The rising gay population

I do not believe there to be a disproportionate rise in homosexuality against general population increase; if anything it's open acceptance and indulgence is anachronistic, in fact. Are men becoming slowly more effeminate? I'd say yes, relatively, but to suggest that this has it's cause in either a shadow body or is rather nature's way of countering species growth are equally absurd, as this has happened to mankind numerous times and it's dominant presence oscillates throughout history, recorded in art and poetry, in stone relief and surviving tribal customs. I don't discredit that our food is tainted with a plethora of bizarre chemicals but sexuality is not something to be trifled with and does not undergo metamorphosis over night.

First of all, to believe we can have any idea of how such a broad and confusing social trend works is hubris and these theories only work on paper by a massive disconnect. To believe that it's current vogue is entirely negative and influenced by rich people with an agenda is reactionary and near sighted; Matt, I've known you to hold this belief for some time now, but as somebody with direct experience with conflicting sexual impulses you might understand how I feel your view trivializes a profound phenomenon that you as being outside of it cannot comprehend, and I add that I've been acutely aware of my effeminacy since long before 'metrosexual' was a word and that in my daily interactions with others I was diametrically opposed to indulging my own true personality. My first 'love' was a boy and my introduction to sex was homosexual, and yet I felt equally desirous of girls and have ever since. Can you imagine what it is like to have to hide at every waking moment your own mannerisms and interests, your actual thoughts and core constitutes of your self, in fear of being belittled and physically harmed? It's easy to reject a notion or a populace as a jaded and wisened figure but when you are a child it is to suffer deeply. I became the prototypical outspoken homophobe who in private cried myself to sleep because by combination of pride and the influence of my parents (and Catholic school) I felt myself to be not only deeply flawed but fundamentally guilty of sexual behavior that damned my 'soul', which I was too young to understand.

I've made the mistake of confusing my sexuality, as some of you here very well know, in an attempt to make sense out of it and to come to terms with feelings that had been largely suppressed for nearly twenty years, at times violently. I've been bisexual and known this since I was 9 years old, and also have phases of interest in cross-dressing, although not in the form nor to the extent which this word normally applies; accordingly, my attraction to either sex goes through alternating phases of acute intensity (although I find myself admiring very, very few people). What I've concluded after being in both straight and gay relationships, after being a single father and a father with a family, is that for very many people being attracted exclusively to one or the other sex stems from a rigid psychological complex which is not easily susceptible to change. It is probably possible to change from nauseated to attracted over a lifetime, but I'd assume this to be an extremely rare occurrence and certainly nothing to fear. The prevalence of effeminacy is not an epidemic of a gay virus and it will recede in due time. For those of us whose sexuality doesn't fit into fashionable labels, nothing will have changed. And while I agree that the gay acceptance phenomenon playing out at the moment is deeply misguided (similar to the 'new atheist' movement) as it generally seeks to approbate whorish behavior by redefining degeneracy in sexual values, I also think that to express total condemnation is to contribute to denying the comfort of young people who are living in mortal fear. Everybody is entitled to their religious or moral ideologies, but when you are active in interfering with a human beings right to live and express themselves without fear of being harmed or abused, you've got some serious insecurity and mental issues and if it were legally acceptable, I'd put you out of your misery myself, and hack your bones apart and pull your teeth out to make myself a new Monster Hunter armor and Great Sword to tackle the Village Elder's Lv 5 star quests.

 

I agree, I don't think there are necessarily MORE gay people, just more OPENLY gay people.

 

Yup. I think that's it.
For example, Iranian leader says there are no gay people in Iran. But just wait and see til the day their government start to accept love in all forms! :daisy:

 

Only a breeder could possibly come up with such a choice of words.

 

what would a gay person say to identify his self as such.

 

I don't know if it's connected, but I've noticed an increase in gay threads around here recently

 

Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

It isn't. Pointless.

Thanks for keeping up with popular culture, but: Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Yuck. Ugly Pointlessness.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Pointless.

Could you please crawl back under a rock? Thank You.

 

(or elsewhere)? Yes, for the purpose of this bogus theory - lets pretty much ignore the rest of the entire world.

So you can see the article is trying to give some purpose to a so-called 'gay gene', and see it as: 'nothing less than condescending to gay people.' - so why are you giving it any thought or credence?

Well, I'd like to know what you think. What your conclusions are.

Clearly 'homosexuality' can't be deemed as a 'population control' measure in any scientific respect.
There really doesn't seem any point trying to intelectualise a rather stupid premise.
But, I would like to hear what you think.

 

Oh grow up you fanatical zealot. Here's a tip - if you lose an argument, just shut up rather than making yourself an even bigger imbecile with a big moronic hissy fit.

 

wont happen, believe me, many of us wish this.

 

:rofl:

 

How can I 'lose' an argument, when no 'arguments' have been made?
You have not made any arguments. I tried to find some. Trust me.
It's just a collection of pointless rancid opinions.
Point to some factual point you made or something that is based on research and I will 'argue' with you.



No.s increase or decrease depending on who/when and how you ask questions.
If Kinsey thought there were 10% in the 1940's and NOW statistics show 2-3%, then what happened?
Is there any point trying to attach HOMOSEXUALITY TO POPULATION CONTROL? ERM, NO...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9OO0S5w2k"]YMCA - YouTube

 

Well you did use the same word 'pointless' 16x to respond to 16 answers.

So all we get from reading your own post is it's pointless..

Actually pointlessness counts as 2

 

There were not 16 (or so) answers. There were 16 (or so) pointless remarks made. A big difference. It was pointless - the point I was trying to make.

 

I think this has a lot to do with it. Even air fresheners have endocrine disrupters in them and people are exposed to things like that constantly.

I also think a lot of it is societal acceptance. also a lot of people have bisexual tendencies and feel more free to explore this due to increased tolerance and acceptance.

 

At 31-32 does PR have any children? Is it likely in the next 5 -10 years he will? Why/not? Is being more 'feminine' a sign you are gay? Do these chemicals turn you gay or make women produce gay children?

A bad thing?

 

The only thing thats "rancid" as you put it, is your own behaviour.

If I wanted to have an argument with someone who's got a particularly debilatating form of Asbergers, I'd make up the number of cracks that exist on the pavement they've studiously surveyed.

But there again... that would be *pointless*

So.. why dont you argue with yourself instead...Because its clear that underneath it all, its *you* that you have a problem with...

 

*chuckle* what?

 

Those air fresheners are known to be carcinogenic too. Bad stuff to breathe in.

The dioxins that are in food packaging, preservatives and fertilisers get into unborn babies. So by the time they are born, the damage is done.

I've even heard that amongst male homosexuals there's actually a "shortage of dominant ones" ie the gender blurring is even more prevalent than we'd think.