On the Homosexual Question

[PeasantAndWorker]

In my view, sexuality is a choice not an "orientation"---that's a modern idea. Homosexuality is an act, you are only gay when you are engaging in homosex. Anyone can choose to put their dick in a man's anus or a woman's vagina, so that's why I consider sexuality a choice.

Homosexuals were essentially rebels against bourgeois society and progressive, but now a growing number of gaymen want the bourgeois life: gay marriage, military service, adoption etc. I oppose this because I oppose gay assimilation and support gay radicalism. Gay assimilation turns gays into bourgeois consumers whereas gay radicalism, which must be understood within the broader context of class struggle, undermines the dominant bourgeois capitalist ideology.

[Methmatician]

You're homosexual if you are sexually attracted to the same sex.

[Fortis in Arduis]

In my view, sexuality is a choice not an "orientation"---that's a modern idea. Homosexuality is an act, you are only gay when you are engaging in homosex. Anyone can choose to put their dick in a man's anus or a woman's vagina, so that's why I consider sexuality a choice.

Incorrect.


Homosexuals were essentially rebels against bourgeois society and progressive, but now a growing number of gay men want the bourgeois life: gay marriage, military service, adoption etc. I oppose this because I oppose gay assimilation and support gay radicalism. Gay assimilation turns gays into bourgeois consumers whereas gay radicalism, which must be understood within the broader context of class struggle, undermines the dominant bourgeois capitalist ideology.

Correct, by Marxist analysis.

Gay radicalism could also take a different turn, within the broader context of national struggle, by undermining the capitalist and state socialist ideologies which have been harmful to homosexuals in the past.

Gay liberation would constitute the freedom for all to own privately their means of income, in a society with a firm grounding of property rights and well-distributed private property.

Politicians are desperate for the pink vote, and the pink money, but history has shown them to be most undeserving.

The latest idiocy has been Gay Marriage, which was entirely unnecessary and bourgeois; just a ruse to pull in some pink votes.

[Loki]

I knew it. You are gay.

[Alenka]

In my view, sexuality is a choice not an "orientation"---that's a modern idea. Homosexuality is an act, you are only gay when you are engaging in homosex. Anyone can choose to put their dick in a man's anus or a woman's vagina, so that's why I consider sexuality a choice.
Homosexuality describes an orientation, not act/behavior. Sexual attraction towards the same gender. For example - it's possible for a homosexual guy to never in his life have intercourse with another man. There are some who, for one reason or another, choose to withold and repress their orientation by having sex (and relationships) with women. This however, does not make them heterosexual as they aren't actually sexually attracted to women.

It's not about who you do, it's about who you're sexually attracted to.

[1stLightHorse]

I've noticed actually there seems to be a connection between homosexuality and various warrior cultures.

Japanese samurai, Pashtun tribes, Various ancient greek militaristic cultures...etc. Even modern western military has its fare share of homosexual ritual, and i don't mean to rain on anyone's parade but of course this was rather a big thing in the Soviet army too.

Has anyone else noticed this?

[Loki]

Has anyone else noticed this?

Hmmm ... not in my culture at all.

[Pleurat]

I've noticed actually there seems to be a connection between homosexuality and various warrior cultures.

Japanese samurai, Pashtun tribes, Various ancient greek militaristic cultures...etc. Even modern western military has its fare share of homosexual ritual, and i don't mean to rain on anyone's parade but of course this was rather a big thing in the Soviet army too.

Has anyone else noticed this?


Not at all, it is considered a sin in my culture.

[1stLightHorse]

Hmmm ... not in my culture at all.

You mean in Germanic loki? What did the ancient germanics think about it? Is there any material on that?

Apparently the celts were pretty big into homosexuality.

[Loki]

You mean in Germanic loki? What did the ancient germanics think about it? Is there any material on that?

Apparently the celts were pretty big into homosexuality.

Yeah well I'm not a Celt. And yes, I don't think it was ever big in Germanic warrior culture. I certainly haven't heard about it yet.

I was actually referring more specifically to Afrikaner/Boer culture.

[alfieb]

I don't believe anyone is born "sexual", in any carnal fashion.

Other than that, I don't care. Gays are people who should be treated with respect like anyone else, whether it's a subconscious choice or something their genetics played a strong role in.

