If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Studies show gay men get worked up over male pheromones. Women still need only two drinks to make out with each other   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 568
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

8655 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 May 2005 at 2:11 AM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



568 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-05-10 04:17:26 PM
Programmer Cat:

Maybe not, but you certainly are complicating matters. Is it necessary to involve Satan when explaining a bank robber's actions? No; the bank robber's actions can be explained by his disregard for the property rights of others. Therefore, Satan is not necessary.

Perhaps not... the myth furnishes a need to have explained what we know in our hearts is not right... that something, somewhere went wrong.

Paranoid_Android:

I would suggest that far from a brainwhashed victim, LoveInAction is actually a fully aware manipulator trying to spread the word of the Church of Latter Day Saints or whatever for his own ends... either finacial or psychological.

Well, at least wait until I post an address to where the money can be sent, there's a good fellow!
 
2005-05-10 04:18:50 PM
Clavis:

Hey, that was easy. Being patronizing and superior is much easier than having an open mind! Too bad it leaves such a bad taste in my mouth...

That bad taste is your own unruly member, the tongue... and the Self is a wily elf.
 
2005-05-10 04:19:21 PM
Clavis:

I was trying to be sarcastic. Or insulting. Or something. LoveInAction has the classic loopy fundamentalist attitude: rather than, "I see your point, but I believe I am correct," he responds with, "Ah, well, of course you don't know any better, poor child, when God chooses to wake you up to the Truth(tm), you will think exactly as I do." I find that attitude incredibly frustrating and patronizing, and was attempting to fight fire with mock fire.


did I screw up that was meant for LiA?
 
2005-05-10 04:21:20 PM
smeegle:

See, now that is your truth. You are telling other people that your truth should be their truth. You are saying that if we don't believe as you do then we are wrong.

Thank you for covering my back on that one...
 
2005-05-10 04:21:33 PM
LoveInAction

Perhaps not... the myth furnishes a need to have explained what we know in our hearts is not right... that something, somewhere went wrong.

We had myths to explain the thunder, too. We don't need Zeus any longer, now that we know how lightning works. Why bother with Satan if you can explain an evil man's actions without recourse to supernatural influences?
 
2005-05-10 04:22:30 PM
Programmer Cat: So, what exactly was I doing to fukk with Satan's head?

Hypothetically speaking, just being yourself. Satan hates nonconformists second only to those who think for themselves.

Technically, it was one better than fukking with his head. Just as you do on the Fark boards, in this hypothetical situation, you caused Satan to fukk with his own head.

Scary stuff, indeed. :)
 
2005-05-10 04:23:56 PM
smeegle: did I screw up that was meant for LiA?

Well, then I misunderstood...

Please note, posters... I've been speaking my piece all along about what I believe in... I've not been forcing it down anyone's throat, nor threatening them with hell fire...

Indeed, I've been saying how God will make it up to us in a big way, and we'll all get that "second chance" during the Judgment. Likewise, those who don't care for the message, I've told "believe what/who you will".
 
2005-05-10 04:24:44 PM


These kittens demand an explanation for why people still care about how other people get their jollies.
 
2005-05-10 04:25:36 PM
Programmer Cat:

We had myths to explain the thunder, too. We don't need Zeus any longer, now that we know how lightning works. Why bother with Satan if you can explain an evil man's actions without recourse to supernatural influences?

Have we come to explain the evil in man's nature/actions, without thinking about a world in which someone like Satan holds sway.

I don't think man's evil has been explained, otherwise.
 
2005-05-10 04:26:10 PM
LoveInAction - Having the ability to type wordy rhetoric while maintaining your position with 5 different people at the same time does not make you correct.

How's this for a concept:

Homosexuality is not a choice - finding the courage to accept and announce your natural desire however, is. This is the primary choice that a homosexual (and bisexual) person needs to make - NOT whether they're gay, but whether they accept and enjoy who they are. This decision must be made in the face of potential persecution from many angles...from family, societies, communities, individuals, religous groups, etc, etc.

