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.

(She)   A Playmate comes out of the closet   (shemag.com) divider line 407
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

192060 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Feb 2003 at 11:34 AM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



407 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-02-05 04:54:44 PM
First, right on, Podmore. People have about as much "choice" in their sexuality as they do their ethnicity.

Us breeders should just be happy we don't have to put up with someone borrowing our underwear! Though Liz Hurley could get into mine anytime.

But I digress: Stinking crap-for-crap site!

Pinging shemag.com [216.158.140.174] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.

The site www.shemag.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000.

Hmm, I wonder if they put on the Slammer patch...
 
2003-02-05 04:55:31 PM
Godfrey: I think that about an hour ago I agreed with someone (maybe you) that the genes could be passed along through heterosexual children. But again, I still think that it would die out, since the incidence of homosexuality in those genetic lines is greater than in others. Eventually, they would reproduce, over many, many years, at a slower rate than others and the gene would die out. You give the example of one single offspring, but there have to be two that mate for it to get a hit. When that happens, it's the end of that particular line because the homosexual child will not reproduce--almost always, I know there are some people who see the light or accept their homosexuality at a later date, after having kids. But those incidents are few and far between. I guess my argument would be projected far into the future, not be seen today.

Sayang: Believe it or not, and you most likely will not, I have a very open mind. I can see why you'd spend time dating men before you thought you wanted to date women, but to me that's because you were raised to wear dresses, long hair, and to like boys. When you figured out it wasn't something you didn't like (or that didn't feel right, to use your terms) you switched. Which I believe reinforces my argument as much as yours. It's not like you're salt and men are slugs--if you had sex with one he wouldn't melt, and neither would you (I'm searching for an analogy, I know--my other one was the mule analogy, where offspring are genetically not able to bear young--and they're not intended to be offensive either, it's just all I could come up with). There is nothing genetically different about homosexuals than heterosexuals, or else the genetic record, over the period of millins of years, would show that there was.
 
2003-02-05 04:57:33 PM
I think its wrong, but it doesn't mean i think its not sexy.
 
2003-02-05 04:57:54 PM
Oh for the love of.... well... whomever.

I am all for whatever you want to beleive in - just don't prosteltize (try to convert) me, and don't hurt yourself or others... It amazes me that in all religions there seem to be some very over-zelous people that feel that thier lives are not complete without convicing someone that thier "god can beat up your god"

Pagans get riled up anytime somenoe mentions the bible... we tend to point out the myriad of inconsistanties between different books, and different translations... heck - remember that this was all oral history untl someone finally wrote it all down, and even then depending on who paid for the translations, you get different things (don't even get me started on King James....)

Xtains tend to want to save your soul.... either by quoting scripture, or by trying to converrt you...

Bottom line people, your god hasn't come down in your lifetime and said.. "Hi, my name's Biff, and I want to tell you a few things".. .anymore than my gods have come down and said "Hi, that's Biff, I'm Bob, This is Cindy, and overthere is Linda - we want to tell you a story"

Religion is faith - beleive in what you will, do good to yourslf and others, and leave your religion at the door, I'll do the same and we'll all get along together just ducky!

And for the record.... gay, straight, bi, whatever rings your bell :-)
 
2003-02-05 04:58:07 PM
I'd like to take this opportunity to evangelize for my religion. Ummm, wait no I wouldn't.

Everybody do whatever the ╒uck you like.
 
2003-02-05 04:58:43 PM
DannySpaz, you're an idiot. Nobody gives a doodle about your Bible.. shove it where the sun don't shine. Your god is
dead and nobody cares.

About the site: it simply won't load. Ah well, I guess
I will download the Matrix anime then ;)
 
2003-02-05 04:58:45 PM
Kpar90 Being right or left handed is different than being gay or straight. I wish I had a good reason for why I think that, but I do. To me, as I understand it, homosexuality is not a physical trait. It is not one such as the genes that make you tall, or short, or more likely to be obese. It, like depression, is a state of the mind. You can be whatever you want to be.

Okay, then contemplate the ease with which you could choose to start having sex only with men, and never with women. Just pretend we all expected that of you. Speaking only for myself, I don't think I could get the equipment in the necessary condition to ram it into some guy's butt, no matter what anyone else said. On the other hand, a hot woman can get me up and ready even if I set my mind against it.