[Zmey Gorynych]

I've noticed actually there seems to be a connection between homosexuality and various warrior cultures.

Japanese samurai, Pashtun tribes, Various ancient greek militaristic cultures...etc. Even modern western military has its fare share of homosexual ritual, and i don't mean to rain on anyone's parade but of course this was rather a big thing in the Soviet army too.

Has anyone else noticed this?
Yes with greeks it was actually encouraged because it was though to form a stronger bond between soldiers. The army is a gay friendly-environment as it provides the necessary platform for the outbreak of pederastic feelings.

[1stLightHorse]

Yes with greeks it was actually encouraged because it was though to create a stronger bond between soldiers. The army is a gay friendly-environment as it provides the necessary platform for the outbreak of pederastic feelings.

Yes this is what i thought...To encourage "love" between male soldiers to create a stronger bond in war. More likely to fight sensibly and harder to preserve themselves and their 'boyfriends'. This is where i was coming from.

[Loki]

I don't believe anyone is born "sexual", in any carnal fashion.


We're all born with sexual desire (unless there is something wrong) - or at least during and after puberty. Almost in the same way that we are born to get hungry. It's very natural.

[alfieb]

We're all born with sexual desire (unless there is something wrong) - or at least during and after puberty. Almost in the same way that we are born to get hungry. It's very natural.

We become hungry from birth. We don't become horny until a dozen years later.

[Loki]

We become hungry from birth. We don't become horny until a dozen years later.

As I said, our body is programmed to desire sex when puberty starts.

[Methmatician]

Hmmm ... not in my culture at all.

Vikings did it.

[Loki]

Vikings did it.

I'm sure it's found in every culture, as a minority.

[ChocolateFace]

I simply can not see how anyone can be a homosexual. The reason why humans are attracted to another individual is because we subconsciously believe that person can create a healthy viable superior offspring. So how can somebody be sexually attracted to the same sex if they can't produce a child with that person? This must mean that their sexual desire is fake. Like the media sets the example of what they should like. So that right there shows that homosexuality can not be real. Plus there is no proof of a gay gene.

But many people might bring up that homosexual acts are also seen among animals. There are animals that have mental issues also and just because animals indulge in homosexual behavior doesn't mean anything. Because homosexuality is a condition of the mind and I believe it can be cured which is evident by how frequent some people change sexual orientations.

Mental disorders should be treated and not accepted. And I do not support anything violent at all ( so don't take that comment the wrong way) but the truth must be exposed.

[Methmatician]

I'm sure it's found in every culture, as a minority.

Of course, there were no homosexual societies, just societies that practiced homosexual acts.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/gayvik.asp

[Loki]

Of course, there were no homosexual societies, just societies that practiced homosexual acts.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/gayvik.asp

I think Arabs and southern Europeans (Greeks especially) were more inclined to homosexuality than Northerners.

[Arbërori]

God you people are so retarded, no wonder y'all are single.

If I like cock it's because I like it, not because my mind is playing tricks on me. I get more pussy than you even talk to and yet you go speaking of choices, Jesus...

[Zmey Gorynych]

I think Arabs and southern Europeans (Greeks especially) were more inclined to homosexuality than Northerners.
Arabs and southerners have a better recorded history and everything that goes with it (customs, practices, scandals etc.), they used to put on paper every single event - how Caesar gave head to Nectarius or how Achiles used to touch Patrocles. Homosexuality is present in Norse mythology, Loki (the god) engaged in pederastic intercourse and another norse god (the name of which escapes me, maybe Odin) also engaged in unnatural sexual intercourse, so it's safe to assume that northerners liked dipping into the chocolate factory :)

[tEhSaint]

Arabs and southerners have a better recorded history and everything that goes with it (customs, practices, scandals etc.), they used to put on paper every single event - how Caesar gave head to Nectarius or how Achiles used to touch Patrocles. Homosexuality is present in Norse mythology, Loki (the god) engaged in pederastic intercourse and another norse god (the name of which escapes me, maybe Odin) also engaged in unnatural sexual intercourse, so it's safe to assume that northerners liked dipping into the chocolate factory :)

That's quite true, not to mention that nowadays northerners are way liberated towards sexual variation. No wonder why most pedos are from N. Europe, and then comes the middle easterners with the known "Bacha bazi" stuff. S Euros are very low profile on these things.