Religous beliefs ARE a choice - YOU choose to accept what you've been taught, or you choose to reject it. It's the same with every religion - the majority of followers, despite what they believe, "choose" which aspects of their faith to apply in their daily lives. Ergo, you choose to accept a faith that best aligns to what you believe to be true. You may never actually reflect on your ability to make this decision, but that lack of consideration in itself is your "choice".

You seem to have chosen a fanatical perspective on religion, including the "New Earth" plans...which you have every right to do.

I choose to think that you are intolerant, egotistical, and arrogant.
 
2005-05-10 04:27:31 PM
Well kids I gotta go. Let me just say to LoveinAction:
As this thread progressed your written vernacular, as it were, became progressivley more "thee and thou" like. (Have you been drinking?)I also noticed that you are an antagonist-not very Christain of you.
Clavis: The cuckoo clock was farking hilarious. Sorry LiA but you did desrve it.
ProgrammerCat: I think it's funny the ProggrammerCat is shortenned to PC which usually stands for Politcally Correct. (Irony)
ans SteveFrench: well what can I say, you little rebel.
Later
 
2005-05-10 04:27:49 PM
LoveInAction
That bad taste is your own unruly member, the tongue... and the Self is a wily elf.

Man, you're all hung up on tongues, aren't you?

Anyway, you've got it backwards: faith is the ultimate worship of the Self, because it says, "No matter what the universe [god's creation] may say to me, what is in my head, my brain, my Self, is what is the truth. If I want to believe it is true, if it comforts ME and makes ME feel special, then I will accept it as THE TRUTH."

I, on the other hand, am a rational human being. I recognize my personal fallibility and rely on consensus evidence from a wide variety of sources. And, even then, I always withhold final judgment, because better evidence might come along later. That is, I let the universe show me what is true. You take an ancient book of fairy tales and interpret them your-Self to suit your personal, selfish ego needs.

I'm always willing to admit I could be wrong, because what makes me so special? On the other hand, you have made up your mind about this complex mythology of angels, devils, etc. and nothing the universe (i.e. "God") can show you will ever change your prideful, Selfish mind.
 
2005-05-10 04:29:37 PM
smeegle:

LoveInAction,
"I used to be just like you. Then I learned the truth. If you weren't so blinded by your own pride and self-love, you'd discover that everything you believe is wrong. Someday, I hope you will gain wisdom and learn the truth about reality, instead of living in Satan's fog."

See, now that is your truth. You are telling other people that your truth should be their truth. You are saying that if we don't believe as you do then we are wrong.


To keep the record straight, Those words of the first paragraph were not my words. That was Clavis putting his spin words on what he thinks I am saying.
 
2005-05-10 04:29:51 PM
LoveInAction

Have we come to explain the evil in man's nature/actions, without thinking about a world in which someone like Satan holds sway.

Come on. Which is more plausible, that Hitler was deranged, power-hungry, and had no problem with sacrificing millions on the altar of his ambition; or that Hitler was a servant of Satan?
 
2005-05-10 04:30:59 PM
smeegle
Clavis: The cuckoo clock was farking hilarious. Sorry LiA but you did desrve it.

Thank you very much. :) I just found it today, and I think I'll keep it.
 
2005-05-10 04:31:27 PM
LoveInAction:

To keep the record straight, Those words of the first paragraph were not my words. That was Clavis putting his spin words on what he thinks I am saying.



Okay then so sorry. But still I wonder,,, have you been tipping a few back during this little chat?
 
2005-05-10 04:31:55 PM


The kitties are still waiting for that explanation.
 
2005-05-10 04:31:58 PM
SpongeJamie - NoPants:

oveInAction - Having the ability to type wordy rhetoric while maintaining your position with 5 different people at the same time does not make you correct.

Nor does it make me wrong, then...

And for the record, my 'wordy rhetoric' is merely the way I express myself, from how I was taught back in grade and high school.

One man's "powerful statement" is another man's "diatribe".
 
2005-05-10 04:34:53 PM
LoveInAction
To keep the record straight, Those words of the first paragraph were not my words. That was Clavis putting his spin words on what he thinks I am saying.


That's correct. What you said was:

My reason and sense are sound enough... that I evince faith in the Bible and my understanding of Jehovah's Plan for Mankind is only considered a flaw by those who are deaf themselves and don't understand what they are seeing when they witness a group of people listening to music.

The music is there, whether you can hear it or not.


Translation: I know what's really going on, and you just don't get it. *Anyone* who thinks I'm crazy just doesn't get it. What I believe is *the truth*, even if you're too blind to see it.

Religious faith is rationalized arrogance -- belief in something without evidence. Pride in one's own righteousness.

Feh and feh.
 
2005-05-10 04:35:21 PM
smeegle: Clavis: The cuckoo clock was farking hilarious. Sorry LiA but you did desrve it.

I thought the picture of the lesbian was funnier... and you deserved that... but to each his own as far as laughability is concerned.

As to whether I am "cuckoo" or not... of the fool or he who argues with the fool, who is the bigger fool?
 
2005-05-10 04:37:36 PM
SpongeJamie - NoPants: I choose to think that you are intolerant, egotistical, and arrogant.

Your words and attitude alone show you to be a member of that club as well.

I have shown far more toleration and less ego than many of those attacking me for my beliefs.

Whether I have been arrogant in my own defense or not, well... I have admitted to being a member of the 'unruly member' club already.
 
2005-05-10 04:39:59 PM
SpongeJamie - NoPants:

How's this for a concept:

Homosexuality is not a choice - finding the courage to accept and announce your natural desire however, is.


If you would go back earlier to this thread, you would see that I said several times I believed it to be a "hardwired" issue.

See, that's my point... your own prejudice and close-mindedness is so great, you don't even know what you're talking about in assuming my beliefs, even though I've stated them plainly on this thread.
 
2005-05-10 04:40:05 PM
LoveInAction

then I'd say you can't even control your unruly member, the tongue...

It's not my tongue that's the unruly member, you know. Just ask my wife.
 
2005-05-10 04:41:36 PM
Clavis:

Religious faith is rationalized arrogance -- belief in something without evidence. Pride in one's own righteousness.

Feh and feh


As opposed to pride in one's own reason and prejudices? Your own arrogance is nothing to sneeze at. Feh yourself.
 
2005-05-10 04:42:26 PM
LoveInAction
As to whether I am "cuckoo" or not... of the fool or he who argues with the fool, who is the bigger fool?

The fool is, because the arguer can stop and go have a sensible conversation with someone else. You will continue to ramble about Kingdoms and the Devil and say things like:

He creates calamity when the wicked arise strong, just like the Flood was His doing, and necessary because all of mankind suffered at the violence of those "giants in the earth", the Nephilim who of their own free will chose to have relations with the daughters of men.

Wow. Killing millions of people was necessary because "the sons of God" mated with "the daughters of Man"? Couldn't he just reverse the damage by snapping his fingers? Did he really have to use such a hamfisted technique, drowning little babies and pregnant women and PUPPIES?!?

Your God sounds like a retard. (And I apologize to retards for lumping God in with them.)

 
2005-05-10 04:43:10 PM
Clavis:

That's correct. What you said was:

My reason and sense are sound enough... that I evince faith in the Bible and my understanding of Jehovah's Plan for Mankind is only considered a flaw by those who are deaf themselves and don't understand what they are seeing when they witness a group of people listening to music.

The music is there, whether you can hear it or not.


AFTER I was accused of being 'cuckoo', thank you very much.

Xtians are not the doormats you make them out to be... when we defend ourselves and our beliefs, call it arrogance if you will... that's just another manifestation of your own untoward arrogance.
 
2005-05-10 04:44:23 PM
As others have said, I think that this could be explained as a Pavlovian response. People who have chosen to be gay are going to train their body to react to the smell of male testosterone.
My hope is that this research will lead to a cure for homosexuality. And to the hetrophobes who are going to whine about that statement, consider that the start of the article states that.."sexual area of a gay man's brain works a lot like that of a woman ..." This is a clear indication that homosexuality is a mental disorder.
 
2005-05-10 04:45:23 PM
Clavis

Wow. Killing millions of people was necessary because "the sons of God" mated with "the daughters of Man"? Couldn't he just reverse the damage by snapping his fingers?

If God was so smart, how come he gave the angels cocks in the first place? He wouldn't have had to flood the earth to kill off the Nephilim if he had made his angels eunuchs in the first place. Hell, Lucifer might have been more docile if he wasn't busy proving his cock was bigger than everybody else's.
 
2005-05-10 04:45:51 PM
LoveInAction -

"And for the record, my 'wordy rhetoric' is merely the way I express myself, from how I was taught back in grade and high school."

"One man's "powerful statement" is another man's "diatribe".

Congratulations on a solid education. Does that mean that one who is less educated has a devalued opinion? I'm all for wordy, as you can tell from my post...rhetoric on the other hand...not so much.

Again, you feel you have a "powerful statement" - and well you may for those that "choose" to listen. My point is that your "powerful statement" was written for you...and is protected by law in most countries, while variations of same are practiced in relative safety around the world.

Can't exactly say that for homosexuals can you...regardless of whether you believe it's a "choice" or not.
 
2005-05-10 04:46:14 PM
LoveInAction
As opposed to pride in one's own reason and prejudices? Your own arrogance is nothing to sneeze at. Feh yourself.


You missed when I said this?

I recognize my personal fallibility and rely on consensus evidence from a wide variety of sources. And, even then, I always withhold final judgment, because better evidence might come along later. That is, I let the universe show me what is true...
I'm always willing to admit I could be wrong, because what makes me so special?


I admit the possibility, right now, that I could be completely wrong and you might be completely right.

Your turn...
 
2005-05-10 04:51:41 PM
Programmer Cat
If God was so smart, how come he gave the angels cocks in the first place? He wouldn't have had to flood the earth to kill off the Nephilim if he had made his angels eunuchs in the first place. Hell, Lucifer might have been more docile if he wasn't busy proving his cock was bigger than everybody else's.

That's exactly right. There are a thousand different claims made about what God did in the Bible that all fit nicely with the Old Testament, Dark Ages idea that God was a mean, vengeful, capricious, tyrannical bastard... but that don't fit too well with the idea that he's all-knowing, all-loving, all-seeing and has a wonderful, cushy Plan for all of us that involves him being our friend and pal and sweetheart. So modern Christians like LoveInAction have to say, "Oh, he really does love us, when something bad happens to us, it's either our fault or it's really a good thing and God just can't tell us why, because his Plan is so complex we couldn't possibly understand it."

I call that the "Brewster's Millions" defense. And it's bullshiat. It allows them to say, "Well, we CAN'T know why God does it, but we have faith that it's for the best... because that's what we WANT to believe."

I call shenanigans...
 
2005-05-10 04:56:22 PM
Love In Action

I thought you had left and I was sorry for it. Not that I agree with most of what you've posited here but this thread is alot more interesting with a "villain" in it.
 
2005-05-10 05:00:57 PM
Love in Action:

"I choose to think that you are intolerant, egotistical, and arrogant.

Your words and attitude alone show you to be a member of that club as well. "

Intolerant: Please point out where I've been intolerant. I clearly indicated my support in religious freedoms, and based my entire argument on supporting individual rights that do not relate to my own life as a heterosexual male.

Egotistical: Again...where have I displayed this? Because I disagreed with you? Because I was direct in my personal assessment of your performance in this thread?

Arrogant: How? Because I disagree with you after reviewing your posts? Because I made a comment regarding my perception of your character?
 
2005-05-10 05:01:08 PM
Clavis:

I admit the possibility, right now, that I could be completely wrong and you might be completely right.

Your turn...


"All right, all right, I apologize. I'm really, really sorry. I apologize unreservedly. I offer a complete and utter retraction. The imputation was totally without basis in fact and was in no way fair comment and was motivated purely by malice, and I deeply regret any distress that my comments may have caused you or your family, and I hereby undertake not to repeat any such slander at any time in the future."
 
2005-05-10 05:03:57 PM
agoodbook:

I thought you had left and I was sorry for it. Not that I agree with most of what you've posited here but this thread is alot more interesting with a "villain" in it.

Nice to be working with proper villains again, what?


Sorry, gotta go... Little League ump duties.
 
2005-05-10 05:09:53 PM
I think straight men should extend the olive branch (no pun) to gay men. I think a truce would be mutually beneficial.

Gay guys can destroy the self-confidence of girls who want a gay best-friend and make it easier for straight guys to pick them up, and in return straight guys can stop stealing gay fashion.
 
2005-05-10 05:21:53 PM
Who gives a fark. Being Gay is being Gay. Does it affect your life?

To all you Gay hating people that claim to fall under my religion, give it a break. God smiles on all of us.

/Not Gay.
 
2005-05-10 05:32:26 PM
You know you're seriously sexually repressed when you try to tell other people how to do it and who they can do it with.

Me? I'm a mule enthusiast! (and god's a pervert)
 
2005-05-10 05:33:36 PM
LoveInAction

Clever Neologism:

It is so sad when I have thought more about theology and scripture than most who actually believe their life depends on it.

There's too much to answer in a few sentences, and it would do no good anyway... for example, a simple google about angels and free will would prove the point, even if you still wanted to swap Bible verses about the nuances between "evil" and "calamity", etc., etc., etc... including the 1/3 of heaven reference from Revelations and what it means.


Firstly, I realized I was speaking of Jewish mythology, not Christian w.r.t. the angel thing. The very fact that the Bible is so bent on semantical interpretation is the entire problem, and now that you mention it, I do remember that the dragon sweeps a third of the stars out of the sky with its tail. I had never realized some people treat that as a reference to the original fall. That whole book is an acid trip gone really weird, anyway (well, a feverish dream, but close enough). Especially when he gets to those animals around the throne... I want some of what he had!

I know. It's so hard keeping all the Bible's nuances straight, isn't it? We could come up with tons of theology and versus to support almost any position. I wonder why? That first sentence wasn't directed at you particularly, BTW. Just a general lament. I would have made it particular to you if that was my intent. Nor am I trying to be offensive, just forceful and unapologetic.

Although most of what I hear there is condescenscion and "I'm right, but it is pointless to argue and you won't get it anyway." The real thing is that no argument can avail for either side.


But your continued diatribe about "me and my ilk" has proven tedious, and I again say... believe what you wish.

If my beliefs are wrong, they will soon perish.


Translation: I cannot respond to your points with anything more than what I have said, and have to stop with "I don't know."

I know, it's horrible to be reminded about what your religion as a cohesive societal movement supports and all the horrible things that have been supported by people with your book. That very fact shows to me that the Bible is not a good source of morality. And no, there are still people who believe the earth is flat and that the earth is the center of the universe: the fact that your beliefs are unfalsifiable (nothing is falsifiable with an all-powerful being capable of deceit) when you really get down to it means your religion will be around for a long time, even if it is wrong.

Peace be with you all, I'm out (5 0'clock cometh).
 
2005-05-10 05:41:41 PM
LoveInAction

No, no. Not apologies. Admitting you could be wrong. About what you believe. Go for it!
 
2005-05-10 06:03:02 PM
TheJollyMunchkin
About masturbation, thats an open issue. [...] But it really has nothing to do with this topic (might be fun to discuss some other time)

Well, I was refering to masturbation between two people - as in non-coital mutual sexual stimulation. Which is relevent to the topic you brought up, as it's a common sexual activity that heterosexual couples often enjoy, yet has no reproductive function.
 