Like you say, you don't have a good reason for believing what you do. If you spent any time talking with someone gay, you'd realize you're just uneducated on the subject and going along with what other ignorant people have said. And I don't mean that as a slam.
 
2003-02-05 04:58:47 PM
Just because someone can't remember when they chose to be gay or straight doesn't mean it is genetic. What other decisions in life can you remember making when you were 0-4 years old.
 
2003-02-05 04:59:49 PM
Genesis 1:1-5 translated 4 times using babelfish

1 In the God that begins the created sky and the Earth.

2 And the Earth was without form and emptiness; and the dark was in the face of the deep one. And the alcohol of the God changed of position in the water face.

3 And the God does that, it left the light there is said: and there was light.

4 And the God saw the light, that that was good: and the God divided the light of the dark.

5 And the God called the easy day and the dark, that Night called. And afternoon and the morning was the first day.
 
2003-02-05 04:59:50 PM
Apparently, the prolific amount of homosexual mates in the non-primate mammalian, and avian, species are also "concious choices" as well.
 
2003-02-05 05:00:21 PM
I'd be plenty more pissed if someone honestly believed I was going to hell but didn't do a damn thing about it. I say annoy away a small price to pay for the greater good.
 
2003-02-05 05:00:25 PM
Jeez, why do I bother?

DannySpaz

I really see only three rational reasons you started this:

1-You're so shockingly naive that you thought you'd somehow convince someone to change their mind.

2-You're running away from something.

3-You wanted to stir up shiat.

By waltzing in here and quoting the Bible, you started a flame war. That is the only tangible result of your cute little intercession. The issue of morality as it concerns homosexuality is tangental at best, and there was nothing about this article that warrented your comments, other than your overwhelming desire to look down your nose at the people you must have known would disagree with you. This, somehow, is "moral" behavior.

And don't give me that "I'm just sayin'" crap. You went to fark.com, opened a link concerning a discussion of a coming out, and posted Bible quotes. Either you wanted to start a flame war, or you desperately need to start going to therapy, specifically to examine the consequences of your actions.

I spent two years in pre-seminary before I was driven out in disgust by this very same bait-and-preach behavior. Using God as an excuse to start arguements is disgusting. Say what you want about homosexuals, they do not do what they do explicitly to anger people, just so they can feel better about their own opinions. Please, go away.
 
2003-02-05 05:02:47 PM
 
2003-02-05 05:07:33 PM
Podmore: Actually, I didn't forget that. And I know quite a few gay people, actually. The person in the office next to mine, with whom I am sharing your thoughts, is gay. As is a woman down the hal. And that's just the people I work with. Still does not explain why it would not breed out eventually, as the incidents of homosexuals bearing offspring would be remarkably low.

Bardic: White trash noise, dude. Makes about as much sense as you do.

That's what I always think of when I see that type of circular reasoning. You seem to bring out the Platoon quotes in me, which is awful heterosexual of you.

Sayang: You can dismiss me with a qip, but that proves nothing about why people are or are not gay. I guess if you and Bardic want to liken your condition to schizophrenia, that's up to you. That seems to imply that it's a disorder, though, which seems like a strange argument for a lesbian to make.

And seeing as you keep calling yourself queer, either you're very at ease with your decision (which is what I thought at first) or you have some guilt about it, like Andrea Yates and her imperfection, which now seems to be the case. I hope some day you will accept your homosexuality as much as I do. I have no problem with you at all.
 
2003-02-05 05:09:17 PM
Loveinaction- You do not HOIST onto a petard in the present, you HOISE. Look it up. The past tense of HOISE is HOIST. To say you HOISTED is redundant. Wordsmithing done for the day.
 
2003-02-05 05:09:24 PM
My kids have two pet rabbits, both male.

I have caught them sharing intimate moments together, and suspect that they are homosexual rabbits.

Are they really homosexual rabbits, or is this just some kind of "prison sex" situation, since there is no female available for them to develop a heterosexual relationship with?

Although I accept them as they are and support their situation, I can't help but feel a bit guilty, since we assumed that one of them was female when we bought them. In fact, we still often refer to that one as "her" and "she" when discussing the bunnies.

Any advice?

Signed,
Owner of bunnies who share the love that dare not speak its name.
 
2003-02-05 05:10:53 PM
Methinks this thread turned into a religious flamewar because the @#$%&! page wouldn't load!
 
2003-02-05 05:12:33 PM
Mr_Crink that's awesome. I once had two female pet rats. They weren't gay, but eventually one of them ate the other ones head. I am not sure what this says about women, but I can wager a guess.

Any thoughts?
 
2003-02-05 05:13:05 PM
Dognamedmoses

"but there's only one God. You've got to deal with that"

Then, not five lines later:

"nobody is imposing anything"

That's just too damned funny to get mad about...
 
2003-02-05 05:14:27 PM
Sucks to expect so much and get so little.
 
2003-02-05 05:14:36 PM
Circular reasoning?

You baffle my mind, troll.
 
2003-02-05 05:15:19 PM
Bardic: There are quite a few differences between non-primate mammals and birds and us. Or maybe not you, but the rest of us. Being able to make conscious choices, like which primate to fark, is just one of those things. And if you think they have some urge to be homosexual, instead, of heterosexual, that would mean that they would have died out long ago for sure--that kind of ruins your argument, doesn't it? If they only have sex with the same sex, then they would NEVER REPRODUCE. (You still with me?) But they do. Most likely they just fark the closest non-primate mammal or bird to them when they're horny.

Podmore: I refer you (again) to my post on the gay people I know and work with, one of whom is laughing at you over my shoulder.
 
2003-02-05 05:15:26 PM
Lorelle, I bet you are right. I am sure I wouldnt have let my revenge monster out today if there were some girl on girl to look at....wait Nevermind
 
2003-02-05 05:16:07 PM
PS:

I already stated flat out earlier in the thread that I am heterosexual.

Your assumption is a grand indication of how "open" your mind really is.
 
2003-02-05 05:18:44 PM
The_Pole_Of_Justice -(to DannySpaz) "your overwhelming desire to look down your nose at the people"
This is probably the same reason DannySpaz wanted to become a cop. He probably gets off at putting people in a defensive situation, only to have the "last word" option if he doesn't like what he has provoked them to say/do. Not to mention that he probably has the thought of what a good little boy he has been when he goes to bed.

And lets not miss it when DannySpaz wrote, "people are dumb and evil. sure not EVERYONE but then again, catch anyone at the right time and they are sinners/law breakers. plain and simple." Soooo, I guess he knows he is dumb AND can be caught breaking his own ram it down your throat / I will put you in handcuffs laws...

*whew* I waited all afternoon to let that out.

(Not that he might sometimes actually do good things while hes at it)
 
2003-02-05 05:19:13 PM
Kpar90

I'm not going to lay out how recessive genes work for the thirtieth time for you.

You are either a troll or a moron.

Either way, I have a meeting to go to.
 
2003-02-05 05:19:20 PM
"I, along with a whole score of other people, are refuting your premise by showing how it very well could exist as a genetic trait. We are doing so by directly contradicting your assertion that it *couldn't* be a genetic trait, exposing your gross ignorance of basic genetics."

That seems circular to me. It says, basically: "We are proving you wrong by insisting that we're right."


Mr Crink: All I want to know is are they reproducing? Passing along any homosexual genes? Of course not.
 
2003-02-05 05:20:01 PM
Kpar90 writes: But again, I still think that it would die out, since the incidence of homosexuality in those genetic lines is greater than in others. Eventually, they would reproduce, over many, many years, at a slower rate than others and the gene would die out.

That assumes that each couple has only one child, which is certainly not the norm - at least for the United States; the average woman gives birth to http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/releases/02news/womenbirths.htm2.1 children over the course of a lifetime (I suppose Verne Troyer is an example of the .1).

You give the example of one single offspring,

Actually, no, I didn't.

but there have to be two that mate for it to get a hit.

I'm not sure what you mean by "get a hit". Generally, it always takes two to mate, unless you're talking about parthanogenesis.


When that happens, it's the end of that particular line because the homosexual child will not reproduce

Again, that assumes that each couple will only produce one child, an assumption not supported by statistics.
 
2003-02-05 05:21:12 PM
What the heck? Oh well, this was supposed to be the link above.
 
2003-02-05 05:23:22 PM
Ebawb- I don't know. Did you try feeding them? Were you spending too much time with the victim, causing the other one to fly into a murderous fit of rage?
 
2003-02-05 05:23:44 PM
Kpar90 Podmore: Actually, I didn't forget that. And I know quite a few gay people, actually. The person in the office next to mine, with whom I am sharing your thoughts, is gay. As is a woman down the hal. And that's just the people I work with. Still does not explain why it would not breed out eventually, as the incidents of homosexuals bearing offspring would be remarkably low.

But what you don't seem to realize is that it would only take a very small number of gay people having babies to make it pretty darned prevalent. As others have said, with recessive genes, the trait can get passed all over the darned place, and a given line only ends if two people with the recessive trait both pass it on, only have the one kid, and that kid doesn't pass it on. So in MOST instances, the recessive gene will simply be passed along. Since a non-trivial number of gay people do have kids, that situation is refreshed.

Add to that the fact that there's a certain frequency of mutation with EVERY gene, so even people who don't carry the recessive gene can have a kid who has it trait. So it might seem counter-intuitive, but the math behind the numbers stands up pretty well.

As someone else said, we have congenital defects that cause sterility that have survived for thousands of years, and those people can't pass it on.
 
2003-02-05 05:24:24 PM
a perfectly good lesbian thread ruined by a religious flame war.

This is a sad day for hetrosexual men and lesbians everywhere. and maybe bi-sexual women also.
 
2003-02-05 05:25:21 PM
Hope it's a meeting with someone to pluck those eye brows. And take off that stupid hat. You look like you make balloon animals for a living.

The heterosexual crack was in response to your constant name calling. All I did was express my belief that homosexuality would breed itself out of the gene pool if it were in fact a gene--recessive or otherwise.

I remember when you could offer an opinion on Fark and not be denounced as a troll for having a different opinion than someone else. That speaks more to your closed mind than it does mind.
 
2003-02-05 05:25:44 PM
please don't flame me. This is not my theory.

Homosexuality could very well be an instinctual defense mechanism. This would explain why it is not a choice (it is built in), yet also would not die out (it is not a genetic trait). In large populations certain members of the species may become homosexual in order to keep a sustainable population. I believe this has been shown in frog populations, the same ones that can spontaneously change sex to keep the population from dying out. However, if this is the case, due to advances in reproductive technology (and societal pressure), the defense mechanism is failing.
 
2003-02-05 05:28:59 PM
Podmore: But would it be growing? I conceded earlier that it could be passed on through heterosexual children, yet still think the genetic lineage of thos efamilies would whittle away due to the higher incedence of homosexuality. Congenital defects are defects. Is homosexuality?
 
2003-02-05 05:29:33 PM
Me thinks the thumpers have thumped away to a fresh patch of grass...
 
2003-02-05 05:30:11 PM
Kpar90 the theory posted above also holds true for the growing number of homosexual individuals. The population keeps getting bigger, more people become homosexuals.
 
2003-02-05 05:30:45 PM
I swore the default human stance on sexality was 'if it feels good, do it'.
 
2003-02-05 05:30:47 PM
Kpar90 Podmore: I refer you (again) to my post on the gay people I know and work with, one of whom is laughing at you over my shoulder.

I bet my gay friends can beat up your gay friends.

Seriously, what part does your friend find funny? I've met very few gay people who suggest that they're gay because they decided it would be more fun. I have met a couple of lesbians who said that they couldn't stand being with men (and had been abused), and preferred being with women to being alone. I put those people in a different category. Everyone else I've known strongly feels that their sexual preference is a basic part of who they are.

Alan
 
2003-02-05 05:32:10 PM
02-05-03 04:55:31 PM Kpar90
"I still think that it would die out, since the incidence of homosexuality in those genetic lines is greater than in others."

It would only die out if NOT having the gene proved more successful than having the gene. If the gene has no ill-effect on heteros that carry it then there's no reason for it to die out. And if it DOES have an ill effect, then for all we know it could be dying out, but the process is so slow it can't be measured. In either case, the continued existence of homosexuals is not proof that the condition is not genetic.
 
2003-02-05 05:33:41 PM
Loveinaction- You do not HOIST onto a petard in the present, you HOISE. Look it up. The past tense of HOISE is HOIST. To say you HOISTED is redundant. Wordsmithing done for the day.

Not so fast there, smithy - your work has just begun...

Being a lover of words myself, this post of yours piqued my curiosity, hence the time spent...

My American Heritage dictionary here in front of me has no listing for "hoise", but does indeed mention "hoist" as a transitive verb meaning "to raise or haul up" (in the present tense), with "hoisted" listed as the past tense.

Not that such a fine point truly matters, but...

In the less-tolerant and turbulent times of my youth, I might have barked "get a life"...

But now, in my more mature enlightened state I will merely say, while maintaining low tones: "nah ah".
 
2003-02-05 05:34:36 PM
I do what I do so Fred Phelps will have something to prattle on about.
 
2003-02-05 05:37:49 PM
It seemed to toss my URL of Fred Phelps heartwarming christian site http://www.godhatesfags.com/
 
2003-02-05 05:38:04 PM
Kpar90 Podmore: But would it be growing? I conceded earlier that it could be passed on through heterosexual children, yet still think the genetic lineage of thos efamilies would whittle away due to the higher incedence of homosexuality. Congenital defects are defects. Is homosexuality?

First of all, do youhave data that suggests that the homosexual population is
growing? I haven't seen that.

But theoretically, it sure could be. As you've seen on the news, gay couples have been taking advantage of infertility treatments like IUI, IVF, surogacy and donor sperm to have kids. So some gay couples that might not have passed their genes down in the past have been able to do so for the last several decades. I don't have any data that says that's happening, but it's a possibility for sure. And, like I said, it wouldn't take many new instances to increase the occurrence in the gene pool.
 
2003-02-05 05:38:18 PM
Podmore: I bet they could. He thinks it's funny that so many non-gay people in this thread would defend him as being gay without choice. He wouldn't be any other way. Many of my friends are openly gay, and have been for years. They think they could be whatever they want, and that they have chosen homosexuality. There are some gay people I know that come from very religious families. Those are the ones that are usually not openly gay, and do believe that it was forced on them by genetics. The correlation with the religious background just seems like it's a learned behavior problem, not a trait.

Starfangled: The ill effect of a homosexual gene is that it makes you not want to have sex with the opposite sex, which is required for reproduction.
 
2003-02-05 05:40:09 PM
Oh neato, he's also started http://www.godhatesamerica.com/
 
2003-02-05 05:43:49 PM
Whenever some one claims science everyone ducks their head when some claims God there is lynching mob...

The stupidity of the faithless is as overpowering as the fanatisms of the devout. You folks are made for each other..

-MadLeaf

-------

The most beautiful experience is to meet the mysterious. This is the source of all true art and scholarly pursuit. He, who has never had this experience, is not capable of rapture and cannot stand motionless with amazement, is as good as dead. His eyes are closed.
-Albert Einstein

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
-Albert Einstein
 
2003-02-05 05:44:12 PM
Kpar90 He thinks it's funny that so many non-gay people in this thread would defend him as being gay without choice. He wouldn't be any other way. Many of my friends are openly gay, and have been for years. They think they could be whatever they want, and that they have chosen homosexuality.

So on the one hand he says he wouldn't be any other way, and on the other he says he's chosen it? So he feels that if someone gave him a good reason he'd happily stop messing with guys and being with women instead?

Sounds like he's bi at heart. It sure doesn't sound like any gay guy I've ever met.
 
2003-02-05 05:44:17 PM
Dannyspazzzzdon't think of me as some whacko.....sin is sin. gay or drunk, murderer or fornicator......God doesn't like sin, so much HE sent HIS Son to die for you so you didn't have to.

Really, come on. What the feruck does that mean? He sent his son to die for my sins? I don't get it. I have to die, right? Then how does Jesus fit in here? If he weren't nailed to a cross then there wouldn't be "sin"?

The whole basis for your religion makes absolutely no sense.

You really shizzle my nizzle, dizzle.
 
2003-02-05 05:45:03 PM
hoise was not found in the Cambridge International Dictionary of English

/case closed... who ARE these guys?
 
Displayed 50 of 407 comments

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



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report