[Sblast]

Homosexuals were essentially rebels against bourgeois society and progressive, but now a growing number of gaymen want the bourgeois life: gay marriage, military service, adoption etc. I oppose this because I oppose gay assimilation and support gay radicalism. Gay assimilation turns gays into bourgeois consumers whereas gay radicalism, which must be understood within the broader context of class struggle, undermines the dominant bourgeois capitalist ideology.

You oppose it because you approach the issue as a romantic, there is no such thing as a society without norms, the mentality of being a rebel is itself normative. The only substantial issue is how we OUGHT to act according to our given values (in equilibrium).
Oh wow, that's a modern idea? does that make it any wronger than an old one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition)? Sexual orientation maybe a choice or not (or some of both) - it's an empirical scientific matter not a matter of your literature fueled interpretation if it's going to mean anything.
The history of homosexuality is a history and most definitely does not conform to the narrow Marxist interpretation you posited - it existed through out history, sometimes accepted and sometimes not before "bourgeois capitalist ideology". Homosexuals are not essentially anything else then people with a certain sexual orientation according to the lexical term, They can hold any political view or live any lifestyle.

[armenianbodyhair]

Who the fuck cares?

[Sarmatian]

... and i don't mean to rain on anyone's parade but of course this was rather a big thing in the Soviet army too.

Have you got any idea what would've happened to a man who was found to be gay in Soviet army? He won't last long I may assure you.

Some instances may have happened but to say 'it was rather big thing' is some serious exaggeration.


Yes this is what i thought...To encourage "love" between male soldiers to create a stronger bond in war. More likely to fight sensibly and harder to preserve themselves and their 'boyfriends'. This is where i was coming from.

While it may create stronger bond it may also lead to jealousy and betrayal. Such bond seems to me to be too unstable and dependent on emotions. Far stronger and more reliable bond was created when members of a military units were taken from same villages as it was in my culture. Can't get any closer than fathers, uncles, brothers etc.

[PeasantAndWorker]

What I think is hypocritical is people who are anti-gay but think of heterosexual intercourse as just a cheap thrill. I can understand opposition to homosexuality if you desire a family, but if you just like squirting jizz in a vagina then there's no difference between squirting jizz in a guy's ass or mouth. It gets more ridiculous when a straight man has anal sex with a woman—I don't care if it's with a woman, the guy is still faggy for turning the exit into an entry. Homophobes who have sex other than for procreation are hypocrites. However, even though straight men who have anal sex with women are gay; homo men who have anal sex with men are straight because they use the anus as a surrogate vagina.

IMO, there is simply no difference between heterosexuality, homosexuality, or even bestiality. I believe in Aristotelian functionalism so sex should be for procreation because that is the function of the sex organs is.

[Fortis in Arduis]

What I think is hypocritical is people who are anti-gay but think of heterosexual intercourse as just a cheap thrill. I can understand opposition to homosexuality if you desire a family, but if you just like squirting jizz in a vagina then there's no difference between squirting jizz in a guy's ass or mouth. It gets more ridiculous when a straight man has anal sex with a woman—I don't care if it's with a woman, the guy is still faggy for turning the exit into an entry. Homophobes who have sex other than for procreation are hypocrites. However, even though straight men who have anal sex with women are gay; homo men who have anal sex with men are straight because they use the anus as a surrogate vagina.

IMO, there is simply no difference between heterosexuality, homosexuality, or even bestiality. I believe in Aristotelian functionalism so sex should be for procreation because that is the function of the sex organs is.

I think that you should start an "Ask PeasantAndWorker anything" thread.

[Sblast]

Have you got any idea what would've happened to a man who was found to be gay in Soviet army? He won't last long I may assure you.


I toke showers with faggs in the army (they can ask to shower later if it disturbs them), as long as they function as soldiers, no one cares, not in the disgusting sense of "Don't ask, don't tell" - it's just so trivial. People in TA are so insecure about their sexuality it amazes me.

[knowledge_cat]

it's people who are insecure about their masculinity that take it upon themselves to condescend homosexuals into being 2nd class citizens. this superiority is based on how ppl judge them, which is sad, cuz this thinking process lets judgers define who you are. are you man enough to be a man? that train of thought is silly. prejudices and discrimination is silly.