2005-05-10 06:24:41 PM
actually, masturbation has everything to do with the topic. it wasn't until the twentieth century that it was accepted. Into the 1900s it was considered a very bad sin. Boys were constantly told by preachers that they would go to hell for it. They had devices that they would have to wear to prevent them from masterbating. And guess what. It was considered as bad or even worse than homosexuality. Kant considered masturbation worse than homosexuality AND incest, because at least there were two people involved in those. Masterbation was considered as bad as homosexuality by almost everyone else because they both did not produce children and masterbation involved fantasizing.
 
2005-05-10 06:37:32 PM
Monty Cantsin

I understand where you're going with that, and let me say again: I understand. The point I was trying to make, however, is that-> Men can fark women and have children. All test tube babies aside, men cannot fark men and have children. Likewise with women.

In terms of being a genetic development, and I just dont see where homosexuality fits in in nature, or how it could have naturally developed genetically. If it in fact is a genetic trait, perhaps its some kind of weird mutated-gene-interaction trait that somehow found its way into the population a long time ago. Perhaps it was a result of inbreeding or something.

IM NOT SURE. However, I am pretty sure that when I die, I am going to have a child to pass along my genes (Unless he's gay, that would be the ultimate irony, wouldnt it?) and hopefully his kids will do the same.

I dont care if someone is homosexual, I dont even care if we let them get married. Thats their business. I DO care that we dont know where homosexuality comes from.
 
2005-05-10 06:40:01 PM
Can't we all just get along?

What ever happened to the old adage...

"Who gives a sh*t?"

Live and let live, damn it.
 
2005-05-10 06:42:30 PM
SpyderWoman

Interesting. I had never delved into the history of masturbation before. I was already aware, however, that throughout history, christians have remained the exact same (BAM!)

/Sorry I just finished my hardest final a bit ago. Laugh with me!
 
2005-05-10 06:43:57 PM
We are having a pretty good discussion here. This isnt a flamewar, madcow.
 
2005-05-10 07:04:25 PM
You're speaking of The Elect when you mention rapture? That's a small number of those who have been able to overcome in this portion of Man's history, where the devil abounds... hence, they earned the right to be governors and God's aides in the New World, and help bring the 'great multitude' back to the ways intended for Adam.

I'd say that's a fair system... anyone who can overcome in this life would certainly be able to make it through the Judgment and beyond, where this is no Satan to upend God's Will and Man's destiny.


It doesn't bother you that God's 'elect' throughout history were 99.9% white? Is God racist? God hates Chinese people?

This is why religious folk hate 'multiculturalism', it forces them to realize a wider world where Christianity is a foreign concept. And that billions of people are going to hell because they weren't born in a 'Christian' country.
 
2005-05-10 07:19:14 PM
ATTENTION

God has nothing to do with gay men responding to testosterone.
Take your circular logic somewhere else.
 
2005-05-10 07:43:34 PM
niethan:

"What bugs is that if two guys are drunk and kiss the are ridiculed as homofags... with women it is an accepted part of being drunk."


My friend and I used to make out when we were drunk. After a few nights of this she'd say "At least let me pour a drink first so I can pretend I'm drunk," but then we'd just make out because it was nice. I think it's just part of that whole experimental "college lesbian" thing so many girls do. This seems to happen far less with guys, but I think it's cute and I wouldn't mind seeing my guy kiss another guy.
 
2005-05-10 08:30:46 PM
LoveInAction

I am not excusing man when I accuse Satan.

(sigh) I wish many Farkers would cast off this tedious black/white binary way of thinking.


Oh wow. You wish people would cast of black and white thinking when you actually believe in supreme Good(White) and Evil(Black) beings that caused the current situation of the human race.

I am going to print out that comment and frame it on my wall.
 
Displayed 50 of 568 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report