gay men have olympic sex drives and that monogamy is far from de rigeur.

    you're implying that gay men shag all the time and aren't monogamous and the implication is gay men can't be trusted with children.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Personally, Im not comfortable with gay men adopting. They are after all still men. I would be more comfortable with lesbians raising my kid.
    Our concern should be the well being of the children. Considering the illegal sex child ring in south east asia there is no way I would endorce gay men adopting legally.

    It seems it's the idea of men rather than gay men adopting that you have a problem with. Why is that? Why do you think men would make lesser parents than women? That notion stereotypes both men and women - men as the strong, breadwinning types with uncontrollable sex drives (your view) and women as the gentle, nurturing types.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Freelancer wrote:
    What can I say? I tend to react badly to things like the tissues of lies, out bigotry, unfounded accusations, and inane tagents which pretty much sum up the body of your posts on this thread.
    what did I lie about? What were these accusations? oh, and I don't consider myself a bigot.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    If you consider the theory that men are not monogamous beings then you have to consider what its like when two non monogamous beings are in a relationship who are also very very horny.
    Luckly, for the sake of the civilisation, you don't have to consider the theory that men are not naturally monogamous, because its biological nonsense. Sure some men cheat on their wives, but then some women cheat on their husbands. The idea that two gay men cannot be faithful to each other is nonsense.

    What this male bashing dribble has to do with adopting children I've no idea :confused: Are you honestly saying that we should not let men adopt children because they cannot be faithful to their partners??
    rsynnot you know gay men have olympic sex drives and that monogamy is far from de rigeur.
    Except for the ones that settle down into long term marriage like partnerships, ie exactly that ones that would want to fecking adopt and raise children in the first place :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Did I miss something?

    Yeah, about 40 years of the gay community trying to change ridiculous anti-gay, anti-male stereotypes :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Freelancer


    what did I lie about? What were these accusations? oh, and I don't consider myself a bigot.

    Your friends in the "guards" who informed you about the policing situation in the city?

    The accusation that "gays were at it all the time?" or "homosexuals do it more often" or "women limit sex"?
    or that "children of homosexual couples were more likely to be abused", or that there was "rampant homophobic violence" in the south you just cannot prove it"

    And bigots usualy dont consider themselves as bigots.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    I didn't actually know about that till I went to give blood. I know that HIV transmission is higher among gays but I would have thought that with the spread of condoms that this would have been stopped.
    The promotion of condoms in many Western countries since the 1980’s went a long way to breaking down many of the remaining social barriers to sex and left people to feel comfortable in the knowledge that they could have sex and do so safely.

    Unfortunately, people being people, they’ll often end up having unsafe sex anyway.

    So while many people have safe sex, the increase in sexual activity engendered by the availability of contraception has ironically also seen an absolute increase in unsafe sex.
    Wicknight wrote:
    Luckly, for the sake of the civilisation, you don't have to consider the theory that men are not naturally monogamous, because its biological nonsense. Sure some men cheat on their wives, but then some women cheat on their husbands. The idea that two gay men cannot be faithful to each other is nonsense.
    I’m sure they can, actually I know one gay couple who’ve been faithful for years - at least as far as I know, it’s not really the sort of thing you ask over a plate of Saltimbocca alla Romana at dinner - however there have been a number of studies that have indicated that homosexual couples are less predisposed to monogamy or long term relationships than heterosexuals:

    http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030711-121254-3711r.htm

    Of course I’m suspicious of any study of homosexuality as it invariably will end up having been sponsored by either a pro or anti group, however I would say that simply claiming that such an assertion is ‘nonsense’ is, well, nonsense too.
    What this male bashing dribble has to do with adopting children I've no idea :confused: Are you honestly saying that we should not let men adopt children because they cannot be faithful to their partners??
    That’s probably not a bad idea regardless of the sexual orientation of the couple.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    rsynnott wrote:
    And do you find that your gay friends have these crazy sex drives you mentioned and find it impossible to be monogamous? That is not my experience, at all.

    Yes. Perhaps that has to do with opportunity and what's available and peer pressure.

    Generally the policy on sex outside the main relationship is "never more than once with the same person and never in the house." Which in many ways is a policy I admire. I know couples who are together for years but they still **** around and cruise.

    Saying that, the men I am truly scared of are the married ones who cruise the subway platforms,are so in denial about their sexuality they wont wear condoms and then go home to their wives and children.

    WK - Im repeating common village wisdom from the metropolitan gay community. They are very collaborative with radical feminist/gender ideologies so I dont know how you conclude that they have worked so hard to eradicate anti male stereotypes.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    Generally the policy on sex outside the main relationship is "never more than once with the same person and never in the house." Which in many ways is a policy I admire. I know couples who are together for years but they still **** around and cruise.

    Ooooookay. Now, I know rather a lot of gay people in this country (college LGBT, USI LGBT and such.) I know maybe one person who might go in for that sort of thing. I certainly wouldn't myself. It may be more a cultural thing in New York than a gay thing as such.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Perhaps. It could be an age thing also. Lesbians as far as I can see are far more monogamous.

    Also I know the ENTIRE staff of a very prominant mens fashion magazine are entirely gay men, I wont name it here, but if you want me to tell you, pm mw, and the sexual harasssment is rife once you start working in gay friendly industries.

    This pressure is saturated also in the film, theatre, and arts industry. So the culture makes it next to impossible for a gay man to be completely faithful.

    Oddly, its probably easier to be faithful if you work in an industry thats more "straight" like finance.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    Perhaps. It could be an age thing also. Lesbians as far as I can see are far more monogamous.

    Also I know the ENTIRE staff of a very prominant mens fashion magazine are entirely gay men, I wont name it here, but if you want me to tell you, pm mw, and the sexual harasssment is rife once you start working.

    This pressure is saturated also in the film, theatre, and arts industry. So the culture makes it next to impossible for a gay man to be completely faithful.

    Heterosexuals in those environments aren't exactly known for being paragons of virtue, either, are they? I'm not convinced that ordinary gay people are crazed nymphomaniacs (or whatever the male version of that might be)

    Oh, and in case you're insinuating something, you know that gay people are allowed work in other industries, right?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement