Thinking Homosexuality

a reply to: cooperton

Oh I was saying that was I? Here I thought I was refuting the patently false statement that "homosexuality does not exist in nature". That is what happens with moving goal posts. Oh and if I were to attack you, you'd know it. No I am attacking your argument, and its a fallacy filled one.

Humanity does a great many unnatural things, yet some of us call them good. I personally have no interest in coprophilia, but if someone does, more power to them. What people do on their own time, in the privacy of their own homes, as long as everyone involved is a consenting participent, who cares?

You are now making sweeping statements about how we've "all felt". Tell me, why did you feel shame at masturbating? You are fallacious in the extreme.

Curious on people's views on the following:

Pedophilia
Incest
Polygamy
Bestiality
Homosexuality
Rape

What makes you think some are acceptable and some are not? They don't all have non-consent.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Its simple, if its non consensual its wrong.

If you are under the age of consent, you don't get to say yes.
If you are not human... you don't get to say yes.
If you are in any way shape or form coerced (Rape).... its not consensual.

So what was your question again? Because you are comparing apples to kumquats.

a reply to: cooperton

Your heart. Anyone who has masturbated has felt the immediate shame experienced after such. We often ignore the moral sensations in our heart for the pursuit of hedonism.

It's not a moral sensation in the heart, it's a well-known and widely-reported psychological effect connected to orgasm (n.b., not masturbation), evolutionary purpose (if any) unknown.

en.wikipedia.org...

You might choose to frame that slightly depressing moment or two as deep personal shame. And indeed, you should be ashamed of yourself.

originally posted by: Gemwolf

OK, that answers my above question... Don't you think if 92-95% of the male of a species and 62-80% of the female of a species does something it's natural?

It is difficult to understand what is natural. To answer that we would have to come to understand the natural essence of a human - to me, masturbation, lustful homosexuality, and lustful heterosexuality are all against our True Nature.

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: cooperton

Hmm interesting. Out if curiosity, to you, does homosexuality mean just a physical act or also include the emotional aspect of love/partnership?

I always considered homosexuality to be the sexual interaction of male-male based in sexual desire. I love other males, this does not mean I would have sexual relations with them. Lust is like gluttony because you are incapable of controlling unwarranted animal urges.

Beyond lust there is a beautiful platonic friendship available between two males, and beyond lust there is a transcendental embrace between a male and a female - the key to the treasure chest.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: cooperton
I was refuting the patently false statement that "homosexuality does not exist in nature". That is what happens with moving goal posts.

I never said that. You are arguing with your self.

You are now making sweeping statements about how we've "all felt". Tell me, why did you feel shame at masturbating? You are fallacious in the extreme.

I just learned it is an actual medical phenomenon: Post-coital tristesse. I felt shame because I literally just got done F*&%ing my self. Are you saying you feel no shame after such an act? Is your heart hardened?

originally posted by: audubon

You might choose to frame that slightly depressing moment or two as deep personal shame.

You don't think this is moral sensation? Just because it has a medical term should not take away from the meaning of it.

a reply to: cooperton

No I am arguing with other posters in this thread. Do try to keep up.

Oh how cute, you are trying appeal to morality as a gambit. I gave you my answer and I stand by it.

originally posted by: Noinden
No I am arguing with other posters in this thread. Do try to keep up.

Yet are replying to me...? You're a trip. There's a language barrier for sure.

I gave you my answer and I stand by it.

Your answer that anything observed in animal warrants normal behavior? You wander off topic and resort to insult.

a reply to: cooperton

Because you are arguing that homosexuality is wrong, and then trying to use other acts as your reason.

You went off topic, changing from homosexuality, to masturbation, to coprophilia. Unrelated acts. I stated my answers to both. If you can not actually accept people will question you, then don't post. Like I said, IF I were to insult you, you'd know. I've simply decided not to be polite to you, based on your archaic ideas.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Without being too prurient, I assure you that you need to expand your horizons of what is possible a la the "hardware."

So anyone who doesn't think the same as you needs to broaden their horizons? such pomposity is a bigger problem, especially if such people are endorsing such ideas that are not the truth. Are you sure you know the truth?

No, I don't want anyone to think the same as me, nice strawman argument.

You seem to think that all intimacy is as simple as "inserting something into something else." That's your issue, not mine.

Frankly, there's nothing pompous at all about pointing out your apparent naivete or childish view of human sexuality or, more likely, pretense to innocence/ignorance.

Yes, I am quite certain I know the truth of many different ways to enjoy the human body beyond "key in lock."

As do all of the other adults here, I'd wager.

EDIT: I see you've conveniently dropped your schtick about "some who believe that homosexuality" is pathological, and yet, you can't explain the difference why, given that there is a literal spectrum of neuroses, psychoses and personality disorders to choose from, so many choose homosexuality as their pet peeve.

The obvious answer is, it's not a matter of trying to "fix" anything ... the obsession comes from some other source. Else, who cares?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Careful you will be accused of attacking him

Attention Please:

Please stick with the topic and keep the discussion limited to that and not each other.

Do not reply to this message.

Thanks

a reply to: cooperton

Ah, the Logic Twister has favoured us with an appearance.

You said animals exhibit homosexual behavior, therefore it must be normal for humans.

No. Animals exhibit homosexual behaviour, therefore homosexual behaviour is not ‘unnatural’ as many homophobes claim. It is a natural phenomenon. ‘Normal’ and ‘natural’ do not mean the same thing, and the poster did not use them as synonyms.

Yet, we observe animals eat their own feces, do you think this demonstrates that eating your own poop is normal?

Again the attempt to make ‘natural’ and ‘normal’ mean the same thing. Also a sly attempt to put homosexuality on a par with coprophagia, thereby triggering disgust in the reader and associating it with homosexuality. What a cheap, nasty, tactic.

Unfortunately for your revolting thesis, coprophagia in animals is both natural and normal.

• Cats, dogs and many other mammals keep their young clean by consuming their excretions.
  
  
• Rabbits and hares eat some of their own pellets to extract further nutrition from them.
  
  
• Baby elephants, giant pandas, koalas and hippopotami eat their mothers’ droppings, which provide them with the gut bacteria necessary to digest vegetation.
  
  
• Our close relatives, chimpanzees and gorillas, eat their own droppings as well as that of other members of their species. Reason unknown, but it happens quite commonly in the wild.

Now that the goalposts are back in place, you can have another try at getting the ball between them.

a reply to: cooperton

Anyone who has masturbated has felt the immediate shame experienced after such.

As a religious teenager, I certainly did feel this shame.

As soon as I outgrew my superstitious youth, away went the shame.

So much for that argument.

originally posted by: cooperton
...
It is difficult to understand what is natural. To answer that we would have to come to understand the natural essence of a human - to me, masturbation, lustful homosexuality, and lustful heterosexuality are all against our True Nature.
...

So your issue is with lust, not with homosexuality or masturbation or heterosexuality? And you clearly state "to me [lust] are against our True Nature". So it is clearly a personal opinion. Not based on any fact other than a personal feeling? One cannot really debate with a "personal feeling" or personal "biases"...

Where does this hate or fear of human sexual behavior come from?
And again... What is natural or this "True Nature" you talk about? You say it is difficult to understand what is natural, yet you use it as measuring stick?

a reply to: Astyanax

Good points re coprophagia, Astyanax!

You could further add the following to your list of four examples - and this is esp. significant due to recent interest - fecal transplant, aka: poop in a pill, poop therapy, transfaunation, stool transplant, fecal microbiota transplant or FMT in short, which "has been used experimentally to treat other gastrointestinal diseases, including colitis, constipation, irritable bowel syndrome, and neurological conditions such as multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has regulated human feces as an experimental drug since 2013." - Wikipedia

There is even a public stool bank in the USA called OpenBiome which set up by MIT - it's no laughing matter!

Read more from the links here: www.google.com...

It's not natural. Period. It's not how nature works or functions.

There is no benefit from it except for pleasure, which follows lust.

a reply to: adrenochrome

Tell us why you think so.

originally posted by: adrenochrome
It's not natural. Period. It's not how nature works or functions.

Well, actually, it is. It's just not how animals reproduce. Which is a slightly different proposition.

One of the primary studies of homosexuality in the animal kingdom (everything apart from humans, that is) is actually a very attractive and readable book. The author's title is "Biological Exuberance", which while flowery, certainly fits the bill.

Still very much in print (originally Macmillan, but now Stonewall Inn Press has reissued it) and reasonably priced. The author puts forward some theories, but the book's primary value is as a scientific catalog of non-heterosexual mating in well over 100 different species.

www.amazon.com...

Anyone who claims homosexuality is 'not natural' is deliberately keeping themselves ignorant.

a reply to: adrenochrome

Citations please. It has been shown that it is indeed natural. It being homosexuality. If you missed the citations, several of us have posted references early in the thread. Oh and no its not "gay agenda propoganda" rather actual sources from scientific studies.